The holiday of Rosh Hashanah is so bound up with hearing the sound of the shofar that in those years when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat, it feels as though something essential is missing. The practice of refraining from sounding the shofar is due to the concern that in their desire to fulfill the mitzvah, those who do not know how to do it properly would carry it in the public domain on Shabbat in order to bring the shofar to an expert who could blow for them or instruct them how to do it properly. As a result, the rabbis ruled that it should not be blown.
However, it has historically been the case that exceptions were made to this, perhaps because the mitzvah of shofar was viewed as too essential to the holiday. The Mishnah (Rosh Hashanah 4:1-2) states that in the times of the Temple, the shofar was sounded on Shabbat on the grounds of the Temple, in Jerusalem, and in any city within view of Jerusalem. Later, after the Temple’s destruction, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakai instituted it such that when Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, the shofar would still be sounded where there was a beit din.
According to the Rif (Rabbi Isaac Alfasi, 1013-1103) this enactment applied to every beit din, and therefore, he sounded the shofar even in his own when Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat. However, most early authorities ruled like the Rambam that the practice was limited only to the beit din hagadol in the Land of Israel when its rabbis had formal semichah. After it no longer existed, the practice came to an end.
Even so, what would happen if one were to transgress the rabbinic prohibition and blow the shofar when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat? Was it possible that they could still fulfill the mitzvah? Though these questions may only sound theoretical, they took on practical significance at the beginning of the twentieth century when Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlessinger attempted to reestablish the practice of blowing shofar on Shabbat in Jerusalem. While it does not appear he was successful, different poskim sought to address the issue in response to his efforts.
Decades later, Rabbi Zvi Pesach Frank, the Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem, carefully examined whether one could fulfill the mitzvah by blowing on Shabbat in his responsa Har Zvi (Orech Chaim 2:88). He focuses specifically on the mitzvah of sukkah as a parallel because the rabbis introduced many rabbinic restrictions that would invalidate a sukkah. While he acknowledged the possibility that the rabbis could potentially uproot a mitzvah, he argues that this may not apply to shofar and appears to leave open the possibility that one could still fulfill the mitzvah of shofar even as one transgresses a rabbinic prohibition and blows it on Shabbat.
Even so, the idea that the rabbis could uproot the biblical mitzvah of shofar seems strange. If God has commanded the shofar to be blown even on Shabbat, by what right do the rabbis have to prevent it from happening? This question is only sharpened when one realizes that the holiday of Rosh Hashanah is dedicated to enthroning God as king, and therefore, it seems particularly curious it would be a day when we flaunt God’s authority. Nevertheless, as the rabbis explain, their power to forbid the shofar on Shabbat is rooted in the very authority God has given them. As Rabbi Akivah explains (Rosh Hashanah 25a), even if the beit din unintentionally or intentionally establishes the wrong date for Rosh Hashanah, God accepts it and cedes divine authority to human beings. One could even argue that the shofar itself testifies to this point. If prophets still existed, there would perhaps be no need for shofar as God could tell us precisely what God wants directly. However, without them, we are left only with the sound of the shofar as God’s call to us, a shofar that human beings must blow.
