GOD spoke to Moses, saying:

In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall observe a sacred occasion: you shall not work at your occupations. You shall observe it as a day when the horn is sounded.^aa day when the horn is sounded Or “a day of festivity.” You shall present a burnt offering of pleasing odor to GOD: one bull of the herd, one ram, and seven yearling lambs, without blemish. The grain offering with them—choice flour with oil mixed in—shall be: three-tenths of a measure for a bull, two-tenths for a ram, and one-tenth for each of the seven lambs. And there shall be one goat for a purgation offering, to make expiation in your behalf— in addition to the burnt offering of the new moon with its grain offering and the regular burnt offering with its grain offering, each with its libation as prescribed, offerings by fire of pleasing odor to GOD.

Ezra opened the scroll in the sight of all the people, for he was above all the people; as he opened it, all the people stood up. Ezra blessed the ETERNAL, the great God, and all the people answered, “Amen, Amen,” with hands upraised. Then they bowed their heads and prostrated themselves before GOD with their faces to the ground. Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites explained the Teaching to the people, while the people stood in their places. They read from the scroll of the Teaching of God, translating it and giving the sense; so they understood the reading. Nehemiah the Tirshatha, Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who were explaining to the people said to all the people, “This day is holy to the ETERNAL your God: you must not mourn or weep,” for all the people were weeping as they listened to the words of the Teaching. He further said to them, “Go, eat choice foods and drink sweet drinks and send portions to whoever has nothing prepared, for the day is holy to our Sovereign. Do not be sad, for your rejoicing in GOD is the source of your strength.” The Levites were quieting the people, saying, “Hush, for the day is holy; do not be sad.” Then all the people went to eat and drink and send portions and make great merriment, for they understood the things they were told.

MISHNA: They are four days in the year that serve as the New Year, each for a different purpose: On the first of Nisan is the New Year for kings; it is from this date that the years of a king’s rule are counted. And the first of Nisan is also the New Year for the order of the Festivals, as it determines which is considered the first Festival of the year and which the last. On the first of Elul is the New Year for animal tithes; all the animals born prior to that date belong to the previous tithe year and are tithed as a single unit, whereas those born after that date belong to the next tithe year. Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: The New Year for animal tithes is on the first of Tishrei. On the first of Tishrei is the New Year for counting years, as will be explained in the Gemara; for calculating Sabbatical Years and Jubilee Years, i.e., from the first of Tishrei there is a biblical prohibition to work the land during these years; for planting, for determining the years of orla, the three-year period from when a tree has been planted during which time its fruit is forbidden; and for tithing vegetables, as vegetables picked prior to that date cannot be tithed together with vegetables picked after that date. On the first of Shevat is the New Year for the tree; the fruit of a tree that was formed prior to that date belong to the previous tithe year and cannot be tithed together with fruit that was formed after that date; this ruling is in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai. But Beit Hillel say: The New Year for trees is on the fifteenth of Shevat. GEMARA: The New Year for kings; with regard to what halakha is it mentioned in the mishna? Why is it necessary to set a specific date to count the years of a king’s rule, rather than counting them from the day that he ascends to the throne? Rav Ḥisda said: It is for determining the validity of documents. It was the common practice to date documents in accordance with the years of the king’s rule; therefore, it was important that these years begin at a fixed time, so that one knows whether a particular document was antedated or postdated, as we learned in a mishna: Antedated promissory notes, i.e., promissory notes dated prior to the date on which the loan actually took place, are invalid because a loan document creates a lien on the borrower’s property. By dating the document earlier than the loan itself, the lender has a fraudulent mortgage on the property, which can be used against any future purchaser. Therefore, the Sages ordained that an antedated promissory note does not establish a lien, even from the true date of the loan. But postdated promissory notes bearing a date that is later than the date when the loan actually took place are valid, as postdating the note presents no opportunity for defrauding a purchaser. The Sages taught in a baraita: If a king ascended to the throne on the twenty-ninth of Adar, the month preceding Nisan, once the first of Nisan arrives, although he reigned for only one day, a year is counted toward his reign; his first year of rule is completed from the first of Nisan. But if he ascended to the throne only on the first of Nisan, one counts an additional year toward his reign only when the next Nisan arrives. The Master said, citing the baraita: If a king ascended to the throne on the twenty-ninth of Adar, once the first of Nisan arrives a year is counted toward his reign. The Gemara comments: This

The Gemara asks further: But the New Year for the Jubilee depends upon a certain action, i.e., sounding the shofar, and nevertheless the tanna counts it. The Gemara answers: The mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, who said that the Jubilee Year begins on Rosh HaShana, even without the shofar blast. The Gemara presents an alternative answer as to why the tanna did not include all the other New Years. Rav Ashi said: The tanna said that there are four New Years that fall on four New Moons. However, there are also other New Years that do not fall on New Moons. The Gemara raises a question: Does Rav Ashi count the first of Shevat as one of the New Years; but the first of Shevat is a New Year only according to Beit Shammai, and by the time of Rav Ashi, the halakha was known to be in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel? The Gemara answers that this is what Rav Ashi is saying: There are three New Years that all agree occur on the first of the month, and the first of Shevat is subject to a dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. § The mishna teaches that Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: The New Year for animal tithes is on the first of Tishrei. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, expounded the same verse in different ways. As it is stated in the verse: “The flocks are clothed in the meadows, and the valleys are wrapped in grain; they shout for joy, they also sing” (Psalms 65:14). Rabbi Meir holds: When are the flocks clothed in the meadows, i.e., when do the rams impregnate the ewes and thereby clothe them? It is at the time when the valleys are wrapped in grain, i.e., when they are covered in grain. And when are the valleys wrapped in grain? It is in Adar. Therefore, the sheep conceive in Adar and give birth five months later in Av, and so it is fitting that their New Year is on the first of Elul, as most of the year’s lambs have been born by then. Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: When are the flocks clothed in the meadows? At the time that the stalks of grain “shout for joy, and also sing.” When do the stalks break out in song, i.e., when are they full, so that they rustle in the wind and create the whispering sounds of song? It is in Nisan. Therefore, the sheep conceive in Nisan and give birth in Elul, and so it is fitting that their New Year is on the first of Tishrei. The Gemara asks: And according to the other tanna, Rabbi Meir, as well, isn’t it written: “They shout for joy, they also sing”? The Gemara answers: That is referring to late sheep, which were conceived after the usual time, in Nisan. The Gemara asks: According to the other opinion of Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon as well, isn’t it written: “And the valleys wrapped in grain,” which is in Adar? The Gemara answers: That is referring to early sheep, which were conceived in Adar. The Gemara asks further: Granted, according to the opinion of Rabbi Meir, the verse can be understood as it is written: “The flocks are clothed in the meadows” at the time when “the valleys are wrapped in grain.” But there are also some that do not conceive until as late as when “they shout for joy, they also sing.” But according to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon, it should have been written in the reverse order: “The flocks are clothed in the meadows” at the time when “they shout for joy, they also sing,” but there are also some that conceive earlier, when “the valleys are wrapped in grain.” If so, according to them, the words in the verse were not written in their proper order. Rather, Rava said that the dispute must be explained as follows: Everyone is of the opinion that “the flocks are clothed in the meadows,” i.e., the sheep conceive, primarily at the time when “the valleys are wrapped in grain,” in the month of Adar. But here they disagree about the meaning of the following verse: “You shall tithe a tithe from all the increase of your seed that the field brings forth year by year. And you shall eat before the Lord your God, in the place which He shall choose to place His name there, the tithe of your grain, of your wine, and of your oil, and the firstborn of your herds, and of your flocks; that you may learn to fear the Lord your God always” (Deuteronomy 14:22–23). The verse speaks here about two tithes, one being the animal tithe and the other the grain tithe. They disagree about the following: Rabbi Meir holds that the verse juxtaposes the animal tithe to the grain tithe. Just as the grain tithe is set aside close to the grain’s completion, after it dries out in the field, so too, the animal tithe is set aside close to its completion, after the animals are born. Just as the grain is completed in Elul and is set aside the following month, which is Tishrei, so too, the animals are born in Av and therefore must be set aside in the following month, which is Elul. On the other hand, Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon hold: The verse juxtaposes the animal tithe to the grain tithe. Just as in the case of the grain tithe, its New Year is in Tishrei, so too, in the case of the animal tithe, its New Year is in Tishrei. § It is taught in the mishna: On the first of Tishrei is the New Year for counting years. The Gemara asks: With regard to which halakha is this stated? Rav Pappa said: It is stated for determining the validity of documents, as we learned in a mishna: Antedated promissory notes, which bear a date that is earlier than the date when the loan actually took place, are invalid. But postdated promissory notes, which bear a date that is later than the date when the loan actually took place, are valid. Therefore, it is essential to know the date on which the new year begins in order to determine whether or not a particular promissory note is valid. The Gemara asks: But didn’t we already learn in the mishna: On the first of Nisan is the New Year for kings; and we say about this: For what halakha is this stated? And Rav Ḥisda said: It is for determining the validity of documents. Therefore, the new year for documents begins in Nisan and not in Tishrei. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; here, where the document is dated according to the reign of the Jewish kings, the year begins in Nisan; and there, where the document is dated to the reign of the gentile kings of the nations of the world, the year begins in Tishrei. The Gemara asks: But that which Rav Ḥisda said in explanation of the mishna, that they taught that the New Year for kings is in Nisan only with regard to the Jewish kings, but as for the gentile kings of the nations of the world we count from Tishrei, did Rav Ḥisda come to teach us what was already taught in the mishna itself? The Gemara answers: No, Rav Ḥisda came to teach us the meaning of certain biblical verses, i.e., that they should not be understood as was suggested at the beginning of this chapter but as teaching that the New Year for gentile kings is in Tishrei. And if you wish, say that Rav Ḥisda teaches the mishna as did Rabbi Zeira, and he maintains that when it says that the first of Tishrei is the New Year for years, it is not referring to documents, as Rabbi Zeira said: The first of Tishrei is the New Year for years with regard to calculating the cycles of the sun and the moon. And this is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who said: The world was created in the month of Tishrei, and all the calculations with regard to the sun and the moon are based on when they were created. § Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: When the mishna says that the first of Tishrei is the New Year for years, it is with regard to judgment, as on that day God judges the world for the whole year, as it is written: “A land that the Lord your God cares for; the eyes of the Lord your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year until the end of the year” (Deuteronomy 11:12); from the beginning of the year judgment is passed as to what will happen at the end of the year. The Gemara raises a question: From where is it known that the day of judgment is in Tishrei? As it is written: “Blow a shofar at the New Moon, at the covered time for our Festival day” (Psalms 81:4). Which is the Festival day

