Rosh Hashanah 32b (לב:) — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: One does not mention kingship, remembrances, or shofar verses expressing calamity.

And the Gemara brings examples of this:

What is a verse expressing calamity with regard to

kingship?

For example, what is written in the book of Ezekiel

“As I live, declares the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, with an outstretched arm, and with outpoured wrath, I will reign over you.”

And although Rav Naḥman said

in tractate Sanhedrin

“With regard to any such wrath, let the Holy One, blessed be He, vent His wrath upon us and redeem us!”

Would that this anger come upon us, so that the Holy One, blessed be He, would redeem us against our will and reign over us

—seemingly, this is not calamity.

Nevertheless,

since it is stated in the context of wrath,

since this verse is phrased in terms of fury and anger,

mentioning wrath on Rosh HaShana—

we do not mention it!

We do not mention the expression of the Holy One, blessed be He’s, anger toward us on Rosh HaShana.

A remembrance

of calamity—

For example,

“And He remembered

the Lord

that they were but flesh,

a spirit that passes away and does not return.”

A shofar

of calamity—

For example,

in Hosea:

“Blow a shofar in Gibeah.

Sound an alarm—for the house of iniquity has gathered forces against you, Benjamin.”

But if one wishes to recite

verses of

kingship,

verses of

remembrance, and

verses of

shofar—

of the calamity of idolaters, one recites them.

Kingship—

For example,

in Psalms:

“The Lord reigns; let the peoples tremble.”

And similarly, “The Lord is King forever and ever; the nations have perished from His land.”

Remembrance—

For example,

in Psalms:

“Remember, Lord, the children of Edom

the day of Jerusalem,” to repay them for this with due recompense.

Shofar—

For example,

in Zechariah:

“And the Lord God shall sound the shofar, and He shall go forth in the tempests of the south.”

The Holy One, blessed be He, will go forth in a tempest to destroy the south.

And it is written

in the following verse:

“The Lord of Hosts shall protect them.”

He will protect Israel, so that they will not be smitten together with the nations.

From here it follows that the calamity mentioned in this verse concerns only the gentiles of the south.

And now the Gemara brings a beraita that discusses the laws of “remembrances”:

As it was taught:

a.

One does not mention

a verse that speaks of

the remembrance of an individual, even

a remembrance

for good.

For example,

this prayer of King David, who said:

“Remember me, Lord, when You show favor to Your people,”

When You show favor to all Your people, remember me as well

and similarly,

the prayer of Nehemiah:

“Remember me, my God, for good.”

b.

References to divine visitation,

verses in which the expression of visitation is mentioned,

are considered like remembrances.

For example,

“And the Lord visited Sarah.”

“And the Lord remembered Sarah.”

And similarly: “I have surely remembered you,”

since the expression “visitation” also means “remembrance.”

This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

References to visitation

are not considered like remembrances.

And we challenge Rabbi Yosei’s statement:

But according to Rabbi Yosei,

who mentioned the verse “And the Lord visited Sarah,” this is difficult:

Granted,

it is indeed true

that references to visitation,

according to Rabbi Yosei,

are considered like remembrances.

But

“And the Lord visited Sarah”—

it is the visitation of an individual!

And one does not mention the remembrance of an individual, as stated above.

And we answer:

Since many emerged from it,

since Isaac was born as a result of that visitation, and the entire people of Israel, who are many, descended from him, therefore such a visitation

is like

the visitation of

many;

it is considered as such.

c. And the beraita continues by discussing the passage in Psalms, chapter 24: how many verses of kingship does it count as?

“Lift up your heads, O gates, and be lifted up, everlasting doors, that the King of glory may enter.

Who is the King of glory?

The Lord, mighty and strong,

the Lord, strong in battle.

Lift up your heads, O gates, and lift up, everlasting doors, that the King of glory may enter.

Who is this King of glory?

The Lord of Hosts—

He is the King of glory, forever.”

The first mention of “Lift up your heads, O gates”

the first

contains a mention of

two

kingships, since “King” is mentioned twice.

The mention of “Lift up your heads, O gates”

the second

contains a mention of

three

kingships, since “King” is mentioned three times,

the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

What the verse says in the form of a question, “Who is this King of glory,” is not included in the count of kingships.

Therefore, the first mention of “Lift up your heads, O gates”

the first

counts only as a mention of

one

kingship. And the mention of “Lift up your heads, O gates”

the second

counts as

two

kingships.

d. And now the beraita discusses another verse: how many verses of kingship does it count as?

It is stated in Psalms:

“Sing praises to God, sing praises; sing praises to our King, sing praises. For God is King over all the earth.”

This verse counts as

two,

since “our King” and “King” are mentioned in it, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

This verse counts as

one

alone: only “King over all the earth” is considered kingship.

But “our King” is not considered kingship, since it mentions kingship only over one nation, Israel.

And Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda agree

Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda

regarding

the verse

“God is King over the nations; God sits upon His holy throne”—

that it is

“kingship”

one

alone. For “He sits upon His holy throne” is not considered kingship.

e.