Responsa, Har Zvi, Orech Chaim 2:88 Nissan, 5617 (1957) | שו”ת הר צבי אורח חיים ב סימן פח ניסן תשיז |
Regarding Rosh Hashanah that falls on Shabbat in which it is forbidden to blow the shofar (Shulchan Arukh 588:5), the achronim investigated what the ruling would be if one transgressed and blew the shofar on Shabbat. Would it be considered as if one fulfilled the mitzvah, or do we say that since the rabbis uprooted the mitzvah of shofar and forbid it on Shabbat, if one were to blow it, one has not done anything at all. This is like the position we find in Tosafot (Sukkah 3a) with regards to a sukkah that is rabbinically invalid [and if one was to dwell in it] they have not fulfilled the mitzvah of sukkah at all. The practical ramification of this question [of blowing shofar on shabbat] exists for those poskim that rule one does not recite the blessing of shehechiyanu on the second day of Rosh Hashanah before blowing shofar since one has already made the blessing on the first day. If so, do we also say that when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat [and one was to blow shofar] that they have not fulfilled the mitzvah at all and, therefore, according to all opinions, they should recite the blessing of shehechiyanu on the second day because the blessing of shehechiyanu they recited on the first day, which was Shabbat, was made in vain? | בענין ר”ה שחל בשבת שאסור לתקוע בשופר (שו”ע סימן תקפח סעיף ה) – חקרו האחרונים כיצד הדין אם עבר ותקע בשבת אי חשיב שקיים מצות תקיעת שופר, או נאמר דמכיון דרבנן עקרו מצות שופר ואסרוהו ביום השבת, גם אי תקע לא עשה ולא כלום, וכמו שמצינו בתוס’ סוכה (דף ג ע”א) גבי סוכה שהיא פסולה מדרבנן שוב הוי כמאן דלא קיים מצות סוכה כלל, ויהיה נ”מ לשיטת הפוסקים דביום שני של ר”ה אין מברכין שהחיינו על תקיעת שופר מפני שכבר בירך ביום ראשון, א”כ גם כשחל בשבת אם נאמר דלא עשה מצוה כלל יתחייב אליבא דכו”ע בברכת שהחיינו ביום השני, דברכת שהחיינו שבירך ביום השבת היתה ברכה לבטלה. |
I saw in the comments of Cheshek Shlomo (Megillah 5b) that he raised the question of a child who became an adult on Purim, which fell on Shabbat or a case where one forgot or was coerced and unable to read it on Friday. Do they need to read megillah on Shabbat? One could say that after [the rabbis] uprooted the obligation to read [megillah] on Shabbat, there is no further obligation on Shabbat to read the megillah, and so too, the same would apply to the blowing of shofar. However, in the Drush v’Chidush of Rabbi Akivah Eiger (number 8) he is not in agreement with this and instead simply writes that an adult who blows shofar on Shabbat fulfills the mitzvah since its proper time is also on Shabbat. [Nevertheless] One has transgressed a rabbinic prohibition of Shabbat. At first glance, Rabbi Akivah Eiger’s words appear to contradict the question of the Cheshek Shlomo, for it was obvious to Rabbi Akivah Eiger that even if the rabbis uprooted the mitzvah of megillah on Shabbat, nevertheless, if one was to transgress and blow the shofar on Shabbat, they would fulfill the mitzvah… But if one looks closely, one sees that the words of Rabbi Akivah Eiger are not a contradiction, for according to the conclusion of the Gemara at the beginning of Massechet Megillah, the enactment not to read megillah on Shabbat and to move it up earlier was established by the anshei kenneset hagedolah [rabbis of the second Temple], and they said that for a clear need, one can uproot the reading of megillah and