is it not right that one day should count as a full year at the beginning of the year? Rather, what opinion does it follow? If the baraita was not taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, does it follow the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who holds that only thirty days are considered like a year? If so, then thirty days and another thirty days are required: Thirty days for the planting to take root, and another thirty days to count as a year. As we learned in a mishna: One may not plant, layer, or graft trees on the eve of the Sabbatical Year less than thirty days before Rosh HaShana, and if one planted, layered, or grafted, he must uproot it, as the planting will take root only in the seventh year; this is the statement of Rabbi Elazar. Rabbi Yehuda says: Any grafting that does not take root within three days will never take root. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Two weeks are needed for the planting to take root. And on this topic Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: According to the statement of the one who says thirty days, this means that it requires thirty days for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And according to the statement of the one who says three days, this means that it requires thirty-three days. And according to the statement of the one who says two weeks, this means that it requires two weeks for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And if the tanna of the mishna holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that only three days are needed for the planting to take root, it still requires three days for the planting to take root and thirty days to count as a year. If so, the baraita cannot be understood even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar. Rather, it must be understood as follows: The baraita was actually taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, and when it says thirty days, it is referring to the time needed for the planting to take root. The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, it requires thirty-one days; thirty days for the planting to take root and one more day to count as a year. The Gemara answers: This is theoretically correct, but he holds that the thirtieth day is counted for here and for there, i.e., it counts as both the thirtieth day for taking root and as a day that is counted as a year. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, who disagree about how much time must pass to count as a year, expounded the same verse. As the verse states: “And it came to pass in the one and six hundredth year, in the first month on the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from off the earth” (Genesis 8:13). Rabbi Meir holds: From the fact that it was only one day into the year, as it was still the first day of the first month, and yet it is called the six hundred and first year, learn from here that one day in a year is already considered a year. And the other tanna, Rabbi Elazar, expounds the verse as follows. If it had written: In the six hundred and first year, it would be as you said. However, now that it is written: “In the one and six hundredth year," I can say that the word “year” relates to “six hundredth,” thereby teaching that it is still considered the six hundredth year. And what is meant by “one”? That it is the beginning of one year, but not that the first day counts as a year. The Gemara asks: And with regard to Rabbi Elazar, what is the rationale for his opinion? From where does he learn that thirty days are counted as a year? As it is written: “In the first month on the first day of the month.” Since it was only one day into the month, and yet it is called a month, learn from here that one day in a month is already considered a month. And since one day in a month is already considered a month, likewise thirty days in a year are already considered a year, as a month is calculated according to its unit, and a year is calculated according to its unit. If one unit by which a month is calculated, i.e., a day, counts as a full month, so too, one unit by which a year is calculated, i.e., a month, counts as a full year. § The Gemara comments: By inference, both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, hold that the world was created in Nisan and that the years are counted from that month, as, if the world were created in Tishrei and the count started then, the first day of the first month of the six hundred and first year would already have been six months into the year for the purpose of counting years. It is taught in a baraita that the tanna’im disagreed about this point: Rabbi Eliezer says: In Tishrei the world was created; in Tishrei the Patriarchs were born; in Tishrei the Patriarchs died; on Passover Isaac was born; on Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered by God and conceived; on Rosh HaShana Joseph came out from prison; on Rosh HaShana our forefathers’ slavery in Egypt ceased; in Nisan the Jewish people were redeemed from Egypt; and in Tishrei in the future the Jewish people will be redeemed in the final redemption with the coming of the Messiah. Rabbi Yehoshua disagrees and says: In Nisan the world was created; in Nisan the Patriarchs were born; in Nisan the Patriarchs died; on Passover Isaac was born; on Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered by God and conceived sons; on Rosh HaShana Joseph came out from prison; on Rosh HaShana our forefathers’ slavery in Egypt ceased; in Nisan the Jewish people were redeemed from Egypt; and in Nisan in the future the Jewish people will be redeemed in the final redemption. The Gemara explains these matters in detail: It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: From where is it derived that the world was created in the month of Tishrei? As it is stated: “And God said: Let the earth bring forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind” (Genesis 1:11). Which is the month in which the earth brings forth grass and the trees are full of ripe fruit? You must say that this is Tishrei. And a further proof that the world was created in Tishrei is that when the world was first created, it needed rain so that the plants would grow, and the period beginning with Tishrei is a time of rain, and rain fell and the plants grew, as it is stated: “But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground” (Genesis 2:6). Rabbi Yehoshua says: From where is it derived that the world was created in the month of Nisan? As it is stated: “And the earth brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree yielding fruit” (Genesis 1:12). Which is the month in which the earth is full of grass and the trees begin to bring forth fruit? You must say that this is Nisan. And further proof that the world was created in Nisan is that when the world was first created, the animals had to breed in order to fill the world, and the period beginning with Nisan is a time when cattle, and beasts, and birds mate with one another, as it is stated: “The flocks are clothed in the meadows, and the valleys are wrapped in grain; they shout for joy, they also sing” (Psalms 65:14). The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of the other tanna, Rabbi Eliezer, isn’t it written: “And tree yielding fruit,” indicating that the world was created at a time when the trees were just beginning to form their fruit? The Gemara answers: That verse is written as a blessing for future generations, that then too they will form their fruit. The Gemara continues to ask: And according to the opinion of the other tanna, Rabbi Yehoshua, isn’t it written: “Fruit tree,” indicating that the world was created in a season when the trees were already filled with their fruit? The Gemara answers: That verse may be understood in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: All the acts of Creation were created with their full stature, immediately fit to bear fruit; they were created with their full mental capacities; they were created with their full form. As it is stated: “And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all their host” (Genesis 2:1). Do not read it as “their host [tzeva’am]”; rather, read it as their form [tzivyonam], which implies that the trees were created filled with ripe fruit. The baraita continues: Rabbi Eliezer says: From where is it derived that in Tishrei the Patriarchs were born? As it is stated: “And all the men of Israel assembled themselves before King Solomon at the feast in the month of the mighty [eitanim], which is the seventh month” (I Kings 8:2), i.e., Tishrei. What is the meaning of the phrase: The month of the mighty? It is the month in which the mighty ones of the world, i.e., the Patriarchs, were born. The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that the term eitan denotes mighty? As it is written: “Strong [eitan] is Your dwelling place, and You put Your nest in a rock” (Numbers 24:21). And it says: “Hear, O mountains, the Lord’s controversy, and you strong [eitanim] foundations of the earth” (Micah 6:2), which is a call to the Patriarchs. And it says: “The voice of my beloved; behold, he comes leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills” (Song of Songs 2:8): “Leaping upon the mountains” means that the redemption will arrive early in the merit of the Patriarchs, who are called mountains, and “skipping upon the hills” means that it will come in the merit of the Matriarchs. Rabbi Yehoshua says: From where is it derived that in Nisan the Patriarchs were born? As it is stated: “And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year, in the month of Ziv” (I Kings 6:1). This means in the month in which the radiant ones [zivtanei] of the world, the Patriarchs, were born. The Gemara asks: And according to the other tanna, Rabbi Yehoshua, isn’t it written: “In the month of the mighty,” which indicates that the Patriarchs were born in Tishrei? The Gemara answers: There, it means that the month is mighty in mitzvot, due to the many Festivals that occur in Tishrei. The Gemara asks further: And according to the other tanna, Rabbi Eliezer, isn’t it written: “In the month of Ziv”? The Gemara answers: Ziv is not an allusion to the Patriarchs. Rather, it means that Nisan is the month in which there is radiance [ziv] for the trees. As Rav Yehuda said: One who goes out during the days of Nisan and sees trees that are blossoming recites: Blessed…Who has withheld nothing from His world and has created in it beautiful creatures and beautiful trees for human beings to enjoy. The Gemara continues: The one who said that in Nisan the Patriarchs were born also holds that in Nisan they died. The one who says that in Tishrei they were born also holds that in Tishrei they died, as it is stated about Moses on the day of his death: “And he said to them: I am one hundred and twenty years old today” (Deuteronomy 31:2). As there is no need for the verse to state “today,” since it is clear that Moses was speaking on that day, what is the meaning when the verse states “today”? It is to teach that Moses was speaking precisely, as if to say: Today my days and years are exactly filled and completed. This comes to teach you that the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits and fills the years of the righteous from day to day and from month to month, as it is stated: “The number of your days I will fulfill” (Exodus 23:26). Similarly, the Patriarchs merited that their years be fulfilled to the day, and so they died on the same date they were born. It was taught in the baraita: On Passover Isaac was born. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? As it is written that the angel who informed Sarah that she would bear a son told Abraham: “At the appointed time [mo’ed] I will return to you, at this season, and Sarah shall have a son” (Genesis 18:14). This is understood to mean: At the time of the next Festival [mo’ed]. When did the angel say this? If we say that it was on Passover and he said to him that Sarah would have a son on Shavuot, can a woman give birth after only fifty days? Rather, say that it was Shavuot and he said that she would give birth on the Festival that occurs in the month of Tishrei, i.e., Sukkot. But still, can she give birth after only five months? Rather, you must say that it was Sukkot, and he spoke about the Festival that occurs in the month of Nisan, i.e., Passover. The Gemara asks further: But still, can a woman give birth after only six months? The Gemara answers: A Sage taught in a baraita: That year was a leap year, in which an additional month of Adar was added before Nisan, and a woman can indeed give birth after seven months. The Gemara raises another question: Ultimately, if one deducts Sarah’s days of ritual impurity, as when the angel spoke Sarah had not yet conceived, and there is a tradition that on that day she began menstruating, as is alluded to in the verse: “After I am grown old, shall I have pleasure” (Genesis 18:12), there are less than seven months. Mar Zutra said: Even according to the one who said that if a woman gives birth to a viable baby in her ninth month, she cannot give birth prematurely, and if she does not complete nine full months’ gestation the baby will not survive, nevertheless, if a woman gives birth in her seventh month, she may give birth early, before the seventh month is complete. As it is stated about the birth of Samuel: “And it came to pass after cycles of days that Hannah conceived and bore a son” (I Samuel 1:20), which is understood as follows: The minimum of “cycles,” seasons of three months, is two, and the minimum of “days” is two. Consequently, it is possible for a woman to give birth after a pregnancy of six months and two days. It was taught in the baraita: On Rosh HaShana, Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were revisited by God and conceived children. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rabbi Elazar said: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between one instance of the term revisiting [pekida] and another instance of the term revisiting, and by means of a verbal analogy between one instance of the term remembering [zekhira] and another instance of the word remembering. It is written about Rachel: “And God remembered Rachel” (Genesis 30:22), and it is written about Hannah: “And the Lord remembered her” (I Samuel 1:19). And the meaning of these instances of the term remembering is derived from another instance of the term remembering, with regard to Rosh HaShana, as it is written: “A solemn rest, memorial proclaimed with the blast of a shofar” (Leviticus 23:24). From here it is derived that Rachel and Hannah were remembered by God on Rosh HaShana. And the meaning of one instance of the term revisiting is derived from another instance of the term revisiting. It is written about Hannah: “And the Lord revisited Hannah” (I Samuel 2:21), and it is written about Sarah: “And the Lord revisited Sarah” (Genesis 21:1). From here it is derived that just as Hannah was revisited on Rosh HaShana, so too, Sarah was revisited on Rosh HaShana. It was further taught in the baraita: On Rosh HaShana Joseph came out of prison. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? As it is written: “Sound a shofar at the New Moon, at the covered time of our Festival day. For this is a statute for Israel, a judgment of the God of Jacob” (Psalms 81:4–5). This is a reference to Rosh HaShana, the only Festival that occurs at the time of the New Moon, when the moon is covered and cannot be seen.

But because the people changed their actions for the worse, the Holy One, Blessed be He, changed for them the acts of Creation and He caused the constellation of Kima to rise during the day, and He removed two stars from it and He brought a flood to the world. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to Rabbi Yehoshua, who holds that the flood began in the month of Iyyar, this is as it is written: “In the second month,” which is referring to the month of Iyyar, the second month from Nisan. But according to Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that the flood began in the month of Marḥeshvan, what is the meaning of “the second month”? The Gemara answers: It means second to the month that includes the day of judgment, which is the month of Tishrei. The Gemara asks further: Granted, according to Rabbi Yehoshua, who holds that the flood began in the month of Iyyar, this is what it means that He changed the acts of Creation with a flood, as rain does not usually fall in Iyyar. But according to Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that the flood began in Marḥeshvan, what did He change? The Gemara answers: Even according to Rabbi Eliezer a change was made, in accordance with the statement of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda said: They sinned with boiling heat, and they were punished with boiling heat; they sinned with the boiling heat of the sin of forbidden sexual relations, and they were punished with the boiling heat of scalding waters. This is derived from a verbal analogy. It is written here, with regard to the flood: “And the waters abated” (Genesis 8:1), and it is written elsewhere, with regard to King Ahasuerus: “And the heated anger of the king abated” (Esther 7:10), which implies that the word “abated” means cooled. This indicates that at first the waters of the flood had been scalding hot. The Sages taught in a baraita: The Jewish Sages count the years from Creation and the flood in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, from Tishrei, and they calculate the cycles of the sun and the moon in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, from Nisan. The sages of the gentile nations of the world, on the other hand, count both the years from Creation and the flood in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, from Nisan. § The mishna taught: And the first of Tishrei is the new year for vegetables. It is taught in a baraita: The first of Tishrei is the new year for vegetables, and for tithes, and for vows. The Gemara asks: What is meant by the term: For vegetables? It means for the vegetable tithe, i.e., one may not take teruma or tithes from vegetables picked before Rosh HaShana in order to fulfill the obligation for vegetables picked after Rosh HaShana. The Gemara asks: If so, this is the same as the meaning of the term for tithes, and yet the baraita distinguishes between them. The Gemara answers: The baraita taught first about a tithe that is by rabbinic law, i.e., the vegetable tithe, that its new year is the first of Tishrei, and then it teaches about a tithe that is by Torah law, i.e., the tithe of grain, wine, and oil, that its new year is also the first of Tishrei. The Gemara asks: If so, let the tanna of the baraita teach that which is by Torah law in the first clause. The Gemara explains: Since the halakha with regard to vegetable tithes was dear to him, he mentioned it first. He taught first about the tithe that is by rabbinic decree, as it involves a greater novelty, and afterward he taught about the tithe that is by Torah law. The Gemara asks further: And with regard to the tanna of our mishna, who mentioned only vegetables but not tithes, what is his reasoning? The Gemara explains: He taught vegetable tithes, which are by rabbinic decree, and from which one may infer all the more so that the first of Tishrei is the new year for the tithe of grain, wine, and oil, which is by Torah law. The Gemara raises a question about the baraita: But let the tanna of the baraita teach: Tithe, in the singular. Why teach tithes in the plural? The Gemara answers: He uses this formulation to include both the animal tithe and the grain tithe. The Gemara asks further: But let him teach: Vegetable, in the singular. Why teach: Vegetables, in the plural? The Gemara answers: He means to include two categories of vegetables, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to a type of vegetable that is usually made into bundles before being sold, the time of tithing is from when it is bundled; and with regard to a type of vegetable that is not usually made into such bundles, the time of tithing is from when one fills a vessel with it. § The Sages taught in a baraita: If one picked vegetables on the eve of Rosh HaShana before the sun had set, so that they belong to the previous year, and then he returned and he picked more vegetables

THE precepts of the eighth class are enumerated in “the Section on Seasons” (Sefer zemannim). With a few exceptions, the reasons for all of them are stated in the Law. The object of Sabbath is obvious, and requires no explanation. The rest it affords to man is known; one-seventh of the life of every man, whether small or great, passes thus in comfort, and in rest from trouble and exertion. This the Sabbath effects in addition to the perpetuation and confirmation of the grand doctrine of the Creation. The object of the Fast of Atonement is evident. The Fast creates the sense of repentance; it is the same day on which the chief of all prophets came down [from Mount Sinai] with the second tables, and announced to the people the divine pardon of their great sin; the day was therefore appointed for ever as a day devoted to repentance and true worship of God. For this reason all material enjoyment, all trouble and care for the body, are interdicted, no work may be done; the day must be spent in confession; ever- one shall confess his sins and abandon them. Other holy days are appointed for rejoicing and for such pleasant gathering as people generally need. They also promote the good feeling that men should have to each other in their social and political relations. The appointment of the special days for such purposes has its cause. The reason for the Passover is well known. It is kept seven days, because the period of seven days is the unit of time intermediate between a day and a month. It is also known how great is the importance of this period in Nature, and in many religious duties. For the Law always follows Nature, and in some respects brings it to perfection; for Nature is not capable of designing and thinking, whilst the Law is the result of the wisdom and guidance of God, who is the author of the intellect of all rational beings. This, however, is not the theme of the present chapter: let us return to our subject. The Feast of Weeks is the anniversary of the Revelation on Mount Sinai. In order to raise the importance of this day, we count the days that pass since the preceding festival, just as one who expects his most intimate friend on a certain day counts the days and even the hours. This is the reason why we count the days that pass since the offering of the Omer, between the anniversary of our departure from Egypt and the anniversary of the Lawgiving. The latter was the aim and object of the exodus from Egypt, and thus God said, “I brought you unto myself” (Exod. 19:4). As that great revelation took place only on one day, so we keep its anniversary only one day: but if the eating of unleavened bread on Passover were only commanded for one day, we should not have noticed it, and its object would not have been manifest. For it frequently happens that we take the same kind of food for two or three days. But by our continuing for a whole period [of seven days] to eat unleavened bread, its object becomes clear and evident. New-Year is likewise kept for one day; for it is a day of repentance, on which we are stirred up from our forgetfulness. For this reason the shofar is blown on this day, as we have shown in Mishneh-torah. The day is, as it were, a preparation for and an introduction to the day of the Fast, as is obvious from the national tradition about the days between New-Year and the Day of Atonement. The Feast of Tabernacles, which is a feast of rejoicing and gladness, is kept seven days, in order that the idea of the festival may be more noticeable. The reason why it is kept in the autumn is stated in the Law, “When thou hast gathered in thy labours out of the field” (Exod. 23:16); that is to say, when you rest and are free from pressing labours. Aristotle, in the ninth book of his Ethics, mentions this as a general custom among the nations. He says: “In ancient times the sacrifices and assemblies of the people took place after the ingathering of the corn and the fruit, as if the sacrifices were offered on account of the harvest.” Another reason is this—in this season it is possible to dwell in tabernacles, as there is neither great heat nor troublesome rain. The two festivals, Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles, imply also the teaching of certain truths and certain moral lessons. Passover teaches us to remember the miracles which God wrought in Egypt, and to perpetuate their memory; the Feast of Tabernacles reminds us of the miracles wrought in the wilderness. The moral lessons derived from these feasts is this: man ought to remember his evil days in his days of prosperity. He will thereby be induced to thank God repeatedly, to lead a modest and humble life. We eat, therefore, unleavened bread and bitter herbs on Passover in memory of what has happened unto us, and leave [on Succoth] our houses in order to dwell in tabernacles, as inhabitants of deserts do that are in want of comfort. We shall thereby remember that this has once been our condition; [comp.] “I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths” (Lev. 23:43); although we dwell now in elegant houses, in the best and most fertile land, by the kindness of God, and because of His promises to our forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who were perfect in their opinions and in their conduct. This idea is likewise an important element in our religion; that whatever good we have received and ever will receive of God, is owing to the merits of the Patriarchs, who “kept the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment” (Gen. 18:19). We join to the Feast of Tabernacles the Feast of the Eighth Day, in order to complete our rejoicings, which cannot be perfect in booths, but in comfortable and well-built houses. As regards the four species [the branches of the palm tree, the citron, the myrtle, and the willows of the brook] our Sages gave a reason for their use by way of Agadic interpretation, the method of which is well known to those who are acquainted with the style of our Sages. They use the text of the Bible only as a kind of poetical language [for their own ideas], and do not intend thereby to give an interpretation of the text. As to the value of these Midrashic interpretations, we meet with two different opinions. For some think that the Midrash contains the real explanation of the text, whilst others, finding that it cannot be reconciled with the words quoted, reject and ridicule it. The former struggle and fight to prove and to confirm such interpretations according to their opinion, and to keep them as the real meaning of the text; they consider them in the same light as traditional laws. Neither of the two classes understood it, that our Sages employ biblical texts merely as poetical expressions, the meaning of which is clear to every reasonable reader. This style was general in ancient days; all adopted it in the same way as poets [adopt a certain style]. Our Sages say, in reference to the words, “and a paddle (yated) thou shalt have upon thy weapon” [azeneka, Deut. 23:14]: Do not read azeneka, “thy weapon,” but ozneka, “thy ear.” You are thus told, that if you hear a person uttering something disgraceful, put your fingers into your ears. Now, I wonder whether those ignorant persons [who take the Midrashic interpretations literally] believe that the author of this saying gave it as the true interpretation of the text quoted, and as the meaning of this precept: that in truth yated, “the paddle,” is used for “the finger, “and azeneka denotes “thy ear.” I cannot think that any person whose intellect is sound can admit this. The author employed the text as a beautiful poetical phrase, in teaching an excellent moral lesson, namely this: It is as bad to listen to bad language as it is to use it. This lesson is poetically connected with the above text. In the same sense you must understand the phrase, “Do not read so, but so,” wherever it occurs in the Midrash. I have departed from my subject, but it was for the purpose of making a remark useful to every intellectual member of the Rabbanites. I now return to our theme. I believe that the four species are a symbolical expression of our rejoicing that the Israelites changed the wilderness, “no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates, or of water to drink” (Num. 20:5), with a country full of fruit-trees and rivers. In order to remember this we take the fruit which is the most pleasant of the fruit of the land, branches which smell best, most beautiful leaves, and also the best of herbs, i.e., the willows of the brook. These four kinds have also those three purposes: First, they were plentiful in those days in Palestine, so that every one could easily get them. Secondly, they have a good appearance, they are green; some of them, viz., the citron and the myrtle, are also excellent as regards their smell, the branches of the palm-tree and the willow having neither good nor bad smell. Thirdly, they keep fresh and green for seven days, which is not the case with peaches, pomegranates, asparagus, nuts, and the like.

