Daf Ditty Eruvin 40
1
MISHNAH: Rabbi Dosa ben Harekinas says: One who passes before the ark in the synagogue
and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day of the festival of Rosh HaShana says:
Strengthen us, O Lord our God, on this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or
tomorrow. And similarly, on the following day he says: Whether Rosh HaShana is today or
yesterday. And the Rabbis did not agree with him that one should formulate his prayer in this
conditional manner.
The mishna cited Rabbi Dosa’s version of the Rosh HaShana prayer: Rabbi Dosa says: He who
passes before the ark and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day of the festival of
Rosh HaShana says: Strengthen us, O Lord our God, on this day of the New Moon, whether it is
today or tomorrow.
Gemara:
2
Rabba said: When we were in the house of study of Rav Huna, we raised the following
dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to whether it is proper to mention the New Moon
during prayer on Rosh HaShana? The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Do we
say that since they have separate additional offerings, as one additional offering is brought for
the New Moon and another for Rosh HaShana, we mention them separately in prayer as well?
Or perhaps one remembrance counts for both this and that? The Torah is referring to both
Rosh HaShana and the New Moon as times of remembrance, and therefore perhaps simply
mentioning that it is a Day of Remembrance should suffice.
Rav Huna said to us: You have already learned the answer to this question in the mishna,
which states that Rabbi Dosa says: He who passes before the ark and leads the congregation in
prayer on the first day and on the second day of Rosh HaShana mentions the New Moon in a
conditional manner: On this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or tomorrow. But the
Rabbis did not agree with him. What, is it not that the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Dosa about
the need to mention the New Moon during prayer on Rosh HaShana?
The Gemara refutes this proof: No, they disagree about whether to make a condition. The
novelty in Rabbi Dosa’s teaching was not that mention must be made of the New Moon, but that
a condition must be made due to the day’s uncertain status. The Rabbis disagree about that.
The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to say that the dispute between Rabbi Dosa and
the Rabbis relates to the condition and not to the very mention of the New Moon. This can be
ascertained from the fact that it was taught in a baraita: And so too, Rabbi Dosa would do
3
this on all the New Moons for which two days are kept out of doubt the entire year; and the
Rabbis did not agree with him.
The Gemara raises an objection based on the Tosefta that states that in the case of Rosh
HaShana that occurs on Shabbat, Beit Shammai say: One prays an Amida that contains ten
blessings, including the nine blessings ordinarily recited on Rosh HaShana and an additional
blessing in which Shabbat is mentioned. And Beit Hillel say: One prays an Amida that contains
nine blessings, as Shabbat and the Festival are mentioned in the same blessing. And if there
were an opinion that held that the New Moon must be separately mentioned in the Rosh
HaShana prayer, then it should say that according to Beit Shammai, one must recite eleven
blessings, i.e., nine for Rosh HaShana, one for Shabbat, and one for the New Moon.
The Gemara raises an objection based on the Tosefta that states that in the case of Rosh
HaShana that occurs on Shabbat, Beit Shammai say: One prays an Amida that contains ten
blessings, including the nine blessings ordinarily recited on Rosh HaShana and an additional
blessing in which Shabbat is mentioned. And Beit Hillel say: One prays an Amida that contains
nine blessings, as Shabbat and the Festival are mentioned in the same blessing. And if there
were an opinion that held that the New Moon must be separately mentioned in the Rosh
HaShana prayer, then it should say that according to Beit Shammai, one must recite eleven
blessings, i.e., nine for Rosh HaShana, one for Shabbat, and one for the New Moon.
4
Summary
The Mishna had stated: Rabbi Dosa said: The person who leads the prayer services on the first
festival day (of Rosh Hashanah) says, [“Fortify us, O Hashem our God, on this day of Rosh
Chodesh, whether it be today or tomorrow,” and on the following day, he says, “[Fortify us, O
Hashem our God, on this day of Rosh Chodesh], whether it be today or yesterday.”]