do it earlier as specified in specific cases by them. Since from the beginning [of the enactment to read megillah], the anshei kenneset hagedolah permitted to move it up in a case of need, we see it as if the anshei kenneset hagedolah themselves uprooted the mitzavh of megillah from Shabbat day, and therefore there remains no mitzvah of megillah on Shabbat at all. This is not the case for shofar, whose obligation is from the Torah. Rabbi Akivah Eiger says that even though the rabbis prohibited the blowing of the shofar on Shabbat, the mitzvah of the Torah was not uprooted from its place and therefore one who transgresses and blows shofar [on Shabbat] fulfills the mitzvah from the Torah. | והלום ראיתי בהגהת חשק שלמה (מגילה דף ה ע”ב) שנסתפק בקטן שהגדיל בפורים שחל בשבת, או בשכחו ונאנסו ולא קראו את המגילה בע”ש – אי צריך לקרות את המגילה בשבת, די”ל דבתר דעקרו לחיוב הקריאה בשבת שוב אינו מוטל על יום השבת שום חיובי קריאה, וכן י”ל לענין תקיעת שופר. אבל בדרוש וחידוש להגרעק”א (מערכה ח) אין דעתו כן, אלא כתב בפשיטות דגם גדול שתוקע בשבת קיים מצות שופר דזמנו גם בשבת אלא דעבר על שבות דשבת. ולכאורה דברי רע”א סותרים ספיקו של בעל חשק שלמה שהרי לרע”א פשיטא ליה דאף דעקרו מצות קריאת המגילה בשבת, מ”מ אם עבר ותקע קיים המצוה, ודלא כבעל חשק שלמה שמצדד דפקעה לגמרי המצוה של שבת. אבל כד נעיין אין סתירה מדברי רע”א, דהרי למסקנת הגמרא ריש מגילה כל ההקדמות והתקנה שלא לקרות בשבת – אנשי כנה”ג בעצמן תקנו והם אמרו שלשם איזה צורך שהוא יכולים לעוקרם ולהקדים זמן הקריאה כפי ראות עיני חכמים, ומכיון שאנשי כנה”ג מעיקרא נתנו רשות להקדים לעת הצורך רואים אנו אותה הקדמה כאילו אנשי כנה”ג בעצמן הקדימוה ועקרו מצות קריאה מיום השבת, ולכן לא נשארה בשבת שום מצוה כלל, משא”כ בשופר שחיובו מן התורה, אומר רע”א דאע”ג דחכמים אסרו תקיעת שופר בשבת, מ”מ המצוה של התורה לא נעקרה ממקומה, ולכן אם עבר ותקע קיים אמרינן ויצא ידי מצוה של תורה. |
However, Rabbi Akivah Eiger’s words are difficult in light of Tosafot (Sukkah 3a) which writes regarding the laws of the sukkah that one who dwells with their head and the majority of their body in the sukkah but the table [they are eating on] is in the home, even though this is only invalid rabbinically it is the case that one who does this do not even fulfill the biblical obligation of the mitzvah of sukkah. This appears to contradict the words of Rabbi Akivah Eiger regarding blowing shofar [on Shabbat] where one fulfills their biblical obligation even though the rabbis forbid blowing it on Shabbat. However…. the Ran writes it is not that one doesn’t fulfill the mizvah of sukkah for it was the rabbis who forbid it, rather it should be understood that one doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah in the appropriate fashion as was the desire of the rabbis. This is similar to the Mishnah (Pesachim 10:5), that all those who fail to recite these three things on Pesach [during the seder] do not fulfill their obligation. This means they have not fulfilled the mitzvah in the appropriate fashion [but not that they haven’t fulfilled the mitzvah at all]. This affirms Rabbi Akivah Eiger’s words that a rabbinic prohibition does not uproot a biblical mitzvah. But one must still wonder about the words of Rabbi Akivah Eiger, who states his position so emphatically that one transgresses a rabbinic prohibition, but the [biblical] mitzvah is still fulfilled, while Tosafot does not agree with this. | אבל קשה על דברי רעק”א מתוס’ סוכה (דף ג ע”א) שכתבו לענין דין סוכה במי שהוא יושב ראשו ורובו בסוכה ושולחנו בתוך