Eat a head of a lamb saying: Let us be as a head and not a tail. It is also a remembrance of the ram of Isaac. Rema: There are those who are careful not to eat nuts, as the word "egoz" in gematriah [is equal to the value of] chet (sin). They also cause a lot of excess saliva and phloem and cause abrogation of prayers. They also go to a river and say the verse: And Thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea (Micah 7:19). There are also those who do not sleep during Rosh Hashana during the day, and this is the correct thing to do.

One bathes and cuts their hair on the eve of Rosh Hashana. (and there are those that are accustomed to immerse in a mikvah on the eve of Rosh Hashana on account of seminal emission. And there are places where there is a custom to go to the graves and to pray very much there and to give charity to poor people there.)

3. We do not bring a sefer Torah to people confined in prison, even on Rosh haShanna and Yom Kippur (see above, end of Orach Chaim 135:1).

We have the custom to get up at the break of dawn to recite Selichot and tachanunim from Rosh Chodesh Elul until Yom Kippur. Rema: The minhag of Ashkenazi Jews is not like that. Instead from Rosh Chodesh on we blow the Shofar after Shacharith, and there are some places where they also blow the Shofar after Arvit. We get up at dawn to recite Selichot from the Sunday before Rosh HaShanah on; and if Rosh HaShanah falls on a Monday or Tuesday, we begin reciting Selichot from Sunday the week before Rosh HaShanah. It is forbidden for a mourner to leave his house in order to hear the Selichot at the synagogue, except on the eve of Rosh HaShanah when we extend the Selichot. On that day, the mourner can go to synagogue (Piskei Mahar"i chapter 133). It is important to search for a prayer leader for Selichot and the Days of Awe who is most fit, one who is learned and does good deeds. He should be at least thirty and married. However, any Jew is kosher for this role, as long as he is liked by the community. If he took the role by force, we do not respond "Amen" to him. He has to be able to fulfill everybody's obligation. If he has an enemy (note: one who hates him) and intends not to fulfill his obligation, even those who like him do not fulfill their obligations (Hagahot and Minhagim Yeshanim). There are places where the person who leads Selichot leads all of that day's prayers (Kol Bo).

We do not say hallel on Rosh HaShanah and also not on Yom Kippur. Rema: Our custom is to say Avinu Malkenu according to the order, but if it falls on Shabbat we do not say it. And we lengthen the piyutim and prayers until noon.

GEMARA: The Gemara cites examples of verses that may not be used in Rosh HaShana prayers because they deal with punishment. With regard to verses of Kingship, for example: “As I live, says the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, will I be King over you” (Ezekiel 20:33). And although Rav Naḥman said about this verse: With regard to any anger like this, let the Holy One, blessed be He, express that anger upon us and let Him redeem us, if that is the process necessary for redemption, since the verse was said with anger it is not included, as one does not mention anger on Rosh HaShana. Similarly, verses of remembrance that speak of a punishment may not be used in Rosh HaShana prayers, for example: “So He remembered that they were but flesh, a wind that passes away, and does not come again” (Psalms 78:39). Nor verses of shofar, which refer to calamity, for example: “Sound the shofar in Giva, and the trumpet in Rama; sound an alarm at Beit Aven, behind you, O Benjamin” (Hosea 5:8). The Gemara qualifies the mishna’s ruling. However, if one comes to recite verses of Kingship, remembrance, and shofar with a theme of the punishment of gentiles, one may recite them. The Gemara offers examples of these verses: With regard to the verses of Kingship, for example: “The Lord reigns, let the peoples tremble” (Psalms 99:1), and, for example: “The Lord is King for ever and ever; the nations are perished out of His land” (Psalms 10:16). With regard to remembrance, for example: “Remember, O Lord, against the children of Edom the day of Jerusalem, who said: Raze it, raze it, to its very foundation” (Psalms 137:7). With regard to the verses of shofar, for example: “And the Lord God will sound the shofar, and will go with whirlwinds of the south” (Zechariah 9:14), and it is written: “The Lord of hosts will defend them” (Zechariah 9:15), i.e., God will defend the Jewish people against their enemies. The Gemara states: One does not recite a verse dealing with the remembrance of an individual, even if it is for good, for example: “Remember me, O Lord, when You show favor to Your people” (Psalms 106:4), and, for example: “Remember me, my God, for good” (Nehemiah 5:19). Verses that mention God’s revisitings [pikdonot] are equivalent to verses of remembrances [zikhronot], and therefore they may be counted in the ten verses. For example: “And the Lord revisited [pakad] Sarah” (Genesis 21:1), and, for example: “I have surely revisited [pakadeti] you” (Exodus 3:16). This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: They are not equivalent to verses of remembrances. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, although verses that speak of God revisiting man are equivalent to verses of remembrances, he cites the following verse as an example: “And the Lord revisited Sarah,” which is a revisiting of an individual. Despite the fact that it was stated above that a remembrance must refer to the collective, since many descendants came from her, as Sarah is the mother of the Jewish people, she is considered like many. Therefore, this verse is effectively dealing with the remembrance of the entire Jewish people. The Gemara discusses several verses from Psalms. “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and be lifted up, you everlasting doors, that the King of glory may come in. Who is the King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle” (Psalms 24:7–8). The psalm continues: “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and lift them up, you everlasting doors; that the King of glory may come in. Who then is the King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory, Selah” (Psalms 24:9–10). The first section is counted as two verses of Kingship, as the term king is mentioned twice, while the second section is counted as three verses of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: The first section is counted as only one verse of Kingship, as the question: “Who is the King of glory,” is not considered a verse of Kingship. By the same reasoning, the second section is counted as only two verses of Kingship. Similarly, the Gemara discusses the following verses: “Sing praises to God, sing praises, sing praises to our King, sing praises. For God is the King of all the earth; sing praises in a skillful song” (Psalms 47:7–8). These are counted as two verses of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: They count as only one verse of Kingship, as the phrase: “Sing praises to our King,” is referring to God as the King of the Jewish people, not the King of the entire world. And they both agree with regard to the verse: “God reigns over the nations, God sits upon His sacred throne” (Psalms 47:9), that it is considered as only one verse of Kingship, as the phrase: “Sits upon His sacred throne,” is not referring to God explicitly as King. With regard to a verse of remembrance that also has a mention of sounding the shofar, for example: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts, a sacred convocation” (Leviticus 23:24), one may recite it with the verses of remembrances, and one may also recite it with the verses of shofarot; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may recite it only with the verses of remembrances alone, as it does not explicitly mention a shofar. With regard to a verse of Kingship that also has a mention of sounding the shofar, for example: “The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them” (Numbers 23:21), one may recite it with the verses of Kingship and one may also recite it with the verses of shofarot; This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may recite it only with the verses of Kingship. With regard to a verse that mentions sounding the shofar that has nothing else with it, i.e., no mention of remembrances, Kingship, or an actual shofar, for example: “It is a day of sounding the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1), one may recite it with the verses of shofarot; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may not recite it at all, as it contains no explicit mention of a shofar. § The mishna taught: When reciting the ten verses, one begins with verses from the Torah and concludes with verses from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei says: If he concluded with a verse from the Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara notes that Rabbi Yosei’s formulation: If he concluded, indicates that after the fact, yes, he has fulfilled his obligation; ab initio, no, he has not fulfilled his obligation to recite the necessary verses. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: One who concludes the series of verses with a verse from the Torah is praiseworthy? The Gemara answers: Say that the text of the mishna must be modified so that it reads: Rabbi Yosei says: He concludes with a verse from the Torah, i.e., one should do so ab initio. The Gemara raises a difficulty. Doesn’t the mishna teach: If he concluded? This indicates that after the fact, yes, one has fulfilled his obligation; ab initio, no, he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara answers that this is what the mishna is saying: One begins with verses from the Torah and concludes with a single verse from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei says: One concludes with a single verse from the Torah, and if he concluded with a single verse from the Prophets he has fulfilled his obligation. This is also taught in a baraita. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: Pious individuals [vatikin], who were scrupulous in their performance of mitzvot, would conclude the series with a single verse from the Torah. Presumably, Rabbi Elazar followed the opinion of his father, Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara asks: Granted, it is possible to conclude Remembrances and Shofarot with a verse from the Torah, as there are many such verses. However, with regard to Kingship, there are only three: “The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them” (Numbers 23:21); “And he was king in Jeshurun” (Deuteronomy 33:5); and: “The Lord shall reign for ever and ever” (Exodus 15:18). And we require ten verses, and according to Rabbi Yosei there are not enough, as he maintains that one should recite four verses from the Torah, the first three and the concluding one. Rav Huna said: Come and hear a solution from that which was taught in the Tosefta (2:11): The verse: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. “Know this day, and lay it to your heart, that the Lord, He is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath; there is none else” (Deuteronomy 4:39), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. “To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord, He is God; there is none else beside Him” (Deuteronomy 4:35), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. This shows that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei there are sufficient verses of Kingship in the Torah to recite three at the beginning and one at the end. MISHNA: With regard to one who is passing before the ark, as prayer leader, on the festival of Rosh HaShana, it is the second prayer leader, i.e., the one who leads the additional prayer, who sounds the shofar on behalf of the congregation. And on a day when the hallel is recited, the first prayer leader, i.e., the one who leads the morning prayer, recites the hallel on behalf of the congregation. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is different about the second prayer leader, that he sounds the shofar during the additional prayer? Is it due to the principle that: “The splendor of the King is in the multitude of the people” (Proverbs 14:28)? In other words, is the shofar sounded during the additional prayer because all of the congregants will have arrived by then? If so, with regard to hallel too, let us say that it should be read by the second prayer leader, due to the principle that “The splendor of the King is in the multitude of the people.” Rather, what is different about hallel that it is recited by the first prayer leader? It is due to the principle that the vigilant are early in the performance of mitzvot. This is also difficult. With regard to the sounding of the shofar, too, let us perform it by means of the first prayer leader, due to the principle that the vigilant are early in the performance of mitzvot. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They taught the halakha that the shofar is sounded during the additional prayer in a time of religious persecution. The gentile authorities prohibited sounding the shofar and appointed guards during the morning to ensure that the Jews comply. Therefore, the Sages delayed the sounding of the shofar until after the guards had left. A similar decree was not imposed against the recitation of hallel, and therefore it was recited during the morning prayer, at the earliest possible time. § The Gemara comments: From the fact that the mishna states: When hallel is recited, one can conclude by inference that on Rosh HaShana there is no recitation of hallel. What is the reason that hallel is omitted on Rosh HaShana? Rabbi Abbahu said: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, for what reason don’t the Jewish people recite songs of praise, i.e., hallel, before You on Rosh HaShana and on Yom Kippur? He said to them: Is it possible that while the King is sitting on the throne of judgment and the books of life and the books of death are open before Him, the Jewish people are reciting joyous songs of praise? Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are somber days of judgment whose mood is incompatible with the recitation of hallel. MISHNA: With regard to the shofar of Rosh HaShana, one may not pass the Shabbat limit for it, i.e., to go and hear it, nor may one clear a pile of rubble to uncover a buried shofar. One may not climb a tree, nor may one ride on an animal, nor may one swim in water, in order to find a shofar to sound. And one may not cut the shofar to prepare it for use, neither with an object that is prohibited due to a rabbinic decree nor with an object that may not be used due to a prohibition by Torah law. However, if one wishes to place water or wine into the shofar on Rosh HaShana so that it emits a clear sound, he may place it, as this does not constitute a prohibited labor. One need not prevent children from sounding the shofar on Rosh HaShana, despite the fact that they are not obligated in mitzvot. Rather, one occupies himself with them, encouraging and instructing them, until they learn how to sound it properly. The mishna adds: One who acts unawares and sounds the shofar without any intention to perform the mitzva has not fulfilled his obligation. And, similarly, one who hears the shofar blasts from one who acts unawares has not fulfilled his obligation. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: There is a principle that a positive mitzva overrides a negative mitzva. With this in mind, what is the reason that one may not perform a prohibited labor on Rosh HaShana to fulfill the positive mitzva of sounding the shofar? The Gemara answers: Sounding the shofar is a positive mitzva, but performing prohibited labor on a Festival violates both the positive mitzva to rest and the prohibition against performing prohibited labor, and a positive mitzva does not override both a prohibition and a positive mitzva. § The mishna taught: One may not pass the Shabbat limit for it, i.e., to go and hear it, nor may one clear a pile of rubble to uncover a buried shofar. One may not climb a tree, nor may one ride on an animal to find a shofar to sound. The Gemara questions the order of these prohibitions: Now that you have said that to sound the shofar one may not perform an action that is prohibited by rabbinic law, i.e., passing the Shabbat limit or clearing a pile of rubble, is it necessary to say that one may not perform an action that could lead to an act prohibited by Torah law, i.e., climbing a tree or riding an animal? The Gemara answers: The mishna teaches employing the style: This, and it is unnecessary to say that. It begins with the more novel case before moving on to the more straightforward one.