Rabbah said: When we were at Rav Huna’s, we raised the following question: Is it necessary to
mention Rosh Chodesh in the prayers of Rosh Hashanah? Is it necessary to mention it because
different mussaf offerings were offered for the two celebrations, or is rather one mention of “”
remembrance” sufficient for both?
And he told us: You have learned this in our Mishna: Rabbi Dosa said: The person who leads the
prayer services on the first festival day etc. [and the Sages disagreed with him]. Doesn’t this
disagreement apply to the mentioning of Rosh Chodesh (and we therefore should accept the
majority opinion of the Sages that it is not mentioned)?
The Gemora disagrees: No; it may refer to the stipulation in the prayer (where the Sages disagree).
The Gemora adds: Logical reasoning also supports this, for in a braisa it was taught: And so did
Rabbi Dosa proceed on Rosh Chodesh throughout the year (when they were uncertain if Rosh
Chodesh was on the thirtieth or the thirty-first day since the preceding Rosh Chodesh, and they
would make the same stipulation in the prayers), but they (the Sages) did not agree with him.
Now, if you admit that their disagreement was to his stipulation in the prayer, one can well
understand why they did not agree with him (since they might well object to introduce stipulations
during prayer); but if you maintain that their objection was to the mention of Rosh Chodesh (on
Rosh Hashanah), why didn’t they agree with him (for during the year, this is not relevant to all)?
The Gemora counters: What then would you suggest? That their objection was to stipulations
during prayer? But what purpose was served by expressing disagreement in two cases? The
Gemora answers:
Both were necessary, for if we had been informed of their disagreement only in the case of Rosh
Hashanah, it might have been presumed that only there did the Rabbis maintain that no stipulation
during prayer should be introduced, because people might come to regard the day with disrespect,
but that in the case of Rosh Chodesh throughout the year, they might have agreed with Rabbi Dosa.
And if their disagreement with Rabbi Dosa had been expressed only in the latter case, it might
have been presumed that Rabbi Dosa maintained his view only in that case, but that in the other
case he agrees with the Rabbis. Therefore, both cases were necessary.
5
Personal rejoicing vs. communal rejoicing: 1
Shehecheyanu is a beracha of rejoicing, in which we show our appreciation to Hashem, who
allowed us to live to see a happy event in our lives.
In order for two people to share a beracha of shehecheyanu, there must be some common
denominator between their joys. When two people buy new talleisim, or eat new fruit, each one
rejoices on his own.
There is nothing to connect them in their joy, and therefore each must recite his own beracha. On
the other hand, when the Jewish people rejoice with the coming of a Yom Tov, or the opportunity
to perform a new mitzva, it is a communal joy. We rejoice together over the same mitzva.
Therefore, it is proper that we join together in one beracha (R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Siach
Halacha, 8, p. 88; Mishmeres Chaim, by R’ Chaim Pinchas Sheinberg).
Based on this distinction, R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach adds that when two people eat two different
seasonal fruit, they must each recite their own shehecheyanu.
However, when they eat the same kind of fruit, one may recite shehecheyanu and the other may
answer Amen. In essence, shehecheyanu expresses not only our gratitude in being able to enjoy
this fruit, but also our gratitude in having been able to live to see the season in which the fruit
reappears. Both people share in the joy of having lived to see this season, even though they do not
share in each other’s enjoyment of the fruit.
However, when two people eat two different seasonal fruits, each should recite his own
shehecheyanu, since the season in which the two fruits reappear begins at a slightly different time
(Siach Halacha, ibid).
Optional shehecheyanu:
1
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Eiruvin_40-1.pdf
6
Another distinction between the shehecheyanu recited over personal joy, and that recited over
Yomim Tovim or mitzvos, is that the shehecheyanu over Yomim Tovim and mitzvos is mandatory,
whereas the shehecheyanu over personal joy is optional.2
Furthermore, a person who does not feel particular joy in eating a new fruit should not recite
shehecheyanu, whereas a person who does not feel joy with the coming of Yom Tov should recite
shehecheyanu nonetheless (Shevet HaLevi, IV, 25).
Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:3
Aside from the issue of eiruvin, the establishment of two days of Rosh HaShana due to the
uncertainty of whether witnesses will arrive who will testify about the new moon also created
problems with the prayers.
Rabbi Dosa ben Harekinas was concerned about saying a prayer that referred to a day as Rosh
HaShana, when perhaps Rosh HaShana was truly on the next day or the previous day. Because of
these concerns, he rules (Mishna 39a) that the prayer on the first day of Rosh HaShana should
clearly state that it is "today or tomorrow" and on the second day "today or yesterday". The
hakhamim, who believe that the two days have kedusha ahat – "one holiness," rule that it is
unnecessary (and improper) to add those clauses.
This discussion leads the Gemara to a broad discussion about the prayers on Rosh HaShana and
Yom Kippur, days that are unique on the Jewish calendar, but are not one of the Shalosh Regalim
– the three pilgrimage festivals of Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot. For example, on the Shalosh
Regalim the shehecheyanu blessing (referred to by the Gemara as Zman, or time) is recited. Should
it be recited on Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur – which are one-time-a-year events as well? Or,
perhaps, that blessing is restricted to the Shalosh Regalim?
One of the concerns of the Gemara is that this blessing is, ordinarily, said with a cup of wine,
which cannot be done on Yom Kippur.
2
Nevertheless, the Mishna Berura 225 s.k. 9, rules that one should not forgo this important beracha
3
https://www.steinsaltz-center.org/home/doc.aspx?mCatID=68446
7
The Gemara asks: Granted, one can recite the blessing over a cup of wine on Shavuot and Rosh
HaShana; but what does one do on Yom Kippur? If you say that he should recite the blessing
over a cup of wine before the actual commencement of Yom Kippur and drink it, there is a
difficulty: Since he recited the blessing for time, he accepted the sanctity of the day upon himself,
and therefore caused the wine to be prohibited to himself by the laws of Yom Kippur.
The Gemara rejects the possibility that the blessing can be said together with a cup of wine (that
would also receive a beraha of its own), which would then be given to a child, because the child
may learn that he is allowed to eat and drink on Yom Kippur.
This concern stems from the fact that the child under consideration must be old enough to
understand what is going on, otherwise making a blessing on his behalf would be without purpose
and having him drink the wine would not solve the problem of making sure that the blessing was
said purposefully.
The obvious problem with this line of reasoning is that if we are concerned that a child will learn
to eat and drink on Yom Kippur because he is given Kiddush wine, shouldn't we forbid him to eat
anything, since perhaps he will learn that he does not need to fast? The answer given by the Rashba
and the Meiri is that we are not concerned with normal meals, as the child will understand that as
an adult he will have to conform to the restrictions of the day like all other adults. The only concern
is that Kiddush wine drunk on behalf of others may be perceived by the child as something special
that he can continue doing as an adult.
The Gemara concludes: The halakha is that one recites the blessing for time on Rosh HaShana
and on Yom Kippur, and the halakha is that one may recite the blessing for time even in the
market, as it does not require a cup of wine.
RECITING A BLESSING OVER WINE ON YOM KIPPUR4
The Gemara initially assumes that the blessing of "Shehecheyanu" at the arrival of Yom Tov must
be recited over a cup of wine. The Gemara asks how Shehecheyanu can be recited on Yom Kippur,
when it is forbidden to drink wine?
And if you say that he should recite the blessing over a cup of wine and leave it and drink it only
after the conclusion of Yom Kippur, this too is difficult, as the principle is that one who recites a
blessing over a cup of wine must taste from it.
If you say that he should give it to a child, who is not obligated to fast, this too is not feasible
because the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rav Aḥa, who made a similar
4
Daf Advancement Forum
8
suggestion with regard to a different matter, due to a concern that perhaps the child will come to
be drawn after it.
