THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
SUKA 36-56 (End of Maseches) have been dedicated by the wife and daughters
of the late Dr. Simcha Bekelnitzky (Simcha Gedalya ben Shraga Feibush) of
Queens N.Y. Well known in the community for his Chesed and Tzedakah, he will
long be remembered.
1) "MAI SHAYAR D'HAI SHAYAR" -- WHAT DID THE TANA LEAVE OUT
QUESTION: Rebbi Acha bar Chanina says that when more than one Korban Musaf
are offered, a separate Shir is said for each one, and a separate set of
Teki'os are sounded for each. The Gemara asks several questions on his
opinion. One question is from our Mishnah (53b), which lists only one day on
which 48 Teki'os are blown in the Mikdash, that day being Chol ha'Mo'ed
Sukos which falls on Erev Shabbos. According to Rebbi Acha, the Mishnah
should also have mentioned Rosh Hashanah which falls on Shabbos, since on
that day, too, 48 Teki'os are sounded (the 21 Teki'os of every day, and an
additional 27 Teki'os for the three different Musaf offerings brought on
that day). The Gemara answers for Rebbi Acha and says that the Tana simply
left out that case. The Gemara asks "what else did the Tana leave out,"
because usually, when the Tana leaves something out from a list, he leaves
out more than just one case.
The Gemara answers that the Tana also left out Erev Pesach, on which they
blow an additional 27 Teki'os (9 for each of the three groups into which the
Jewish people were divided when bringing the Korban Pesach). However, the
Gemara ultimately rejects this answer and says that the case of Erev Pesach
is not considered a case which the Tana left out, because the Tana of our
Mishnah might hold like Rebbi Yehudah regarding Erev Pesach. Rebbi Yehudah
holds that the last of the three groups on Erev Pesach did not complete the
recitation of Hallel even once, and thus they had, at most, only one set of
Teki'os. Consequently, the maximum number of Teki'os on Erev Pesach,
according to Rebbi Yehudah, is only 42 (21 normal Teki'os, 9 for the first
group, 9 for the second group, and 3 for the third group).
The Gemara answers that even if the Mishnah holds like Rebbi Yehudah, there
is still another case which it left out. On Erev Pesach that falls on Erev
Shabbos, 48 Teki'os are blown according to Rebbi Yehudah (42 as described
above, 3 to warn the people to stop their Melachah, and 3 to announce the
onset of Shabbos). The Mishnah does not contradict Rebbi Acha, because it
left out a few cases.
Why is the Gemara asking a question on Rebbi Acha based on such a
conjecture? Who forced the Gemara to say that the Mishnah holds like Rebbi
Yehudah? Let it be the Rabanan, who argue with Rebbi Yehudah, and thus Erev
Pesach has 48 Teki'os and that is the additional case which the Mishnah left
out, in addition to the case of Rosh Hashanah that falls on Shabbos! This
way, the Mishnah poses no problem to the opinion of Rebbi Acha, so why
insist that the Mishnah is like Rebbi Yehudah in order to create a problem?
(a) The RA'AVAD (cited in Shitah Mekubetzes, Bava Kama 15a) and the RITVA
offer a new understanding of the common phrase, "What else did the Tana
leave out." Most people would translate "Mai Shayar d'Hai Shayar" to mean
that it is not the manner of the Tana to leave out just one case from a list
of cases; the Tana leaves something out only when there are two or more
cases to leave out. This is how Rashi appears to explain this expression in
Ta'anis (13b, DH Mai).
The Ra'avad and Ritva explain that this is not the correct meaning of the
phrase. Rather, "Mai Shayar d'Hai Shayar" is a rhetorical question, a
statement declaring that we cannot assume that the Tana left out anything.
The only way to propose that something was left out of the Mishnah is by
*proving* that this Mishnah was not intending to list everything. This is
done by demonstrating that there is at least one other case which the Tana
undeniably left out even though it belongs on his list. From that other,
unquestionable omission, we can assume that the Tana was not intending to
list everything, and thus we can assume that the case in question was also
Therefore, the only way to prove that the Mishnah left out the case of Rosh
Hashanah that falls on Shabbos is if it can be proven that the Mishnah
definitely left out another case. The Gemara says that the Mishnah must have
left out Erev Pesach, and then it responds that it is *not certain* that it
left out Erev Pesach, because it is *possible* that the Mishnah follows the
opinion of Rebbi Yehudah.
(b) The SEFAS EMES explains that we can understand the expression, "Mai
Shayar d'Hai Shayar," in the usual manner, and explain our Sugya as follows.
In general, why is it that a Tana does not leave out single cases from his
lists? The Tana is afraid that he will be misunderstood. People might think
that he is writing a comprehensive statement, and they will not think that
he left anything out (as a consequence, they will assume that the case which
he omitted was omitted because it does not *belong* on the list). If the
Tana leaves something out, then he leaves a number of cases out, so that
everyone will know that he was not listing everything, and no incorrect
conclusions can be drawn about his omissions.
In our Sugya, the Gemara is saying that just like it is not the style of the
Tana to leave out a single case if there is no other case being left out, it
is also not the style of the Tana to leave out a case when that case depends
on a Machlokes Tana'im. He does not leave out such a case for the same
reason as mentioned above -- the Tana is afraid that he will be
misunderstood, and that people will think that he holds like the other Tana,
assuming that this case was not left out because the Tana was not listing
all of the cases, but because it inherently does not belong in the Mishnah,
for the Mishnah holds like one side of the Machlokes Tana'im. Therefore, if
such a case does belong in the list, the Tana will definitely include it ,
in order to avoid such an error.