and his teacher established it in his name. Consequently, it is counted as one of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s ordinances. MISHNA: The order of the blessings of the additional prayer on Rosh HaShana is as follows: One recites the blessing of the Patriarchs, the blessing of God’s Mighty Deeds, and the blessing of the Sanctification of God’s Name, all of which are recited all year long. And one includes the blessing of Kingship, containing many biblical verses on that theme, with them, i.e., in the blessing of the Sanctification of God’s Name, and he does not sound the shofar after it. Next, one adds a special blessing for the Sanctification of the Day, and sounds the shofar after it; followed by the blessing of Remembrances, which contains many biblical verses addressing that theme, and sounds the shofar after it; and recites the blessing of Shofarot, which includes verses that mention the shofar, and sounds the shofar after it. And he then returns to the regular Amida prayer and recites the blessing of God’s Service and the blessing of Thanksgiving and the Priestly Blessing. This is the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri. Rabbi Akiva said to him: If one does not sound the shofar for the blessing of Kingship, why does he mention it? Rather, the order of the blessings is as follows: One recites the blessing of the Patriarchs and that of God’s Mighty Deeds and that of the Sanctification of God’s Name. He subsequently includes the blessing of Kingship in the blessing of the Sanctification of the Day, and sounds the shofar. Next he recites the blessing of Remembrances, and sounds the shofar after it, and the blessing of Shofarot and sounds the shofar after it. He then recites the blessing of God’s Service and the blessing of Thanksgiving and the Priestly Blessing. GEMARA: The mishna taught that Rabbi Akiva said to him: If one does not sound the shofar for the blessing of Kingship, why does he mention it? The Gemara expresses surprise at this question: Why does he mention it? The Merciful One states that one should mention it. It is a mitzva to recite the blessing of Kingship, regardless of the sounding of the shofar. Rather, this is what Rabbi Akiva meant: Why does one mention ten verses of Kingship, as in the other blessings? Let him recite nine verses or fewer. Since the blessing is different in that it is not followed by shofar blasts, let it also be different with regard to the number of verses it includes. § The Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that one recites the blessing of the Patriarchs? As it is stated: “Ascribe to the Lord, O you sons of the mighty” (Psalms 29:1), which is interpreted to mean that one should mention before God the greatness of the mighty, i.e., the righteous Patriarchs. And from where is it derived that one recites the blessing of God’s Mighty Deeds? As it is stated: “Ascribe to the Lord glory and strength” (Psalms 29:1). And from where is it derived that one recites the blessing of the Sanctification of God’s Name? As it is stated: “Ascribe to the Lord the glory due to His name; worship the Lord in the beauty of sanctity” (Psalms 29:2). And from where is it derived that on Rosh HaShana one recites the blessings of Kingship, Remembrances, and Shofarot? Rabbi Eliezer says: As it is written: “In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall have a solemn rest, a memorial of blasts, a sacred convocation” (Leviticus 23:24). This verse is interpreted as follows: “A solemn rest,” this is referring to the blessing of the Sanctification of the Day; “a memorial,” this is Remembrances; “blasts,” this is Shofarot; “a sacred convocation” this means sanctify it by abstaining from performing prohibited labor. Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Eliezer: For what reason isn’t it stated instead that the phrase “solemn rest” teaches that one must rest by abstaining from prohibited labor, as this is the term with which the verse opened first. It stands to reason that the verse would begin with the main issue, i.e., that this day is a Festival on which performing labor is prohibited. Rather, the verse should be explained as follows: “A solemn rest,” sanctify it by abstaining from performing prohibited labor; “a memorial,” this is Remembrances; “blasts,” this is Shofarot; “a sacred convocation,” this is the Sanctification of the Day. From where is it derived that that one recites the blessing of Kingship? It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: One verse states: “I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 23:22), which is referring to God’s Kingship over the world; and two verses later it states: “In the seventh month” (Leviticus 23:24). This teaches that God’s Kingship must be mentioned on Rosh HaShana. Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: This is not necessary, as the verse states: “Also in the day of your gladness, and in your appointed seasons, and in your New Moons, you shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace-offerings; that they may be to you for a remembrance before your God: I am the Lord your God” (Numbers 10:10). As there is no need for the verse to state: “I am the Lord your God,” and therefore what is the meaning when the verse states: “I am the Lord your God”? This is a paradigm that in all places where verses of Remembrances are stated, verses of Kingship should be recited with them. § The Gemara returns to the issue discussed in the mishna: And where does one recite the Sanctification of the Day? It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: One recites it with the blessing of Kingship, in the fourth blessing. He explains: Just as we find in all other places that the Sanctification of the Day is mentioned in the fourth blessing of the Amida prayer, so too here, it is recited in the fourth blessing. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: One recites it together with the blessing of Remembrances, in the fifth blessing. He explains: Just as we find in all other places that the Sanctification of the Day is mentioned in the middle blessing of the Amida prayer, e.g., on Shabbat, when it is the fourth of seven blessings, so too here, it is recited in the middle blessing, which in the case of Rosh HaShana is the fifth blessing, as the Rosh HaShana Amida prayer is comprised of nine blessings. § And the baraita relates that when the court sanctified the year in Usha, Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka descended as the prayer leader in the presence of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and he acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Nuri by including the blessing of Kingship in the blessing of the Sanctification of God’s Name. Rabban Shimon said to him: They were not accustomed to act in this manner in Yavne. On the second day, Rabbi Ḥanina, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, descended as the prayer leader, and he acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva by including the blessing of Kingship in the blessing of the Sanctification of the Day. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: This is how they were accustomed to act in Yavne. The Gemara asks a question concerning this baraita: Is that to say that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva? But didn’t Rabbi Akiva say that one recites the blessing of Kingship with the blessing of the Sanctification of the Day, and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says that one recites the blessing of the Sanctification of the Day with the blessing of Remembrances? Why then did Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel indicate his agreement with Rabbi Akiva’s practice? Rabbi Zeira said: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel merely meant to say that he agrees that one sounds the shofar together with the blessing of Kingship, and that this was how they were accustomed to act in Yavne. The baraita taught that on the second day Rabbi Ḥanina descended as the prayer leader. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: The second day? If we say that this is referring to the second day of the Festival day of Rosh HaShana, is that to say that they rendered Elul a full month, so that the thirtieth day of Elul was the first day of Rosh HaShana and the first day of Tishrei was the second day? But didn’t Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana say: From the days of Ezra onward we have not found that the month of Elul was ever rendered full. If so, it is difficult to believe that a case of this kind occurred in the time of the tanna’im. Rav Ḥisda said: What is the meaning of: The second day? It means on the second day, the next time it was Rosh HaShana, i.e., on Rosh HaShana of the following year. MISHNA: One does not recite fewer than ten verses in the blessing of Kingship, or fewer than ten verses in the blessing of Remembrances, or fewer than ten verses in the blessing of Shofarot. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: If one recited three from each of them, he has fulfilled his obligation. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: These ten verses of Kingship, to what do they correspond? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: They correspond to the ten praises that David said in the book of Psalms. The Gemara asks: There are many more praises than that in the book of Psalms. The Gemara answers that he means those in which it is written by them: “Praise Him with the blast of the shofar” (Psalms 150:3). In that chapter the phrase “Praise Him” appears ten times. Rav Yosef said: The ten verses correspond to the Ten Commandments, which were said to Moses at Sinai. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They correspond to the ten utterances through which the world was created. The Gemara asks: Which are these ten utterances? The Gemara explains: This is referring to the ten times that the phrase “And He said” appears in the story of Creation in the first two chapters of Genesis. The Gemara asks: Does it refer to the repetition of the phrase: “And He said” in Genesis? There are only nine such phrases, not ten. The Gemara answers that the phrase “In the beginning” is also considered an utterance, as it is written: “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made” (Psalms 33:6), which indicates that all of creation came into existence through a single utterance, after which all matter was formed into separate and distinct entities by means of the other nine utterances. § The mishna taught that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says: If one recited three from each of them, he has fulfilled his obligation. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is he teaching here? Does Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri mean that one must recite three verses from the Torah, three from the Prophets, and three from the Writings, which are nine in total, and if so the practical difference between the opinions of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri and the first tanna is only one verse? Or perhaps he means that one must recite one verse from the Torah and one from the Prophets and one from the Writings, which are three altogether, and the practical difference between them is a large number of verses, i.e., seven. The Gemara clarifies this matter: Come and hear a proof, as it is taught in a baraita: One does not recite fewer than ten verses of Kingship, or fewer than ten verses of Remembrances, or fewer than ten verses of Shofarot. And if one recited seven from each of them, he has fulfilled his obligation, as they correspond to the seven firmaments in heaven. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said: One who recites fewer than the requisite ten should not recite fewer than seven, but if he recited three from each of them he has fulfilled his obligation, as they correspond to the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. And some say: They correspond to the priests, the Levites, and the Israelites. This indicates that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri means a total of three verses for each blessing. Rav Huna said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri. MISHNA: One does not mention verses of Remembrance, Kingship, and Shofar that have a theme of punishment. When reciting the ten verses, one begins with verses from the Torah and concludes with verses from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei says: If he concluded with a verse from the Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation. GEMARA: The Gemara cites examples of verses that may not be used in Rosh HaShana prayers because they deal with punishment. With regard to verses of Kingship, for example: “As I live, says the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, will I be King over you” (Ezekiel 20:33). And although Rav Naḥman said about this verse: With regard to any anger like this, let the Holy One, blessed be He, express that anger upon us and let Him redeem us, if that is the process necessary for redemption, since the verse was said with anger it is not included, as one does not mention anger on Rosh HaShana. Similarly, verses of remembrance that speak of a punishment may not be used in Rosh HaShana prayers, for example: “So He remembered that they were but flesh, a wind that passes away, and does not come again” (Psalms 78:39). Nor verses of shofar, which refer to calamity, for example: “Sound the shofar in Giva, and the trumpet in Rama; sound an alarm at Beit Aven, behind you, O Benjamin” (Hosea 5:8). The Gemara qualifies the mishna’s ruling. However, if one comes to recite verses of Kingship, remembrance, and shofar with a theme of the punishment of gentiles, one may recite them. The Gemara offers examples of these verses: With regard to the verses of Kingship, for example: “The Lord reigns, let the peoples tremble” (Psalms 99:1), and, for example: “The Lord is King for ever and ever; the nations are perished out of His land” (Psalms 10:16). With regard to remembrance, for example: “Remember, O Lord, against the children of Edom the day of Jerusalem, who said: Raze it, raze it, to its very foundation” (Psalms 137:7). With regard to the verses of shofar, for example: “And the Lord God will sound the shofar, and will go with whirlwinds of the south” (Zechariah 9:14), and it is written: “The Lord of hosts will defend them” (Zechariah 9:15), i.e., God will defend the Jewish people against their enemies. The Gemara states: One does not recite a verse dealing with the remembrance of an individual, even if it is for good, for example: “Remember me, O Lord, when You show favor to Your people” (Psalms 106:4), and, for example: “Remember me, my God, for good” (Nehemiah 5:19). Verses that mention God’s revisitings [pikdonot] are equivalent to verses of remembrances [zikhronot], and therefore they may be counted in the ten verses. For example: “And the Lord revisited [pakad] Sarah” (Genesis 21:1), and, for example: “I have surely revisited [pakadeti] you” (Exodus 3:16). This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: They are not equivalent to verses of remembrances. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, although verses that speak of God revisiting man are equivalent to verses of remembrances, he cites the following verse as an example: “And the Lord revisited Sarah,” which is a revisiting of an individual. Despite the fact that it was stated above that a remembrance must refer to the collective, since many descendants came from her, as Sarah is the mother of the Jewish people, she is considered like many. Therefore, this verse is effectively dealing with the remembrance of the entire Jewish people. The Gemara discusses several verses from Psalms. “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and be lifted up, you everlasting doors, that the King of glory may come in. Who is the King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle” (Psalms 24:7–8). The psalm continues: “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and lift them up, you everlasting doors; that the King of glory may come in. Who then is the King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory, Selah” (Psalms 24:9–10). The first section is counted as two verses of Kingship, as the term king is mentioned twice, while the second section is counted as three verses of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: The first section is counted as only one verse of Kingship, as the question: “Who is the King of glory,” is not considered a verse of Kingship. By the same reasoning, the second section is counted as only two verses of Kingship. Similarly, the Gemara discusses the following verses: “Sing praises to God, sing praises, sing praises to our King, sing praises. For God is the King of all the earth; sing praises in a skillful song” (Psalms 47:7–8). These are counted as two verses of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: They count as only one verse of Kingship, as the phrase: “Sing praises to our King,” is referring to God as the King of the Jewish people, not the King of the entire world. And they both agree with regard to the verse: “God reigns over the nations, God sits upon His sacred throne” (Psalms 47:9), that it is considered as only one verse of Kingship, as the phrase: “Sits upon His sacred throne,” is not referring to God explicitly as King. With regard to a verse of remembrance that also has a mention of sounding the shofar, for example: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts, a sacred convocation” (Leviticus 23:24), one may recite it with the verses of remembrances, and one may also recite it with the verses of shofarot; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may recite it only with the verses of remembrances alone, as it does not explicitly mention a shofar. With regard to a verse of Kingship that also has a mention of sounding the shofar, for example: “The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them” (Numbers 23:21), one may recite it with the verses of Kingship and one may also recite it with the verses of shofarot; This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may recite it only with the verses of Kingship. With regard to a verse that mentions sounding the shofar that has nothing else with it, i.e., no mention of remembrances, Kingship, or an actual shofar, for example: “It is a day of sounding the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1), one may recite it with the verses of shofarot; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may not recite it at all, as it contains no explicit mention of a shofar. § The mishna taught: When reciting the ten verses, one begins with verses from the Torah and concludes with verses from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei says: If he concluded with a verse from the Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara notes that Rabbi Yosei’s formulation: If he concluded, indicates that after the fact, yes, he has fulfilled his obligation; ab initio, no, he has not fulfilled his obligation to recite the necessary verses. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: One who concludes the series of verses with a verse from the Torah is praiseworthy? The Gemara answers: Say that the text of the mishna must be modified so that it reads: Rabbi Yosei says: He concludes with a verse from the Torah, i.e., one should do so ab initio. The Gemara raises a difficulty. Doesn’t the mishna teach: If he concluded? This indicates that after the fact, yes, one has fulfilled his obligation; ab initio, no, he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara answers that this is what the mishna is saying: One begins with verses from the Torah and concludes with a single verse from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei says: One concludes with a single verse from the Torah, and if he concluded with a single verse from the Prophets he has fulfilled his obligation. This is also taught in a baraita. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: Pious individuals [vatikin], who were scrupulous in their performance of mitzvot, would conclude the series with a single verse from the Torah. Presumably, Rabbi Elazar followed the opinion of his father, Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara asks: Granted, it is possible to conclude Remembrances and Shofarot with a verse from the Torah, as there are many such verses. However, with regard to Kingship, there are only three: “The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them” (Numbers 23:21); “And he was king in Jeshurun” (Deuteronomy 33:5); and: “The Lord shall reign for ever and ever” (Exodus 15:18). And we require ten verses, and according to Rabbi Yosei there are not enough, as he maintains that one should recite four verses from the Torah, the first three and the concluding one. Rav Huna said: Come and hear a solution from that which was taught in the Tosefta (2:11): The verse: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. “Know this day, and lay it to your heart, that the Lord, He is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath; there is none else” (Deuteronomy 4:39), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. “To you it was shown, that you might know that the Lord, He is God; there is none else beside Him” (Deuteronomy 4:35), is a verse of Kingship; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a verse of Kingship. This shows that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei there are sufficient verses of Kingship in the Torah to recite three at the beginning and one at the end. MISHNA: With regard to one who is passing before the ark, as prayer leader, on the festival of Rosh HaShana, it is the second prayer leader, i.e., the one who leads the additional prayer, who sounds the shofar on behalf of the congregation. And on a day when the hallel is recited, the first prayer leader, i.e., the one who leads the morning prayer, recites the hallel on behalf of the congregation. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is different about the second prayer leader, that he sounds the shofar during the additional prayer? Is it due to the principle that: “The splendor of the King is in the multitude of the people” (Proverbs 14:28)? In other words, is the shofar sounded during the additional prayer because all of the congregants will have arrived by then? If so, with regard to hallel too, let us say that it should be read by the second prayer leader, due to the principle that “The splendor of the King is in the multitude of the people.” Rather, what is different about hallel that it is recited by the first prayer leader? It is due to the principle that the vigilant are early in the performance of mitzvot. This is also difficult. With regard to the sounding of the shofar, too, let us perform it by means of the first prayer leader, due to the principle that the vigilant are early in the performance of mitzvot. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They taught the halakha that the shofar is sounded during the additional prayer in a time of religious persecution. The gentile authorities prohibited sounding the shofar and appointed guards during the morning to ensure that the Jews comply. Therefore, the Sages delayed the sounding of the shofar until after the guards had left. A similar decree was not imposed against the recitation of hallel, and therefore it was recited during the morning prayer, at the earliest possible time. § The Gemara comments: From the fact that the mishna states: When hallel is recited, one can conclude by inference that on Rosh HaShana there is no recitation of hallel. What is the reason that hallel is omitted on Rosh HaShana? Rabbi Abbahu said: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, for what reason don’t the Jewish people recite songs of praise, i.e., hallel, before You on Rosh HaShana and on Yom Kippur? He said to them: Is it possible that while the King is sitting on the throne of judgment and the books of life and the books of death are open before Him, the Jewish people are reciting joyous songs of praise? Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are somber days of judgment whose mood is incompatible with the recitation of hallel. MISHNA: With regard to the shofar of Rosh HaShana, one may not pass the Shabbat limit for it, i.e., to go and hear it, nor may one clear a pile of rubble to uncover a buried shofar. One may not climb a tree, nor may one ride on an animal, nor may one swim in water, in order to find a shofar to sound. And one may not cut the shofar to prepare it for use, neither with an object that is prohibited due to a rabbinic decree nor with an object that may not be used due to a prohibition by Torah law. However, if one wishes to place water or wine into the shofar on Rosh HaShana so that it emits a clear sound, he may place it, as this does not constitute a prohibited labor. One need not prevent children from sounding the shofar on Rosh HaShana, despite the fact that they are not obligated in mitzvot. Rather, one occupies himself with them, encouraging and instructing them, until they learn how to sound it properly. The mishna adds: One who acts unawares and sounds the shofar without any intention to perform the mitzva has not fulfilled his obligation. And, similarly, one who hears the shofar blasts from one who acts unawares has not fulfilled his obligation. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: There is a principle that a positive mitzva overrides a negative mitzva. With this in mind, what is the reason that one may not perform a prohibited labor on Rosh HaShana to fulfill the positive mitzva of sounding the shofar? The Gemara answers: Sounding the shofar is a positive mitzva, but performing prohibited labor on a Festival violates both the positive mitzva to rest and the prohibition against performing prohibited labor, and a positive mitzva does not override both a prohibition and a positive mitzva. § The mishna taught: One may not pass the Shabbat limit for it, i.e., to go and hear it, nor may one clear a pile of rubble to uncover a buried shofar. One may not climb a tree, nor may one ride on an animal to find a shofar to sound. The Gemara questions the order of these prohibitions: Now that you have said that to sound the shofar one may not perform an action that is prohibited by rabbinic law, i.e., passing the Shabbat limit or clearing a pile of rubble, is it necessary to say that one may not perform an action that could lead to an act prohibited by Torah law, i.e., climbing a tree or riding an animal? The Gemara answers: The mishna teaches employing the style: This, and it is unnecessary to say that. It begins with the more novel case before moving on to the more straightforward one.