The child might come to drink wine on Yom Kippur even in future years after he comes of age, and
we do not institute a practice that might turn into a stumbling block.
The Gemara suggests that one may give the cup of wine to a child to drink.
RASHI (DH Lisvei li'Yenuka)
explains that it is a disgrace to the cup of wine to recite the blessing "Borei Pri ha'Gafen" over it
and not benefit from the wine. Therefore, one should give the wine to a child to drink. This is
permissible because one is allowed to recite a blessing for a child for the sake of Chinuch, to teach
him to perform the Mitzvos.
Rashi's words are difficult to understand.
(a) What does Rashi mean when he says that it is a disgrace to the cup of wine to recite a
blessing over it and not to drink it? He should say simply that it is a Berachah l'Vatalah to
recite a blessing over the wine and not to drink it. (This is the way the RITVA explains the
Gemara.)
(b) Why does Rashi say that one is permitted to recite the blessing for a child and give him the
wine because of Chinuch? This child obviously has not reached the age of Chinuch,
because a child who has reached the age of Chinuch is also required to refrain from food
and drink on Yom Kippur. If, on the other hand, the child has not yet reached the age of
Chinuch, then one is not permitted to recite a blessing for him. (YA'AVETZ)
ANSWERS:
(a) Rashi apparently understands that for a Kos Shel Berachah, one is permitted to recite the
blessing "Borei Pri ha'Gafen" even though he will not drink the wine. That blessing refers
not only to the wine inside the cup, but it is said to show honor to the blessings of Kidush
and Havdalah. That is, one honors the blessings of Kidush and Havdalah when he holds a
cup of wine and recites "Borei Pri ha'Gafen" as part of the procedure of Kidush or
Havdalah. It is not necessary to drink the wine afterwards for the blessing of "Borei Pri
ha'Gafen" to become purposeful. It is not a Berachah l'Vatalah because it is part of Kidush
or Havdalah and gives honor to those blessings.
9
(b) The RITVA answers that it is obvious that the child the Gemara mentions has not reached
the age of Chinuch of fasting on Yom Kippur. However, the child has reached the age at
which he starts saying blessings for himself. A child reaches this age before he reaches the
age at which he starts fasting on Yom Kippur.
Teshuvos Ri MiGash (§203) writes5 that the recitation of the berachah of Shehecheyanu on Rosh
Hashanah and Yom Kippur is only D'Rabbanan — but that on Sukkos it is D’oraisa!
R' Yosef Engel (Gilyonei HaShas here) notes that this clearly cannot be taken literally. The only
berachos which may be D’oraisa are Birkas HaMazon and Birkas HaTorah. Rather, states R' Yosef
Engel, Ri MiGash must mean that the Shehecheyanu of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur is
optional while the Shehecheyanu of Sukkos is obligatory — but, ultimately, both are D'Rabbanan.6
Nevertheless, writes R' Yosef Engel, even taken non-literally, Ri MiGash's ruling seems at odds
with our sugya, which seems to conclude that the Shehecheyanu of Rosh Hashanah and Yom
Kippur is obligatory.
In resolution of this contradiction, he cites Tanya Rabasi, Hil. Rosh Hashanah §73 (in the name of
Yerushalmi) that the Shehecheyanu of Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while the Shehecheyanu of Shofar
is D’oraisa.
Similarly, Maharil, Hilchos Rosh Hashanah, writes that the Shehecheyanu of Kiddush does not
cover the Shehecheyanu of Shofar because Kiddush is D'Rabbanan while Shofar is D’oraisa. But,
asks R' Yosef Engel, why do we not recite Shehecheyanu on Rosh Chodesh? Perhaps, he suggests,
Kiddush Levanah is in lieu of Shehecheyanu.
5
Daf Digest
6
Other instances of such usage, cited by Gilyonei HaShas, are in Teshuvos Ri MiGash §89; Teshuvos Tashbetz 2:182.