הבית, דאע”ג שאין זה אלא פסול דרבנן מ”מ גם מדאורייתא לא יצא ולא קיים מצות סוכה. ולכאורה זה סותר לדברי רע”א שבתקיעת שופר יוצא וקיים המצוה אעפ”י שרבנן אסרוהו לתקוע בשבת. הן אמנם דעל המשנה מי שהיה ראשו ורובו בסוכה וכו’ – כתב הר”ן שם לאו דוקא (לא קיים מצות סוכה) דהא מדרבנן הוא דמיתסר, אלא הכי קאמר לא קיימת מצות סוכה כראוי וכרצון חכמים וכדתנן בפרק ערבי פסחים כל מי שלא אמר שלשה דברים אלו בפסח לא יצא ידי חובתו כלל, כלומר שלא קיים מצותן כראוי, עכ”ל הר”ן. וזה סיוע לדברי רע”א דלא אתי גזירה דרבנן ומפקיע מצות התורה. אבל עדיין יש להפליא על דברי רע”א דאומר כ”כ בפשיטות דעבר על שבות ומ”מ המצוה קיים במקום שהתוס’ לא ס”ל כן. |
It appears that one could question the approach of Tosafot that a rabbinic invalidation is effective such that the biblical mitzvah is completely uprooted from the Gemara in Sukkah (23a): “A sukkah constructed on top of an animal, Rabbi Meir says is valid and Rabbi Yehudah says is invalid. What is the reason of Rabbi Yehudah? The Torah says ‘the holiday of sukkot you shall make for seven days.’A sukkah that is appropriate for all seven days is deemed a sukkah. A sukkah that is not appropriate for all seven days is not deemed a sukkah.” The Gemara then raises a difficulty, “and Rabbi Meir who holds the sukkah [on top of an animal] is valid because on a biblical level the sukkah is appropriate [for seven days]. It is just the rabbis who have prohibited it [because the animal is muktzeh on Shabbat].” When we analyze the disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Meir, it appears that Rabbi Meir is almost explicitly stating that a rabbinic invalidation does not uproot the biblical mitzvah, for it is clear that Rabbi Meir validates [a sukkah] with a rabbinic invalidation and one still fulfills the mitzvah with it. Even according to Rabbi Yehudah, it is not proven that he holds that the mitzvah is not fulfilled on a biblical level if one dwells in it [a rabbinically invalid sukkah]. One could say that Rabbi Yehudah would invalidate the sukkah on a rabbinical level and rabbinically prohibit one from dwelling in it. However, if one transgressed and dwelled in it, they would still fulfill the mitzvah of sukkah on a biblical level… | ולכאורה יש לתמוה על שיטת התוס’ דפסול דרבנן מהני לדאורייתא דהמצוה נפקעת ממנו לגמרי, מההיא דסוכה (דף כג ע”א) העושה סוכתו ע”ג בהמה ר”מ מכשיר ור’ יהודה פוסל, מ”ט דר’ יהודה, אמר קרא חג הסוכות תעשה לך שבעת ימים, הראוי לשבעה שמה סוכה שאינה ראויה לשבעה לא שמה סוכה – ופריך הגמרא ור”מ, הא נמי מדאורייתא מיחזי חזיא ורבנן הוא דגזרי בה. וכד נעיין בפלוגתא דר”מ ור”י לכאורה נראה דלר”מ כמעט מפורש דפסול דרבנן לא מפקיע מצוה דאורייתא, שהרי מפורש דר”מ מכשיר פסול דרבנן וקיים את המצוה, ואפילו לר’ יהודה עדיין לא מוכח דס”ל דגם מדאורייתא לא קיים אם ישב בה, דשפיר י”ל דר’ יהודה פוסל מדרבנן דאסור מדרבנן לשבת אבל בדיעבד אם עבר וישב קיים מצות סוכה דאורייתא, דמדר”מ נשמע לר’ יהודה דמדאורייתא קיים המצוה, ולא פליג על ר”מ אלא לענין דיעבד אם יצא גם מדרבנן אבל לענין דאורייתא לא פליג, וא”כ יקשה על התוס’ דס”ל דגם מדאורייתא לא יצא… |