the requisite nine shofar blasts at nine different times of the day, he has fulfilled his obligation, as the blasts need not be heard in immediate succession. This is also taught in a baraita: If one heard nine shofar blasts at nine different times of the day, he has fulfilled his obligation. If one heard the blasts from nine different people simultaneously, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If one heard a tekia from this one and afterward he heard a terua from this other one, he has fulfilled his obligation, as one does not have to hear all the blasts from the same individual. And this is true even if one heard the blasts from the different individuals at intervals, and even if it took the course of the entire day. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥanan actually say this? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: During the reading of hallel or the Megilla of Esther, if one paused long enough to complete all of it, he must return to the beginning, as it must be read in one session? Why is the halakha different in the case of the shofar? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as this ruling with regard to the shofar is his own opinion, and that case of hallel and the Megilla is his teacher’s opinion. It is Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak who holds that one may not pause in the middle of sounding the shofar. The Gemara asks: And is this not also his own opinion as well? Wasn’t Rabbi Abbahu once walking after Rabbi Yoḥanan, and Rabbi Abbahu was reciting Shema as he walked? When he reached alleyways that were filthy with human excrement, where it is prohibited to utter words of Torah, he fell silent and stopped reciting Shema. After he passed through, Rabbi Abbahu said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: What is the halakha with regard to completing Shema from where I left off? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: If you remained in the alleyway for an interval sufficient to complete the entire Shema, return to the beginning and start again. This shows that Rabbi Yoḥanan himself holds that if one takes an extended break, he must start again from the beginning. The Gemara answers: This is no proof, as it is possible that this is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said: I myself do not hold that one must start again after a long pause; however, according to you, as you hold that a delay is a problem, the halakha is that if you paused for an interval sufficient to complete the entire Shema, you must return to the beginning. § The Sages taught in a baraita: The various trumpet blasts on a fast day do not invalidate one another, i.e., if one was omitted, this does not invalidate the other blasts. Similarly, the additional blessings that are inserted into the Amida prayer on a fast day do not invalidate one another. However, the shofar blasts and additional blessings of Rosh HaShana and of Yom Kippur do invalidate one another. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that all the blasts and blessings are indispensable on Rosh HaShana? Rabba said that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Recite before Me on Rosh HaShana Kingship, Remembrances, and Shofarot. Kingship, so that you will crown Me as King over you; Remembrances, so that your remembrance will rise before Me for good. And with what? With the shofar. Since these blessings constitute a single unit, one who did not recite them all has not fulfilled his obligation. § The mishna taught: In the case of one who recited the blessings of the additional prayer and only afterward a shofar became available to him, he sounds a tekia, sounds a terua and sounds a tekia; this is a set that he repeats three times. The Gemara explains: The reason that he may do this is that he did not have a shofar at the outset. This indicates that if he had a shofar at the outset, when he hears the blasts he must hear them by the order of the blessings, i.e., one set must be sounded after each special blessing. The Gemara relates: Rav Pappa bar Shmuel once rose to pray on Rosh HaShana. He said to his attendant: When I signal to you that I have finished each of the blessings, sound the shofar for me. Rava said to him: They said that the shofar must be sounded after each blessing only where there is a quorum of ten [ḥever ir], not when it is sounded for an individual. This is also taught in a baraita: When one hears the shofar blasts, he must hear them in order, i.e., a tekia-terua-tekia set, and upon the order of the blessings. In what case is this statement said? Where there is a quorum of ten [ḥever ir]. However, where there is not a ḥever ir, one must hear them in order, but he need not hear them upon the order of the blessings. And in the case of an individual who has not sounded the shofar, another may sound it for him. But with regard to an individual who has not recited the blessings, another may not recite the blessings for him. And if one has to choose between hearing the shofar and reciting the blessings, the mitzva to be among those who sound the shofar is more important than the mitzva to be among those who recite the blessings. How so? If there are two towns, in one there are those who know how to sound the shofar, and in the other there are individuals who know how to recite the blessings, one should go to the place where they sound the shofar, and one does not go to the place where they know how to recite the blessings. The Gemara asks: This halakha is obvious. Sounding the shofar is a mitzva by Torah law, whereas the additional prayer applies by rabbinic law. A mitzva that applies by Torah law is clearly more important. The Gemara answers: No; this seemingly superfluous ruling is necessary to teach that although in this town it is certain that the additional prayer will be recited and in this other town it is uncertain whether or not the shofar will be sounded, one should still go to the place where they know how to sound the shofar rather than the location where they know how to recite the blessings. § The mishna states: Just as the prayer leader is obligated in the prayers of Rosh HaShana, so too, every individual is obligated in these prayers. Rabban Gamliel says: The prayer leader fulfills the obligation on behalf of the many. It is taught in a baraita that the Rabbis said to Rabban Gamliel: According to your statement, why does the congregation recite the silent Amida prayer beforehand? He said to them: In order that the prayer leader should have time to prepare and arrange his prayer. Rabban Gamliel said to the Rabbis: According to your statement, that the prayer leader does not fulfill the obligation on behalf of the many, why does the prayer leader descend before the ark and recite the Amida prayer? They said to him: He does so to fulfill the obligation of one who is not an expert in prayer. Rabban Gamliel said to them: Just as he can fulfill the obligation of one who is not an expert in prayer, so too, he can fulfill the obligation of the expert. With regard to this baraita, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Ultimately, the Rabbis concede to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel. But Rav said: It is still a dispute that remains unresolved. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya, son of Rabba bar Naḥmani, heard this and went and stated this halakha before Rav Dimi bar Ḥinnana. He said to him that this is what Rav said: It is still a dispute. Rav Dimi bar Ḥinnana said to him: This is what Rabba bar bar Ḥana also said: When Rabbi Yoḥanan said this halakha, that the Rabbis concede to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, Reish Lakish disagreed with him and said: It is still a dispute. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥanan actually say this? Didn’t Rabbi Ḥana from the city of Tzippori say that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel? From the fact that he said: The halakha, one can conclude by inference that the Rabbis still disagree. The very fact that he issued a ruling in favor of Rabban Gamliel shows that Rabbi Yoḥanan maintains that the Sages do not accept this opinion.

Even though the sounding of the shofar on Rosh HaShanah is a decree, it contains an allusion. It is as if [the shofar's call] is saying:
Wake up you sleepy ones from your sleep and you who slumber, arise. Inspect your deeds, repent, remember your Creator. Those who forget the truth in the vanities of time and throughout the entire year, devote their energies to vanity and emptiness which will not benefit or save: Look to your souls. Improve your ways and your deeds and let every one of you abandon his evil path and thoughts.
Accordingly, throughout the entire year, a person should always look at himself as equally balanced between merit and sin and the world as equally balanced between merit and sin. If he performs one sin, he tips his balance and that of the entire world to the side of guilt and brings destruction upon himself.
[On the other hand,] if he performs one mitzvah, he tips his balance and that of the entire world to the side of merit and brings deliverance and salvation to himself and others. This is implied by [Proverbs 10:25] "A righteous man is the foundation of the world," i.e., he who acted righteously, tipped the balance of the entire world to merit and saved it.
For these reasons, it is customary for all of Israel to give profusely to charity, perform many good deeds, and be occupied with mitzvot from Rosh HaShanah until Yom Kippur to a greater extent than during the remainder of the year.
During these ten days, the custom is for everyone to rise [while it is still] night and pray in the synagogues with heart-rending words of supplication until daybreak.

When you are at war^fWhen you are at war Meaning of Heb. uncertain. in your land against an aggressor who attacks you, you shall sound short blasts on the trumpets, that you may be remembered before the ETERNAL your God and be delivered from your enemies. And on your joyous occasions—your fixed festivals and new moon days—you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well-being. They shall be a reminder of you before your God: I, the ETERNAL, am your God.

So-and-so keva’a from me. Levi did not understand what that man was saying to him, as he did not know the meaning of the word kava. So he went and asked in the study hall. They said to him: That man said to you: He robbed me, as it is written: “Will a man rob [hayikba] God?” (Malachi 3:8). Rava from a place called Barnish said to Rav Ashi: Had I been there in Levi’s place I would have tried to uncover the meaning of the word in a different way, for I would have said to him: How did he keva’a you? With what did he keva’a you? And why did he keva’a you? And from his answers I would have understood on my own what was being said. The Gemara comments: And Levi, who did not do this, thought that the man was talking about a matter of prohibition and not a monetary matter, and so asking the man these questions would not have helped, as they are relevant only to monetary matters. The Gemara continues its discussion of unusual words: The Sages did not know the meaning of the word seirugin, which is found in a mishna. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to the Sages whom she saw entering the house not all at once, but intermittently: How long shall you enter seirugin seirugin? and from this they understood that the word seirugin means: At intervals. It is similarly recounted that the Sages did not know the meaning of the word ḥaloglogot, which is mentioned in various mishnayot and baraitot. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to a certain man whom she saw scattering his purslane plants: How long shall you scatter your ḥaloglogot? So they understood that ḥaloglogot means purslane. The Sages also did not know the meaning of the word salseleha in the verse: “Salseleha and it will exalt you” (Proverbs 4:8). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to a certain man who was curling his hair: How long shall you mesalsel your hair? And from this they understood that the verse means: Turn wisdom about, and it will exalt you. It is further related that the Sages did not know the meaning of the words in the verse: “And sweep it [vetetetiha] with the broom [matatei] of destruction” (Isaiah 14:23). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house saying to her workmate: Take a broom [tateita] and sweep [ta’ati] the house,” and they understood the meaning of these words. The Sages also did not know the meaning of the word yehavkha in the verse: “Cast your load [yehavkha] upon the Lord and He will sustain you” (Psalms 55:23). Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: One day I was traveling with a certain Arab [Tayya’a], and I was carrying a load, and he said to me: Take your yehav and cast it on my camel, and from this I understood that yehav means a load. MISHNA: The shofar that was used on Rosh HaShana in the Temple was made from the straight horn of an ibex, and its mouth, the mouthpiece into which one blows, was plated with gold. And there were two trumpets, one on each of the two sides of the person sounding the shofar. The shofar would sound a long blast, whereas the trumpets would sound a short blast, because the mitzva of the day is with the shofar. And in contrast, the shofarot used on public fast days were made from the curved horns of rams, and their mouths were plated with silver. There were two trumpets in the middle between the shofarot, and the shofar would sound a short blast, whereas the trumpets would sound a long blast, for the mitzva of the day is with the trumpets. Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana with regard to both the shofar blasts that are sounded and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer. Rabbi Yehuda disagrees and says: There is a difference between the two days: On Rosh HaShana one blows with horns of rams, whereas in Jubilee Years one blows with horns of ibexes. GEMARA: Rabbi Levi said: The mitzva of Rosh HaShana and of Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is to blow with curved shofarot, and that of the rest of the year, on fast days, is to blow with straight shofarot. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But didn’t we learn differently in the mishna: The shofar that was used on Rosh HaShana was made from the straight horn of an ibex? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Levi said his statement in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: On Rosh HaShana they would blow with the curved horns of rams, and on the Days of Atonement of the Jubilee Years with the horns of ibexes. The Gemara asks: If so, let it simply say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. Why was it necessary to quote the baraita in full, as if it provided new information? The Gemara explains: If you had said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, I would have said that he, Rabbi Levi, holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda even with regard to the shofar used in the Jubilee Year, i.e., that one must blow with the horn of ibexes at that time. Therefore, the Gemara teaches us that he agrees with Rabbi Yehuda only with regard to Rosh HaShana, and not with regard to any other matter. The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do these tanna’im disagree? One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, holds that on Rosh HaShana the more a person bends his mind and humbles himself by bending in prayer, the better. Therefore, a curved shofar is sounded as an allusion to our bent minds and bodies. But on Yom Kippur, the more a person straightens his mind and prays with simplicity, the better. Therefore, a straight shofar is sounded. The other Sage, the anonymous tanna of the mishna, maintains the opposite: On Rosh HaShana, the more a person straightens his mind and avoids any crookedness, the better. On fasts, on the other hand, the more a person bends his mind and humbles himself, the better.