10
Poskim discuss whether the berachah on wine is part of the mitzvah of kiddush and Havdalah or
whether it is the same as any other berachah that is recited on a food or beverage. The practical
difference between these two approaches is whether someone who listens to another’s recitation
of kiddush and Havdalah must also hear the recitation of the berachah on the wine.
Rashi in our Gemara writes that the reason one must drink from a kos shel berachah is that it is
disrespectful for one to recite a berachah on the cup of wine and not drink any.
11
This clearly indicates that the primary intent is for the berachah to be recited rather than for
someone to drink the wine. Sefer HaChinuch, on the other hand, writes that one drinks the wine
from a kos shel berachah in order to derive inspiration. This implies that the primary intent is the
drinking of the wine which must be preceded by the recitation of the berachah.
Tur cites Yerushalmi (Berachos 1:5) that states that one who was drinking wine on erev Shabbos
and would like to recite kiddush once Shabbos arrives may recite kiddush without the berachah on
the wine.
This clearly indicates that the purpose of the berachah on the wine is to permit drinking the wine
and thus if one already recited a berachah on wine there is no reason to repeat the berachah a
second time.
Mishnah Berurah rules similarly regarding Havdalah. If one will listen to another person’s
recitation of Havdalah, he is not required to listen to the berachah on the wine.
Shulchan Aruch HaRav also rules that one who listens to another’s recitation of Havdalah and
intends to fulfill his obligation to recite Havdalah but does not intend to discharge his obligation
to recite the berachah on wine fulfills his obligation of Havdalah without any doubt whatsoever.
However, in the event that he decides to drink some wine he is obligated to recite the berachah.
12
Rashi explains that the Gemara’s suggestion is to possibly give the cup to a child to drink. This
means that although the one who recited the Shehecheyanu while holding the cup cannot drink
from it on Yom Kippur, perhaps as long as someone drinks from it, even if it is not the one who
recited the blessing, this also serves to avoid the disgrace of having the blessing recited for no
purpose.
HaRav Moshe Feinstein, zt”l, writes (Igros Moshe O.C. 4, 70:1) that although Rashi explains that
the reason for drinking from the wine is to avoid its being disgraced if no one was to drink from
it, nevertheless, the drinking from the cup represents an even more fundamental purpose. The
partaking of the wine is an essential aspect of the Kiddush or Havdalah itself.
The drinking from the wine is a basic aspect of fulfilling one’s obligation to recite the Kiddush or
Havdalah. As we see in the Gemara, the law would not prescribe reciting Shehecheyanu on Yom
Kippur while holding the cup if it could not resolve the issue of who would drink from it.
Accordingly, it is critical that one who listens to Kiddush from someone else, if he plans to fulfill
his obligation with his recitation, must not only listen to the words, but he must also wait until the
person saying Kiddush also drinks from the cup before speaking or interrupting.
This is because, as we have seen, the fulfillment of the mitzvah is only complete with the partaking
of the wine from the cup.
Mishnah Berura (296:#33) cites the opinion of Magen Avraham that when listening to Havdalah,
if the listener intends to hear the blessing of Havdalah, but he does not also intend to hear the
blessing of the wine that is being said, the listener has fulfilled his obligation, בדיעבד.
This is because the blessing of Havdalah is the main blessing being recited. This implies that it is
better, לכתחילה, to also listen to the blessing being said over the wine as well.
13
In honor of the New Year tonight let us think about that wonderful beracha:
Rav Moshe Taragin writes:7
There are two gemarot which discuss the recitation of the beracha of shehecheyanu upon
experiencing unique joy or simcha. The mishna in Berakhot (54a) describes someone who
purchases a new home or new clothing, mandating the recitation of a shehecheyanu. An
ensuing gemara in Berakhot (58b) describes a beracha of shehecheyanu upon meeting a friend
whom one hasn’t seen for a period of 30 days. Presumably, the common denominator of these
two shehecheyanu is the joy which the respective experience generates. Purchasing a new home
or reuniting with a lost friend each create joy, which in turn is the source of the chiyuv to
recite shehecheyanu to thank Hashem for “sustaining us to this moment,” which has caused such
immense simcha.
