(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Rosh Hashanah 30


AGADAH: The Mishnah states that Raban Yochanan ben Zakai instituted a Mitzvah d'Rabanan to hold the Arba'as ha'Minim on all seven days of Sukos outside of the Mikdash. The Gemara explains that this enactment was made so that the people would have a commemoration of the Mikdash ("Zecher la'Mikdash"). From where do we learn that there is a concept of making a Zecher la'Mikdash? The Gemara cites the verse, "For I shall raise up (A'aleh) for you a cure, and from your wounds I will heal you -- the word of Hashem, for 'abandoned' did they call you: 'She is Tzion -- no one remembers her'" (Yirmiyah 30:17).

Our Gemara, regarding the Arba'as ha'Minim, is the only occasion that this verse teaching the concept of making a Zecher la'Mikdash is cited. What is there in the verse that alludes specifically to the Arba'as ha'Minim?

The word "A'aleh" ("I shall raise up") is comprised of the first letter of each of the Arba'as ha'Minim -- Esrog, Aravah, Lulav, Hadas! Thus, it is with the Arba'as ha'Minim that the Rabanan instituted that a Zecher la'Mikdash be made, so that we remember that Hashem will heal the wounds of Tzion -- "from your wounds I will heal you."

If this is correct, we may find a similar allusion to the Arba'as ha'Minim in another verse, "May my tongue stick to my palate if I do not remember you, [O Zion], if I do not raise up (A'aleh) Yerushalayim above my foremost joy (Rosh Simchasi)" (Tehilim 137:6). This verse as well is hinting that we should remember the Mikdash on Sukos through the Mitzvah of Arba'as ha'Minim. "Rosh Simchasi" alludes to the time of Simchah -- Zeman Simchasenu, or Sukos, during which the Simchas Beis ha'Sho'evah celebrations took place when the Beis ha'Mikdash stood. Nowadays, the Chachamim instituted to make a "Zecher la'Mikdash" on Sukos by taking the Esrog, Aravah, Lulav, and Hadas, alluded to in the word "A'a'leh," each of the seven days of Sukos, and not just on the first day.

(M. Kornfeld -- see also "Peninim mi'Shulchan ha'Gra" by Rav Dov Eliach, Vayikra 23:40, who cites the Vilna Gaon as saying that the four Minim are alluded to in the verse "*E'eleh* v'Samar, Ochazah b'Sansinav..." (Shir ha'Shirim 7:9). The original source for this Remez is actually a Zohar in Ra'aya Mehemna end of Ki Tetzei, 283a, and Tikunei Zohar #13. I later discovered that Rav Reuven Margulies, in Sha'arei Zohar and Nitzotzei Zohar, preceded me in pointing out the Remez from the verse cited in our Gemara.).


QUESTION: The Mishnah says that once witnesses did not come on Rosh Hashanah until after the time of Minchah, and as a result the Levi'im did not say the correct Shir when they brought the Korban Tamid in the afternoon. Because of that Kilkul, the Rabanan instituted that witnesses for the new moon never be accepted after the time of Minchah.

Why does the Mishnah say that the problem was that they said the wrong Shir? If the witnesses did not come until after they brought the Korban Tamid, then there was a much more serious Kilkul -- they could not bring the Korban Musaf! We know that the Korban Tamid must be the last Korban brought in the day (Pesachim 58b), and since they had already brought the Korban Tamid, they could not bring the Korban Musaf! If so, not only were they Mekalkel by saying the wrong Shir, but they were Mekalkel by not bringing the entire Musaf offering! (TOSFOS DH Niskalkelu)


(a) TOSFOS answers that according to the opinion in the Gemara that the Kilkul was that they did not say the Shir at all (and not that they said the wrong Shir), then it is possible that what happened was that witnesses did *not* come that day after all, and not that they came late. There was no Kilkul by not bringing the Musaf offerings, because they were not supposed to bring them -- it was not Rosh Chodesh! However, there was a Kilkul in the Shir, since they did not say the Shir out of doubt whether or not witnesses would come. Therefore, the only Kilkul was that they did not say the Shir (the weekday Shir).

(b) According to the other opinion in the Gemara, that they said the wrong Shir, the weekday Shir for the Korban Tamid (implying that witnesses *did* actually arrive to testify to the new month), TOSFOS suggests that we must say that it is permitted to bring the Korban Musaf after the Korban Tamid. Even though no other Korban may be brought after the Tamid, a Korban Tzibur (such as the Musaf) is different, because the Mitzvas Aseh of the Tzibur overrides the Mitzvas Aseh of Hashlamah (the Isur of bringing a Korban after the Korban Tamid).

(c) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Kidush ha'Chodesh 3:5) explains that the Kilkul was exactly that -- they did not bring the Musaf offering. He mentions nothing about the Shir.

What, then, does the Rambam do with the Mishnah which clearly states that the Levi'im were "Niskalkelu *b'Shir*?" Furthermore, how does he explain the Gemara that discusses at length what the Kilkul of not saying the Shir was?

Perhaps the Rambam understands that the Mishnah is telling us that not only did the *Kohanim* err by not bringing the appropriate Korbanos, but even the *Levi'im* also erred by not saying the proper Shir. The Mishnah is teaching how far the Kilkul went, that it even affected the Levi'im. (M. Kornfeld -- see Lechem Mishnah etc.)

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,