§ It was taught in the mishna: And the mouth of the shofar that was used on Rosh HaShana was plated with gold. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: If a shofar was plated with gold at the place where one puts his mouth, it is unfit for blowing; if it was plated, but not at the place where he puts his mouth, it is fit for blowing? Abaye said: When we learned in the mishna as well, we learned that it referred not to the place where one puts his mouth, but a little above it. § It was taught in the mishna: And there were two trumpets, one on each of the two sides of the person sounding the shofar. The Gemara asks: But is it really possible to properly discern two different sounds, that of the shofar and that of the trumpets, at the same time? Isn’t it taught in a baraita: The two versions of the fifth of the Ten Commandments, “Remember the Shabbat day” (Exodus 20:8) and “Keep the Shabbat day” (Deuteronomy 5:12), were spoken by God simultaneously in a single utterance, something that the human mouth cannot speak and the human ear cannot hear? This indicates that it is impossible to take in two sounds at once, and so, due to the sound of the trumpets, it should be impossible to hear the blast of the shofar. The Gemara answers: For this reason they would sound a long blast with the shofar, to make it possible to hear the sound of the shofar on its own. The Gemara rejects this answer: Is this to say that if one hears the end of a blast without hearing the beginning of the blast he has fulfilled his obligation? In this case one hears only the end of the shofar blast, since the shofar was initially sounded together with the trumpets. If so, it would follow that if one hears the beginning of the blast without hearing the end of the blast, he has also fulfilled his obligation. This, however, is difficult. Come and hear that which was taught in a mishna: If one blew the initial tekia, a long, continuous shofar blast, of the first tekia-terua-tekia set, and then drew out the final tekia of that set so that it spans the length of two tekiot, it counts as only one tekia and is not considered two tekiot, i.e., the final tekia of the first set, and the initial tekia of the second set. But why is this so? Let it count for him as two tekiot, since as stated above, half a blast is considered a blast. The Gemara explains: If one hears only the beginning or the end of a shofar blast, he has indeed fulfilled his obligation, but nevertheless we do not divide a shofar blast into two. The Gemara raises another difficulty: Come and hear that which was taught in a mishna: With regard to one who sounds a shofar into a pit, or into a cistern, or into a large jug [pitas], if he clearly heard the sound of the shofar, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if he also heard the sound of an echo, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But why is this so? If half a blast is indeed considered a complete blast, let him fulfill his obligation with the beginning of the blast, before the sound is confused with the echo, since the beginning of the blast was heard clearly. Rather, we must retreat from the explanation offered above and say as follows: Two sounds coming from one source or person cannot be discerned, and this was the miracle at Sinai in which the people heard both “Remember the Shabbat” (Exodus 20:8) and “Keep the Shabbat” (Deuteronomy 5:12) in a single divine utterance. But two sounds from two different sources or people can be properly discerned. The Gemara raises another difficulty: But is it really true that two sounds coming from two different people can be properly discerned? Isn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to the public reading of the Torah, one person may read and one may translate, provided that there are not two people reading and two people translating. Consequently it is clear that two sounds cannot be properly heard, even when they come from two different people. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, since our case is only similar to the case mentioned in the latter clause of that baraita, which reads: With regard to the reading of hallel and the Scroll of Esther, even ten people may read simultaneously. Apparently, since these readings are dear to their listeners, they direct their attention to them, listen attentively, and distinguish between the different readers. Here too, since the sounding of the shofar is dear to the listener, he directs his attention to the matter and discerns between the two sounds. The Gemara asks: But if it is indeed possible to discern the sound of the shofar even when it is sounded simultaneously with the trumpets, why does he sound a long blast with the shofar? The Gemara answers: This is so people should know that the mitzva of the day is specifically with the shofar. § It was taught in the mishna: The shofarot that were used on public fast days were made from the curved horns of rams, and their mouths were plated with silver. The Gemara asks: What is different there that the shofar of Rosh HaShana is plated with gold, and what is different here that the shofarot of fast days are plated with silver? The Gemara answers: If you wish, you can say: Any shofar made for the purpose of gathering people together is made of silver, as it is written: “Make for yourself two trumpets of silver; of a whole piece shall you make them, and you shall use them for calling the assembly and for the journeying of the camps” (Numbers 10:2). And if you wish, you can say: The Torah spared the money of the Jewish people and therefore allows these shofarot to be made of silver, which is less costly than gold. The Gemara asks: If so, there too, the shofar of Rosh HaShana should be made with silver plating. The Gemara answers: Even so, the duty of honoring the Festival is given priority, so that it is proper to beautify the shofar of Rosh HaShana. On a fast day, however, since it is not a Festival, there is no need to use gold, and silver is sufficient. It is related that Rav Pappa bar Shmuel thought to act in accordance with the mishna regarding all the details of the shofar and the trumpets. But Rava said to him: They said this only with regard to the Temple. This is also taught in a baraita: In what case is this statement said? Only in the Temple, but in the provinces, anywhere outside the Temple, the halakha is as follows: Wherever there are trumpets, e.g., on fast days, there is no shofar, and wherever there is a shofar, e.g., on Rosh HaShana, there are no trumpets. And similarly, Rabbi Ḥalafta established the custom in Tzippori as it is described in the mishna, and so did Rabbi Ḥananya ben Teradyon in Sikhni, and when the matter came before the Rabbis they said: They acted in this manner only at the east gates of the Temple and on the Temple Mount. Rava said, and some say it was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi that said: What is the verse from which this is derived? As it is written: “With trumpets and the sound of a shofar make joyful noise before the Lord, the King” (Psalms 98:6), from which it may be inferred: Only before the Lord, the King, i.e., in His Temple, do we need both trumpets and the sound of a shofar, but in general, outside the Temple, we do not need both. § It was taught in the mishna: Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana with regard to both the shofar blasts that are sounded and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer. Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: In accordance with whose opinion do we pray today on Rosh HaShana, saying: This day is the beginning of Your works, a commemoration of the first day? In accordance with whom? In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who said: The world was created in the month of Tishrei. We therefore mention on Rosh HaShana that it is the first day. Rav Eina raised an objection: It was taught in the mishna: Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana with regard to both the shofar blasts that are sounded and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer. But there are the words: This day is the beginning of Your works, a commemoration of the first day, which can be recited on Rosh HaShana but cannot be recited on Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year, which is neither: The beginning of Your works, nor: A commemoration of the first day. If so, how can one recite the same blessing on both occasions? The Gemara answers: When the mishna was taught, saying that the blessings of the Jubilee and Rosh HaShana are the same, it was taught with regard to the other parts of the blessings, but the line beginning: This day, is indeed omitted on Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, taught the previous passage as follows: Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: That which we learn in the mishna, Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana with regard to both the shofar blasts that are sounded and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer; in accordance with whom was it taught? Apparently it was not taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, as if it reflects the view of Rabbi Eliezer, there is a difficulty. Since he said that the world was created in Tishrei, then there are also the words: This day is the beginning of Your works, a commemoration of the first day, which can be recited on Rosh HaShana, but cannot be recited on Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. If so, how can one recite the same blessing on both occasions? The Gemara rejects this argument: When the mishna was taught, it was taught with regard to the other parts of the blessings, but this line is indeed omitted on Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. MISHNA: A shofar that was cracked and then glued together, even though it appears to be whole, is unfit. Similarly, if one glued together broken fragments of shofarot to form a complete shofar, the shofar is unfit.

What is the customary order of fast days? Normally the sacred ark in the synagogue, which was mobile, was kept in a locked room. However, on fast days they remove the ark to the main city square and place burnt ashes upon the ark, as a sign of mourning. And they also place ashes on the head of the Nasi, and on the head of the deputy Nasi, and each and every member of the community likewise places ashes upon his head. The eldest member of the community says to the congregation statements of reproof, for example: Our brothers, it is not stated with regard to the people of Nineveh: And God saw their sackcloth and their fasting. Rather, the verse says: “And God saw their deeds, that they had turned from their evil way” (Jonah 3:10). And in the Prophets it says: “And rend your hearts and not your garments, and return to the Lord your God” (Joel 2:13). This teaches that prayer and fasting are insufficient, as one must also repent and amend his ways in practice. They stood for prayer. The congregation appoints an elder, who is experienced in leading prayer, to descend before the ark as communal prayer leader. And this prayer leader must have children and must have an empty house, i.e., he must be poor, so that his heart will be fully concentrated on the prayer for the needs of his community. And he recites twenty-four blessings before the congregation: The eighteen blessings of the everyday Amida prayer, to which he adds another six blessings, and they are as follows: The special series of blessings recited on Rosh HaShana, the Remembrances and Shofarot; and the sections of Psalms that begin with the verses: “In my distress I called to the Lord and He answered me” (Psalms 120:1), “I will lift up my eyes to the mountains; from where will my help come” (Psalms 121:1), “Out of the depths I have called You, O Lord” (Psalms 130:1), and “A prayer of the afflicted, when he faints” (Psalms 102:1). Rabbi Yehuda says: The prayer leader did not need to recite the Remembrances and Shofarot passages. Rather, he recites instead of them the passage beginning with: “If there be famine in the land, if there be pestilence” (I Kings 8:37), followed by the verse “The word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah concerning the droughts” (Jeremiah 14:1). And he recites at the end of all of these six blessing their unique conclusions.