A different type of shehecheyanu may emerge from the gemara in Sukka (46), which
describes the beracha upon the first performance of a Yom Tov-related mitzva, such
as lulav or sukka. The gemara debates the appropriate moment to recite the beracha – upon first
interaction with the mitzva of the chag (preparing the lulav or sukka) or
during Kiddush announcing the commencement of the chag. Either way, it seems that the CHAG –
and its mitzvot – generate an obligation to recite shehecheyanu.
The simple approach would be to group this shehecheyanu together with the first paradigm.
Experiences which generate simcha obligate a beracha of shehecheyanu; a chag and
its mitzvot would certainly fall under that category. In fact, Tosafot in Sukka (46a) question
the shehecheyanu recited upon chag-related mitzvot (sukka, reading megillah [Megillah 21]) in
light of the fact that the performance of a brit mila does not warrant shehecheyanu recital. To
further complicate matters, Tosfot quote a gemara in Pesachim which
demands shehechiyanu for pidyon ha-ben, inferring by way of omission that mila DOES NOT
require shehechiyanu.
Tosafot solve this riddle by claiming that any mitzvah which
generates SIMCHA mandates shehechiyanu, which explains the requirement for Yom
Tov mitzvot and pidyon ha-ben. Mila should have been a candidate, but since the baby suffers,
the SIMCHA is slightly compromised and the shehechiyanu thus omitted. It is clear that Tosafot
view the shehechiyanu of chag and chag-related mitzvot as based on the JOY that
the chag causes. Pidyon ha-ben also causes joy and deserves the berakha, while mila does not
allow for the same unmitigated joy and therefore does not merit a berakha.
The first hint that a different type of shehechiyanu may exist stems from a gemara in our
daf which questions the recital of shehechiyanu on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. On the one
hand, these days are not identified as days of simcha (itself an interesting point), and therefore
MAY NOT warrant shehechiyanu. Alternatively, the gemara asserts, since these days occur only
once in a while, perhaps they do deserve shehechiyanu. It seems as if the gemara is building a new
7
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shehechiyanu
14
paradigm for this berakha: not only should the berakha of shehechiyanu be recited during
moments of SIMCHA, it should also be offered as we pass important milestones that dot our yearly
schedule. Perhaps important milestones - even if they are not experiencing of joy per se - should
mandate a berakha praising Hashem for sustaining us to this stage. Reciting shehechiyanu on
Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur would be based solely upon recognizing a new template for
this berakha. Not only should the berakha be recited for simcha generating experiences; it should
also mark important halakhic milestones.
In fact, the gemara may provide an additional application of this second form
of shehechiyanu. Commenting on the question of reciting shehechiyanu for Rosh Hashanah, R.
Yehuda remarks that he would regularly recite a shehechiyanu on a new fruit. He implies that just
as he would recite the berakha for a new fruit, shehechiyanu should be recited on Rosh Hashanah
and Yom Kippur. Presumably, R. Yehuda’s point was that this ALTERNATE model
of shehechiyanu exists, indicated by his minhag to recite the berakha over new fruit. Eating a new
fruit does not generate unique excitement. If a shehechiyanu is nonetheless recited,
evidently shehechiyanu can be recited in response to annual milestones (ripening of new fruit). As
such, it can also be recited for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur - different types of milestones. R.
Yehuda assumed that shehechiyanu upon new fruit proves the existence of a second model
of shehechiyanu which can be applied to Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur even though
no simcha exists on those days.
It is unclear whether the gemara would accept R. Yehuda’s premise. Perhaps
the shehechiyanu upon eating new fruit is comparable to the shehechiyanu upon moments
of simcha, such as chag related mitzvot or purchasing a new home. It is possible that only ONE
model of shehechiyanu exists, encompassing obvious moments of simcha as well as a less obvious
ones, such as eating new fruit.
15
ONLY BLESSINGS FOR THE COMING YEAR
16