To resolve the position of Tosafot, one could say that according to them, the disagreement between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah corresponds to the disagreement between Tosafot and the Ran. Rabbi Meir holds, like the Ran, that a rabbinic invalidation does not uproot the biblical mitzvah and since after the fact [if one does it] one still fulfills the mitzvah, therefore the sukkah is technically appropriate for all seven days. Rabbi Yehudah holds like Tosafot that a rabbinic invalidation uproots the mitzvah entirely, and it is no longer a sukkah at all, for it is considered to be invalid on a biblical level…. Rather, according to the logic that when the rabbis uprooted a mitzvah they did so even on a biblical level, as a matter of halacha, the rishonim are in disagreement. Ritz Giat [R. Yitzchak Ibn Giat, 1038-1089] rules like Rabbi Yehudah, as is the rule in every case where Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah disagree, and Tosafot holds like [regarding the sukkah]. With this, the words of Rabbi Akivah Eiger are resolved, for he holds like Shulchan Aruch in this case [not blowing shofar on Shabbat] that it is like Rabbi Meir in that regarding a rabbinic invalidation of the biblical mitzvah is not entirely uprooted. Because of this, it is clear to Rabbi Akivah Eiger that one who blows the shofar when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat, even though they transgress a rabbinic prohibition, the biblical mitzvah has not been uprooted, and therefore one fulfills it. | וכדי ליישב שיטת התוס’ י”ל דלדידהו פלוגתא דר”מ ור’ יהודה תליא בפלוגתת התוס’ והר”ן, דר”מ ס”ל כסברת הר”ן דפסול מדרבנן לא מפקיע המצוה מדאורייתא, וכיון דבדיעבד קיים אמרינן ויצא הרי מצות סוכה שפיר ראויה לשבעה היא, ור’ יהודה ס”ל כתוס’ סוכה דפסול דרבנן מפקיע גם עיקר המצוה ולא שמה סוכה, ונמצא שמן התורה פסולה… אלא מכח סברא דכל דעקרו רבנן המצוה נפקעה גם מדאורייתא. ולהלכה נחלקו הראשונים: הרי”ץ גיאות פסק כר’ יהודה כמו בכל מקום ר”מ ור”י הלכה כר”י, והתוס’ בסוכה יסברו כרי”ץ גיאות. ובזה מיושב נמי דברי רע”א הנז’ דהוא נקט להלכה כהשו”ע דכאן הלכה כר”מ דבשביל פסול דרבנן לא נעקר לגמרי המצוה דאורייתא, ומה”ט פשיטא ליה לרע”א דהתוקע בר”ה שחל בשבת יצא ידי תקיעת שופר אעפ”י שעבר על שבות דרבנן, דהם לא עקרו מצות התורה לגמרי ולכן קיים אמרינן. |
All of the content in The Lindenbaum Center for Halakhic Studies is released with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. It is open for reuse with the following attribution: "Authored by [name of author] from The Lindenbaum Center for Halakhic Studies at YCT.
Rabbi Zachary Truboff ('10) is the coordinator of the International Beit Din Institute, which seeks to educate rabbis about halakhic solutions to the agunah problem. His writings on contemporary Jewish thought and Zionism have appeared in the Lehrhaus, Arutz Sheva, Akdamot, and Zerufim. His first book, Torah Goes Forth From Zion: Essays on the Thought of Rav Kook and Rav Shagar, will appear in the coming year. Before making aliyah, he served for nearly a decade as the rabbi of Cedar Sinai Synagogue in Cleveland. Under his leadership the synagogue grew substantially and became known for its inclusive community and innovative programing. In 2015, he was chosen by the Cleveland Jewish News as one of the 18 Difference Makers, a select group honored for their contributions to Jewish communal life in Northeast Ohio. He has taught in a variety of adult education settings such as the Wexner Heritage Program, the Torat Tzion Kollel, and the Hartman Institute. . He received semikha from Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. He and wife, Jen, live in Jerusalem with the four children Nahum, Elihai, Shaiya, and Orya.
3700 Henry Hudson Parkway, 2nd Floor
Riverdale, NY 10463
Phone: (212) 666-0036
Fax: (212) 666-5633
Email: office@yctorah.org
Click here to sign up to receive updates from YCT straight to your inbox.