in the first clause, the baraita is dealing with a minor who has reached the age of training in mitzvot. This child is taught to sound the shofar, as one is obligated to teach him the proper way to perform mitzvot. However, here, in the second clause, the baraita is dealing with a minor who has not yet reached the age of training. Although one need not prevent this child from sounding the shofar, one does not encourage him to do so. § The mishna taught: One who acts unawares while sounding the shofar, without any intention to produce a sound, has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara infers: One who sounds a shofar for music, even if he has no intention to perform the mitzva, has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: Let us say that the mishna supports the opinion of Rava, as Rava said: One who sounds a shofar for music has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara rejects this suggestion. There is no clear proof from here, as perhaps one who sounds a shofar for music is also called one who acts unawares. It is possible that the tanna of the mishna includes in this category anyone who sounds the shofar without a clear intention to fulfill the mitzva. § The mishna continues. And one who hears the shofar blasts from one who acts unawares has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: However, one who hears the shofar blasts from one who is sounding the shofar for himself, without intention of sounding it for others, what is the halakha? The mishna apparently indicates that he has fulfilled his obligation. Let us say that this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Zeira, as Rabbi Zeira said to his attendant: Have the intention to sound the shofar on my behalf and sound it for me. This statement indicates that one must have the intention to enable the one who hears it to fulfill his obligation. The Gemara rejects this argument. Perhaps one can explain that since the first clause of the mishna taught the halakha with regard to one who acts unawares, the latter clause also taught the halakha with regard to one who acts unawares. If so, no inference may be drawn from here to the case of one who sounds the shofar for himself, with no intention of doing so for others. MISHNA: The order of the blasts is three sets of three blasts each, which are: Tekia, terua, and tekia. The length of a tekia is equal to the length of three teruot, and the length of a terua is equal to the length of three whimpers. If one sounded the first tekia of the initial series of tekia, terua, tekia, and then extended the second tekia of that series to the length of two tekiot, so that it should count as both the second tekia of the first set and the first tekia of the second set, he has in his hand the fulfillment of only one tekia, and he must begin the second set with a new tekia. With regard to one who recited the blessings of the additional prayer, and only afterward a shofar became available to him, he sounds a tekia, sounds a terua, and sounds a tekia, an order he repeats three times. Just as the prayer leader is obligated in the prayer of Rosh HaShana, so too, each and every individual is obligated in these prayers. Rabban Gamliel disagrees and says: Individuals are not obligated, as the prayer leader fulfills the obligation on behalf of the many. GEMARA: The Gemara raises a difficulty. Although the mishna taught that the length of a tekia is equal to the length of three teruot, isn’t it taught in a baraita that the length of a single tekia is equal to the length of an entire terua, which is comprised of several shorter sounds? Abaye said: There is no difficulty. The tanna of our mishna counts the tekia of all the sets of blasts and the teruot of all the sets. He means that the length of the three tekiot is equal to the length of the three teruot. Conversely, the tanna of the baraita counts the first tekia of only one set, and no more, and therefore he simply states that the length of one tekia is equal to the length of one terua. § The mishna continues. The length of a terua is equal to the length of three whimpers. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it taught in a baraita that the length of a terua is equal to the length of three shevarim, i.e., broken blasts, which presumably are longer than whimpers? Abaye said: In this matter, the tanna’im certainly disagree. Although the first baraita can be reconciled with the mishna, this second baraita clearly reflects a dispute. As it is written: “It is a day of sounding [terua] the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1), and we translate this verse in Aramaic as: It is a day of yevava to you. And to define a yevava, the Gemara quotes a verse that is written about the mother of Sisera: “Through the window she looked forth and wailed [vateyabev], the mother of Sisera” (Judges 5:28). One Sage, the tanna of the baraita, holds that this means moanings, broken sighs, as in the blasts called shevarim. And one Sage, the tanna of the mishna, holds that it means whimpers, as in the short blasts called teruot. § The Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that the soundings of Rosh HaShana must be performed with a shofar? The verse states: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the Day of Atonement you shall make proclamation with the shofar throughout all your land” (Leviticus 25:9). From this I have derived the halakha only with regard to Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. From where do I derive that the soundings of Rosh HaShana must also be with a shofar? The verse states: “Of the seventh month.” Since there is no need for the verse to state: “Of the seventh month,” as it already states: “On the Day of Atonement,” what is the meaning when the verse states: “Of the seventh month”? This comes to teach that all the obligatory soundings of the seventh month must be similar to one another. This verse states: “The blast [terua] of the shofar,” indicating that one must sound a terua. The Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that the terua sound is preceded by a straight blast, i.e., a tekia? The verse states: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [shofar terua]” (Leviticus 25:9), indicating that the terua must be preceded by the basic sound of a shofar, i.e., by the straight blast of a tekia. And from where is it derived that the terua sound is followed by a straight blast? The same verse states again: “You shall make proclamation with the shofar,” which indicates that there must be another tekia after the terua. The baraita continues. From this I have derived the halakha only that these tekia blasts before and after the terua must be sounded on Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year. From where do I derive that they must be sounded on Rosh HaShana as well? The verse states: “Of the seventh month.” Since there is no need for the verse to state: “Of the seventh month,” as it already states: “On the Day of Atonement,” what is the meaning when the verse states: “Of the seventh month”? This serves to teach that all soundings of the shofar of the seventh month must be similar to one another. And from where is it derived that there must be three sets of three blasts each? The verse states: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [shofar terua]”(Leviticus 25:9); and another verse states: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” (Leviticus 23:24); and a third verse states: “It is a day of sounding [terua] the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1). Terua is mentioned three times in these verses, and a terua is always preceded and followed by a tekia. Since one of these verses deals with Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year, while two of them deal with Rosh HaShana, the Gemara asks: From where is it derived to apply what is said about that verse to this one, and what is said about this verse to that one? With regard to Rosh HaShana, the verse states: “Of the seventh month” (Leviticus 25:9), and with regard to Yom Kippur the verse likewise states: “In the seventh month” (Leviticus 23:24). It is derived by verbal analogy that any shofar blasts sounded on one of these days must also be sounded on the other. Consequently, on each day one must sound three sets of tekia-terua-tekia. How so? How does one actually perform the sounding of the shofar? One sounds three sets of three blasts each, which altogether are nine separate blasts. The length of a tekia is equal to the length of a terua, and the length of a terua is equal to the length of three shevarim. The Gemara analyzes the baraita. This tanna initially derives his halakha from juxtaposition, based on the phrase: “Of the seventh month,” which teaches that every sounding of the shofar in the seventh month must be alike. And now he derives this halakha that one sounds three tekia-terua-tekia sets by verbal analogy from the recurrence of the term “seventh.” How can the tanna change his method of derivation in the very same baraita? The Gemara explains that this is what the tanna is saying: If there were no verbal analogy, I would have derived this halakha by juxtaposition. Now that it is derived through a verbal analogy, the juxtaposition is not necessary. The Gemara comments: And the following tanna derives this halakha by verbal analogy from the sounding of the shofar in the wilderness, as it is taught in a baraita that the verse: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua” (Numbers 10:5), indicates that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound. Do you say that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound? Or perhaps is it only that a tekia and a terua are one and the same, i.e., the two terms are synonymous? When it says: “But when the assembly is to be gathered together, you shall sound a tekia [titke’u], but you shall not sound a terua [tari’u]” (Numbers 10:7), you must say that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound. And from where is it derived that a terua is preceded by a straight blast, i.e., a tekia? The verse states: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua” (Numbers 10:5), which indicates that one must first sound a tekia and then a terua. And from where is it derived that a terua is followed by a straight blast? The verse states: “A terua you shall sound [titke’u]” (Numbers 10:6), i.e., first a terua and then a tekia. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, says: This derivation is not necessary, as the verse states: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua a second time” (Numbers 10:6). As there is no need for the verse to state: “A second time,” since it is clear from the context that this is the second terua, what is the meaning when the verse states: “A second time?” This is a paradigm of the principle that in all places where it is stated terua, a tekia should be second to it. I have derived this halakha only in the wilderness. From where do I derive that the same applies to Rosh HaShana? The verse states “terua” with regard to the wilderness, and the verse states “terua” with regard to Rosh HaShana. This comes to teach by verbal analogy that the halakha of one applies to the other. And three teruot are stated with regard to Rosh HaShana: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” (Leviticus 23:24); “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you” (Numbers 29:1); “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]” (Leviticus 25:9). And there are two tekiot for each and every one of the teruot, one before and one after. Consequently, we are found to have learned that three teruot and six tekiot are stated with regard to Rosh HaShana. Two of the teruot are required by the statement of the Torah and one by the statement of the Sages, i.e., based on the verses but not derived directly from them. How so? “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” and “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]”; these apply by Torah law. However, the verse “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you” comes for its own statement, i.e., for the verbal analogy, which teaches that the halakhot of the wilderness apply to Rosh HaShana as well. Consequently, the third terua is merely alluded to in that verse and its obligation applies by rabbinic law. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: One terua applies by Torah law, and two apply by rabbinic law: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]” applies by Torah law. However, the verses: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” and “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you”; these two phrases come for their own statement. The Gemara asks: What does Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani mean when he says that the verse: “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you,” comes for its own statement? What other halakha is derived from this verse? The Gemara explains: It is required to teach that the shofar must be sounded during the day and not at night, as indicated by the phrase: “A day of sounding the shofar.” The Gemara asks: And the other tanna, who does not derive this halakha from this verse, from where does he learn that the shofar must be sounded during the day and not at night? The Gemara answers: He derives it from that which is stated with regard to the Jubilee Year: “On the Day of Atonement” (Leviticus 25:9), which indicates that the shofar must be sounded during the day, not at night. The Gemara asks: If that tanna derives this halakha from the phrase: “On the Day of Atonement,” let us also derive from it that one must sound a straight blast of a tekia before each terua and a straight one after it. Since he derives one halakha from the verses that deal with Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year, why not derive this halakha from there as well? In that case, he would not need to derive it from the verses that deal with the wilderness. The Gemara answers: The phrases “Then you shall make proclamation [veha’avarta]” (Leviticus 25:9) and “You shall make proclamation [ta’aviru]” from the same verse do not indicate a tekia according to him, as they come to teach a different matter. The Gemara asks: Rather, what does he learn from those phrases? The Gemara answers: He expounds: “Veha’avarta,” in accordance with the opinion of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana said: “Veha’avarta,” which literally means: And you shall carry, indicates that the shofar must be shaped in the same way that the animal carries it on its head while alive, i.e., the natural narrow end must be maintained. One should not widen that side and narrow the naturally wide end. And the word “ta’aviru” teaches that the Merciful One states it so that one should not mistakenly explain as follows: Let us merely carry the shofar by hand throughout the land rather than sounding it. The Gemara asks: And from where does the other tanna derive these halakhot, as he used this verse to learn that the terua must be preceded by a tekia. The Gemara answers: He derives the halakha of Rav Mattana from the fact that the verse changed its normal language. It employs the term “ta’aviru” instead of titke’u, the more common expression for sounding the shofar. As for the concern that one might think the verse means: You shall merely carry the shofar by hand and not sound it, you cannot in any event say that, as that tanna derives by verbal analogy between the root avara used here and the same root avara that is found with regard to Moses. It is written here: “Then you shall make proclamation [veha’avarta] with the blast of the shofar,” and it is written elsewhere: “And Moses commanded, and they caused to be proclaimed [vaya’aviru] throughout the camp” (Exodus 36:6). Just as there, with regard to Moses, they proclaimed with a sound, so too here, the proclamation must be with a sound. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of this tanna, who derives the halakha that each terua of Rosh HaShana must be preceded by a tekia from the sounding of the shofar in the wilderness at the time of the gathering of the assembly, one can argue as follows: If so, just as there, in the wilderness, there was sounding of trumpets, so too, here, on Rosh HaShana, there must be sounding of trumpets. Therefore, the verse states: “Sound the shofar at the New Moon, at the full moon [keseh] for our feast day” (Psalms 81:4). Which is the Festival on which the month, i.e., the moon, is covered [mitkaseh]? You must say that this is Rosh HaShana, the only Festival that coincides with the new moon, which cannot be seen. And the Merciful One states: “Sound the shofar at the New Moon,” which indicates that on Rosh HaShana one sounds a shofar and nothing else. § Rabbi Abbahu instituted in Caesarea the following order of sounding of the shofar: First a tekia, a simple uninterrupted sound; next three shevarim, broken sounds; followed by a terua, a series of short blasts; and, finally, another tekia. The Gemara asks: Whichever way you look at it, this is difficult. If, according to the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, the sound the Torah calls a terua is a whimpering, i.e., short, consecutive sounds, one should perform a tekia-terua-tekia set. And if he holds that a terua is moaning, i.e., longer, broken sounds, he should sound a set as follows: Tekia, followed by three shevarim, and then another tekia. Why include both a terua and a shevarim? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain whether a terua means moaning or whimpering, and he therefore instituted that both types of sound should be included, to ensure that one fulfills his obligation. Rav Avira strongly objects to this: But perhaps a terua is whimpering, and the addition of three shevarim interrupts between the terua and the initial tekia, which disqualifies the entire set. The Gemara answers: That is why one then performs a tekia-terua-tekia set, to account for this possibility. Ravina strongly objects to this: But perhaps a terua is moaning, and the terua interrupts between the shevarim and the final tekia, once again disqualifying the entire set. The Gemara likewise answers: That is why one then performs a tekia-shevarim-tekia set, to cover this possibility as well. The Gemara asks: But if in any case one must perform the two sets of blasts, for what purpose did Rabbi Abbahu institute that one should perform a tekia-shevarim-terua-tekia set? If a terua is moaning, one already did it; if it is whimpering, one already did this, too. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain, and he thought that perhaps a terua consists of moaning followed by whimpering. Consequently, all three sets are necessary. The Gemara asks: If so, let one perform the opposite set as well: Tekia, terua, three shevarim, tekia, as perhaps a terua consists of whimpering and then moaning. The Gemara answers: The normal way of things is that when a person experiences a bad event, he first moans and then whimpers, but not the reverse. § The mishna taught: If one sounded the first tekia and then extended the second tekia of that series to the length of two tekiot, so that it should count as both the second tekia of the first set and the first tekia of the second set, it is considered as only one tekia, and one must begin the second set with a new tekia. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: If one heard

So-and-so keva’a from me. Levi did not understand what that man was saying to him, as he did not know the meaning of the word kava. So he went and asked in the study hall. They said to him: That man said to you: He robbed me, as it is written: “Will a man rob [hayikba] God?” (Malachi 3:8). Rava from a place called Barnish said to Rav Ashi: Had I been there in Levi’s place I would have tried to uncover the meaning of the word in a different way, for I would have said to him: How did he keva’a you? With what did he keva’a you? And why did he keva’a you? And from his answers I would have understood on my own what was being said. The Gemara comments: And Levi, who did not do this, thought that the man was talking about a matter of prohibition and not a monetary matter, and so asking the man these questions would not have helped, as they are relevant only to monetary matters. The Gemara continues its discussion of unusual words: The Sages did not know the meaning of the word seirugin, which is found in a mishna. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to the Sages whom she saw entering the house not all at once, but intermittently: How long shall you enter seirugin seirugin? and from this they understood that the word seirugin means: At intervals. It is similarly recounted that the Sages did not know the meaning of the word ḥaloglogot, which is mentioned in various mishnayot and baraitot. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to a certain man whom she saw scattering his purslane plants: How long shall you scatter your ḥaloglogot? So they understood that ḥaloglogot means purslane. The Sages also did not know the meaning of the word salseleha in the verse: “Salseleha and it will exalt you” (Proverbs 4:8). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house say to a certain man who was curling his hair: How long shall you mesalsel your hair? And from this they understood that the verse means: Turn wisdom about, and it will exalt you. It is further related that the Sages did not know the meaning of the words in the verse: “And sweep it [vetetetiha] with the broom [matatei] of destruction” (Isaiah 14:23). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s house saying to her workmate: Take a broom [tateita] and sweep [ta’ati] the house,” and they understood the meaning of these words. The Sages also did not know the meaning of the word yehavkha in the verse: “Cast your load [yehavkha] upon the Lord and He will sustain you” (Psalms 55:23). Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: One day I was traveling with a certain Arab [Tayya’a], and I was carrying a load, and he said to me: Take your yehav and cast it on my camel, and from this I understood that yehav means a load. MISHNA: The shofar that was used on Rosh HaShana in the Temple was made from the straight horn of an ibex, and its mouth, the mouthpiece into which one blows, was plated with gold. And there were two trumpets, one on each of the two sides of the person sounding the shofar. The shofar would sound a long blast, whereas the trumpets would sound a short blast, because the mitzva of the day is with the shofar. And in contrast, the shofarot used on public fast days were made from the curved horns of rams, and their mouths were plated with silver. There were two trumpets in the middle between the shofarot, and the shofar would sound a short blast, whereas the trumpets would sound a long blast, for the mitzva of the day is with the trumpets. Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana with regard to both the shofar blasts that are sounded and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer. Rabbi Yehuda disagrees and says: There is a difference between the two days: On Rosh HaShana one blows with horns of rams, whereas in Jubilee Years one blows with horns of ibexes. GEMARA: Rabbi Levi said: The mitzva of Rosh HaShana and of Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is to blow with curved shofarot, and that of the rest of the year, on fast days, is to blow with straight shofarot. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But didn’t we learn differently in the mishna: The shofar that was used on Rosh HaShana was made from the straight horn of an ibex? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Levi said his statement in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: On Rosh HaShana they would blow with the curved horns of rams, and on the Days of Atonement of the Jubilee Years with the horns of ibexes. The Gemara asks: If so, let it simply say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. Why was it necessary to quote the baraita in full, as if it provided new information? The Gemara explains: If you had said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, I would have said that he, Rabbi Levi, holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda even with regard to the shofar used in the Jubilee Year, i.e., that one must blow with the horn of ibexes at that time. Therefore, the Gemara teaches us that he agrees with Rabbi Yehuda only with regard to Rosh HaShana, and not with regard to any other matter. The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do these tanna’im disagree? One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, holds that on Rosh HaShana the more a person bends his mind and humbles himself by bending in prayer, the better. Therefore, a curved shofar is sounded as an allusion to our bent minds and bodies. But on Yom Kippur, the more a person straightens his mind and prays with simplicity, the better. Therefore, a straight shofar is sounded. The other Sage, the anonymous tanna of the mishna, maintains the opposite: On Rosh HaShana, the more a person straightens his mind and avoids any crookedness, the better. On fasts, on the other hand, the more a person bends his mind and humbles himself, the better.

Rav Hai (Gaon) wrote in a Teshuva (responsum): Don't think that in the days of Rabbi Abahu an uncertainty befell them in this matter for there are early Mishnayos - one says three sobs and one says three broken sounds. And Abaye says they are arguing about... This is how it was from the early days (differing) customs in all of Israel - some sounding a Teruah as three short sobs and some making heavy moaning sounds which are shevarim. Both of them fulfilling their obligation because heavy broken sounds are a Teruah and short sobs are a Teruah. The matter appeared to be divided even thought it wasn't divided. There were the Tanaim mentioned above - these taught that the length of a Teruah was three sobs and these taught that it was three broken sounds. These taught like their custom and these taught like their custom. And Abaye said they are arguing about the following... but it wasn't an argument where they held that the other was mistaken. Rather, this master did like his place and this master did like his place. And the sages of this one agreed that broken sounds are (also) a teruah and the sages of this one agreed that sobs are (also) a teruah. And when Rabbi Abahu came he saw fit to make an enactment so that all of Israel would be acting in the same way so there wouldn't be something between them that to a simpleton would look divided.

Since there is no need for the verse to state: “Of the seventh month,” as it already states: “On the Day of Atonement,” what is the meaning when the verse states: “Of the seventh month”? This serves to teach that all soundings of the shofar of the seventh month must be similar to one another. And from where is it derived that there must be three sets of three blasts each? The verse states: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [shofar terua]”(Leviticus 25:9); and another verse states: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” (Leviticus 23:24); and a third verse states: “It is a day of sounding [terua] the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1). Terua is mentioned three times in these verses, and a terua is always preceded and followed by a tekia. Since one of these verses deals with Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year, while two of them deal with Rosh HaShana, the Gemara asks: From where is it derived to apply what is said about that verse to this one, and what is said about this verse to that one? With regard to Rosh HaShana, the verse states: “Of the seventh month” (Leviticus 25:9), and with regard to Yom Kippur the verse likewise states: “In the seventh month” (Leviticus 23:24). It is derived by verbal analogy that any shofar blasts sounded on one of these days must also be sounded on the other. Consequently, on each day one must sound three sets of tekia-terua-tekia. How so? How does one actually perform the sounding of the shofar? One sounds three sets of three blasts each, which altogether are nine separate blasts. The length of a tekia is equal to the length of a terua, and the length of a terua is equal to the length of three shevarim. The Gemara analyzes the baraita. This tanna initially derives his halakha from juxtaposition, based on the phrase: “Of the seventh month,” which teaches that every sounding of the shofar in the seventh month must be alike. And now he derives this halakha that one sounds three tekia-terua-tekia sets by verbal analogy from the recurrence of the term “seventh.” How can the tanna change his method of derivation in the very same baraita? The Gemara explains that this is what the tanna is saying: If there were no verbal analogy, I would have derived this halakha by juxtaposition. Now that it is derived through a verbal analogy, the juxtaposition is not necessary. The Gemara comments: And the following tanna derives this halakha by verbal analogy from the sounding of the shofar in the wilderness, as it is taught in a baraita that the verse: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua” (Numbers 10:5), indicates that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound. Do you say that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound? Or perhaps is it only that a tekia and a terua are one and the same, i.e., the two terms are synonymous? When it says: “But when the assembly is to be gathered together, you shall sound a tekia [titke’u], but you shall not sound a terua [tari’u]” (Numbers 10:7), you must say that a tekia is its own sound and a terua is its own sound. And from where is it derived that a terua is preceded by a straight blast, i.e., a tekia? The verse states: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua” (Numbers 10:5), which indicates that one must first sound a tekia and then a terua. And from where is it derived that a terua is followed by a straight blast? The verse states: “A terua you shall sound [titke’u]” (Numbers 10:6), i.e., first a terua and then a tekia. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, says: This derivation is not necessary, as the verse states: “And you shall sound [utekatem] a terua a second time” (Numbers 10:6). As there is no need for the verse to state: “A second time,” since it is clear from the context that this is the second terua, what is the meaning when the verse states: “A second time?” This is a paradigm of the principle that in all places where it is stated terua, a tekia should be second to it. I have derived this halakha only in the wilderness. From where do I derive that the same applies to Rosh HaShana? The verse states “terua” with regard to the wilderness, and the verse states “terua” with regard to Rosh HaShana. This comes to teach by verbal analogy that the halakha of one applies to the other. And three teruot are stated with regard to Rosh HaShana: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” (Leviticus 23:24); “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you” (Numbers 29:1); “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]” (Leviticus 25:9). And there are two tekiot for each and every one of the teruot, one before and one after. Consequently, we are found to have learned that three teruot and six tekiot are stated with regard to Rosh HaShana. Two of the teruot are required by the statement of the Torah and one by the statement of the Sages, i.e., based on the verses but not derived directly from them. How so? “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” and “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]”; these apply by Torah law. However, the verse “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you” comes for its own statement, i.e., for the verbal analogy, which teaches that the halakhot of the wilderness apply to Rosh HaShana as well. Consequently, the third terua is merely alluded to in that verse and its obligation applies by rabbinic law. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: One terua applies by Torah law, and two apply by rabbinic law: “Then you shall make proclamation with the blast of the shofar [terua]” applies by Torah law. However, the verses: “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts [terua]” and “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you”; these two phrases come for their own statement. The Gemara asks: What does Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani mean when he says that the verse: “It is a day of sounding the shofar [terua] to you,” comes for its own statement? What other halakha is derived from this verse? The Gemara explains: It is required to teach that the shofar must be sounded during the day and not at night, as indicated by the phrase: “A day of sounding the shofar.” The Gemara asks: And the other tanna, who does not derive this halakha from this verse, from where does he learn that the shofar must be sounded during the day and not at night? The Gemara answers: He derives it from that which is stated with regard to the Jubilee Year: “On the Day of Atonement” (Leviticus 25:9), which indicates that the shofar must be sounded during the day, not at night. The Gemara asks: If that tanna derives this halakha from the phrase: “On the Day of Atonement,” let us also derive from it that one must sound a straight blast of a tekia before each terua and a straight one after it. Since he derives one halakha from the verses that deal with Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year, why not derive this halakha from there as well? In that case, he would not need to derive it from the verses that deal with the wilderness. The Gemara answers: The phrases “Then you shall make proclamation [veha’avarta]” (Leviticus 25:9) and “You shall make proclamation [ta’aviru]” from the same verse do not indicate a tekia according to him, as they come to teach a different matter. The Gemara asks: Rather, what does he learn from those phrases? The Gemara answers: He expounds: “Veha’avarta,” in accordance with the opinion of Rav Mattana, as Rav Mattana said: “Veha’avarta,” which literally means: And you shall carry, indicates that the shofar must be shaped in the same way that the animal carries it on its head while alive, i.e., the natural narrow end must be maintained. One should not widen that side and narrow the naturally wide end. And the word “ta’aviru” teaches that the Merciful One states it so that one should not mistakenly explain as follows: Let us merely carry the shofar by hand throughout the land rather than sounding it. The Gemara asks: And from where does the other tanna derive these halakhot, as he used this verse to learn that the terua must be preceded by a tekia. The Gemara answers: He derives the halakha of Rav Mattana from the fact that the verse changed its normal language. It employs the term “ta’aviru” instead of titke’u, the more common expression for sounding the shofar. As for the concern that one might think the verse means: You shall merely carry the shofar by hand and not sound it, you cannot in any event say that, as that tanna derives by verbal analogy between the root avara used here and the same root avara that is found with regard to Moses. It is written here: “Then you shall make proclamation [veha’avarta] with the blast of the shofar,” and it is written elsewhere: “And Moses commanded, and they caused to be proclaimed [vaya’aviru] throughout the camp” (Exodus 36:6). Just as there, with regard to Moses, they proclaimed with a sound, so too here, the proclamation must be with a sound. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of this tanna, who derives the halakha that each terua of Rosh HaShana must be preceded by a tekia from the sounding of the shofar in the wilderness at the time of the gathering of the assembly, one can argue as follows: If so, just as there, in the wilderness, there was sounding of trumpets, so too, here, on Rosh HaShana, there must be sounding of trumpets. Therefore, the verse states: “Sound the shofar at the New Moon, at the full moon [keseh] for our feast day” (Psalms 81:4). Which is the Festival on which the month, i.e., the moon, is covered [mitkaseh]? You must say that this is Rosh HaShana, the only Festival that coincides with the new moon, which cannot be seen. And the Merciful One states: “Sound the shofar at the New Moon,” which indicates that on Rosh HaShana one sounds a shofar and nothing else. § Rabbi Abbahu instituted in Caesarea the following order of sounding of the shofar: First a tekia, a simple uninterrupted sound; next three shevarim, broken sounds; followed by a terua, a series of short blasts; and, finally, another tekia. The Gemara asks: Whichever way you look at it, this is difficult. If, according to the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, the sound the Torah calls a terua is a whimpering, i.e., short, consecutive sounds, one should perform a tekia-terua-tekia set. And if he holds that a terua is moaning, i.e., longer, broken sounds, he should sound a set as follows: Tekia, followed by three shevarim, and then another tekia. Why include both a terua and a shevarim? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain whether a terua means moaning or whimpering, and he therefore instituted that both types of sound should be included, to ensure that one fulfills his obligation. Rav Avira strongly objects to this: But perhaps a terua is whimpering, and the addition of three shevarim interrupts between the terua and the initial tekia, which disqualifies the entire set. The Gemara answers: That is why one then performs a tekia-terua-tekia set, to account for this possibility. Ravina strongly objects to this: But perhaps a terua is moaning, and the terua interrupts between the shevarim and the final tekia, once again disqualifying the entire set. The Gemara likewise answers: That is why one then performs a tekia-shevarim-tekia set, to cover this possibility as well. The Gemara asks: But if in any case one must perform the two sets of blasts, for what purpose did Rabbi Abbahu institute that one should perform a tekia-shevarim-terua-tekia set? If a terua is moaning, one already did it; if it is whimpering, one already did this, too. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain, and he thought that perhaps a terua consists of moaning followed by whimpering. Consequently, all three sets are necessary. The Gemara asks: If so, let one perform the opposite set as well: Tekia, terua, three shevarim, tekia, as perhaps a terua consists of whimpering and then moaning. The Gemara answers: The normal way of things is that when a person experiences a bad event, he first moans and then whimpers, but not the reverse. § The mishna taught: If one sounded the first tekia and then extended the second tekia of that series to the length of two tekiot, so that it should count as both the second tekia of the first set and the first tekia of the second set, it is considered as only one tekia, and one must begin the second set with a new tekia. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: If one heard the requisite nine shofar blasts at nine different times of the day, he has fulfilled his obligation, as the blasts need not be heard in immediate succession. This is also taught in a baraita: If one heard nine shofar blasts at nine different times of the day, he has fulfilled his obligation. If one heard the blasts from nine different people simultaneously, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If one heard a tekia from this one and afterward he heard a terua from this other one, he has fulfilled his obligation, as one does not have to hear all the blasts from the same individual. And this is true even if one heard the blasts from the different individuals at intervals, and even if it took the course of the entire day. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥanan actually say this? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: During the reading of hallel or the Megilla of Esther, if one paused long enough to complete all of it, he must return to the beginning, as it must be read in one session? Why is the halakha different in the case of the shofar? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as this ruling with regard to the shofar is his own opinion, and that case of hallel and the Megilla is his teacher’s opinion. It is Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak who holds that one may not pause in the middle of sounding the shofar. The Gemara asks: And is this not also his own opinion as well? Wasn’t Rabbi Abbahu once walking after Rabbi Yoḥanan, and Rabbi Abbahu was reciting Shema as he walked? When he reached alleyways that were filthy with human excrement, where it is prohibited to utter words of Torah, he fell silent and stopped reciting Shema. After he passed through, Rabbi Abbahu said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: What is the halakha with regard to completing Shema from where I left off? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: If you remained in the alleyway for an interval sufficient to complete the entire Shema, return to the beginning and start again. This shows that Rabbi Yoḥanan himself holds that if one takes an extended break, he must start again from the beginning. The Gemara answers: This is no proof, as it is possible that this is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said: I myself do not hold that one must start again after a long pause; however, according to you, as you hold that a delay is a problem, the halakha is that if you paused for an interval sufficient to complete the entire Shema, you must return to the beginning. § The Sages taught in a baraita: The various trumpet blasts on a fast day do not invalidate one another, i.e., if one was omitted, this does not invalidate the other blasts. Similarly, the additional blessings that are inserted into the Amida prayer on a fast day do not invalidate one another. However, the shofar blasts and additional blessings of Rosh HaShana and of Yom Kippur do invalidate one another. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that all the blasts and blessings are indispensable on Rosh HaShana? Rabba said that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Recite before Me on Rosh HaShana Kingship, Remembrances, and Shofarot. Kingship, so that you will crown Me as King over you; Remembrances, so that your remembrance will rise before Me for good. And with what? With the shofar. Since these blessings constitute a single unit, one who did not recite them all has not fulfilled his obligation. § The mishna taught: In the case of one who recited the blessings of the additional prayer and only afterward a shofar became available to him, he sounds a tekia, sounds a terua and sounds a tekia; this is a set that he repeats three times. The Gemara explains: The reason that he may do this is that he did not have a shofar at the outset. This indicates that if he had a shofar at the outset, when he hears the blasts he must hear them by the order of the blessings, i.e., one set must be sounded after each special blessing. The Gemara relates: Rav Pappa bar Shmuel once rose to pray on Rosh HaShana. He said to his attendant: When I signal to you that I have finished each of the blessings, sound the shofar for me. Rava said to him: They said that the shofar must be sounded after each blessing only where there is a quorum of ten [ḥever ir], not when it is sounded for an individual. This is also taught in a baraita: When one hears the shofar blasts, he must hear them in order, i.e., a tekia-terua-tekia set, and upon the order of the blessings. In what case is this statement said? Where there is a quorum of ten [ḥever ir]. However, where there is not a ḥever ir, one must hear them in order, but he need not hear them upon the order of the blessings. And in the case of an individual who has not sounded the shofar, another may sound it for him. But with regard to an individual who has not recited the blessings, another may not recite the blessings for him. And if one has to choose between hearing the shofar and reciting the blessings, the mitzva to be among those who sound the shofar is more important than the mitzva to be among those who recite the blessings. How so? If there are two towns, in one there are those who know how to sound the shofar, and in the other there are individuals who know how to recite the blessings, one should go to the place where they sound the shofar, and one does not go to the place where they know how to recite the blessings. The Gemara asks: This halakha is obvious. Sounding the shofar is a mitzva by Torah law, whereas the additional prayer applies by rabbinic law. A mitzva that applies by Torah law is clearly more important. The Gemara answers: No; this seemingly superfluous ruling is necessary to teach that although in this town it is certain that the additional prayer will be recited and in this other town it is uncertain whether or not the shofar will be sounded, one should still go to the place where they know how to sound the shofar rather than the location where they know how to recite the blessings. § The mishna states: Just as the prayer leader is obligated in the prayers of Rosh HaShana, so too, every individual is obligated in these prayers. Rabban Gamliel says: The prayer leader fulfills the obligation on behalf of the many. It is taught in a baraita that the Rabbis said to Rabban Gamliel: According to your statement, why does the congregation recite the silent Amida prayer beforehand? He said to them: In order that the prayer leader should have time to prepare and arrange his prayer. Rabban Gamliel said to the Rabbis: According to your statement, that the prayer leader does not fulfill the obligation on behalf of the many, why does the prayer leader descend before the ark and recite the Amida prayer? They said to him: He does so to fulfill the obligation of one who is not an expert in prayer. Rabban Gamliel said to them: Just as he can fulfill the obligation of one who is not an expert in prayer, so too, he can fulfill the obligation of the expert. With regard to this baraita, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Ultimately, the Rabbis concede to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel. But Rav said: It is still a dispute that remains unresolved. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya, son of Rabba bar Naḥmani, heard this and went and stated this halakha before Rav Dimi bar Ḥinnana. He said to him that this is what Rav said: It is still a dispute. Rav Dimi bar Ḥinnana said to him: This is what Rabba bar bar Ḥana also said: When Rabbi Yoḥanan said this halakha, that the Rabbis concede to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, Reish Lakish disagreed with him and said: It is still a dispute. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥanan actually say this? Didn’t Rabbi Ḥana from the city of Tzippori say that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel? From the fact that he said: The halakha, one can conclude by inference that the Rabbis still disagree. The very fact that he issued a ruling in favor of Rabban Gamliel shows that Rabbi Yoḥanan maintains that the Sages do not accept this opinion.