A “remembrance” that contains “sounding,” such as

in Leviticus:

“A solemn rest, a remembrance of sounding, a sacred convocation.”

If one wishes,

one recites it with the remembrances. And

if one wishes,

one recites it with the shofar verses, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: One recites it only with the remembrances,

since it does not mention the term “shofar,” but rather the term “sounding.”

A “kingship” that is accompanied by “sounding,” such as

in Numbers:

“The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them.”

If he wishes,

he recites it with the kingships. And

if he wishes,

he recites it with the shofar verses, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: One recites it only with the kingships

since it does not mention the term “shofar,” but rather the term “sounding.”

“Sounding” that is accompanied by nothing else, such as

in Numbers:

“It shall be a day of sounding for you”—

one recites it with the shofar verses, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: One does not recite it at all,

since among the shofar verses one mentions only a verse in which the term “shofar” is stated, and not merely the term “sounding.”

We learned in the Mishna: In each order,

one begins with

three verses from the

Torah,

continues with three verses from the Writings,

and concludes

[and ends]

with

four verses from the

Prophets.

Rabbi Yosei says: If he concluded

the tenth verse

with

a verse from the

Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation.

And we infer from Rabbi Yosei’s statement, from the wording

“If he concluded

with the Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation.”

It follows that this applies specifically

after the fact, not

only if he already concluded with the Torah has he fulfilled his obligation after the fact.

But

initially—

no,

he should not conclude with the Torah.

And we challenge this:

But it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yosei says: One who concludes with the Torah—

this is praiseworthy!

And we answer: Rather,

say

that this is what our Mishna says: Rabbi Yosei says:

He concludes

with the Torah initially.

And we challenge this:

But “if he concluded

with the Torah, he has fulfilled his obligation,”

it teaches.

This implies

after the fact, not

only if he has already done so has he fulfilled his obligation. But

initially—

no,

he should not do so.

And we answer:

This is what it means;

this is what the Mishna said:

He begins with the Torah,

continues with the Writings,

and concludes with the Prophets.

Rabbi Yosei says:

Initially,

he concludes with the Torah. And

after the fact,

if he concluded with the Prophets, he has fulfilled his obligation.

A beraita was also taught accordingly:

The same was taught in a beraita:

Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: The scrupulous would conclude it,

they would conclude each order of verses,

with

a verse from the

Torah.

That is, they initially recited three verses from the Torah, then three from the Writings and three from the Prophets, and finally concluded again with a verse from the Torah. It follows that they mentioned four verses from the Torah in each order.

And we challenge this:

Granted, with regard to the remembrances and the shofar verses—

there are many.

Indeed, with regard to remembrances and shofar verses, Rabbi Yosei’s statement is readily understandable, since there are many verses of remembrances and shofar verses in the Torah, and it is possible to recite four of them in each order.

But kingships—

only

three are there!

There are only three in the Torah! [a]

“The Lord his God is with him, and the sounding of a king is among them”

in Numbers. [b]

“

And there was a king in Jeshurun”

in Deuteronomy. [c]

“

The Lord shall reign forever and ever”

in Exodus.

And

this is difficult:

we require ten

verses,

but there are not!

According to Rabbi Yosei, we require ten verses, including four verses from the Torah. Yet there are not four verses of kingship in the Torah at all!

Rav Huna said:

Rabbi Yosei’s statement can be resolved on the basis of his statement in the following beraita:

A tanna

taught in a beraita: [a] The verse

“

Hear, Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One”

in Deuteronomy

is kingship,

even though the term kingship is not mentioned in the verse; its meaning is the kingship of the Lord,

the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not kingship,

because the term kingship is not explicitly mentioned. [b] The verse

“

You shall know this day and take it to your heart that the Lord is God; there is none else”

in Deuteronomy

is kingship, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not kingship,

because the term kingship is not explicitly mentioned in the verse. [c] The verse

“

You have been shown to know that the Lord is God; there is none else besides Him,”

is

is kingship, the statement of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not kingship.

According to Rabbi Yosei’s opinion in the beraita, we have found three additional verses of kingship in the Torah, besides the three mentioned above. It is therefore possible to recite four verses of kingship from the Torah.

Mishna:

On the mornings of the Festivals, it was customary for two prayer leaders to stand before the congregation, one for Shacharit and one for Musaf.

The one who stands before the congregation on Rosh HaShana, the Festival day—

the second one sounds the shofar.

That is, during the repetition of the Amidah by the second prayer leader, who recites Musaf, the shofar is sounded.

And at the time of Hallel,

on Festivals on which Hallel is recited, the prayer leader

the first

is the one who

leads the congregation in Hallel

after the conclusion of Shacharit.

Gemara:

And we inquire:

What is different about the second one sounding the shofar,

what is distinctive about the second prayer leader, who recites Musaf on Rosh HaShana, such that the shofar is sounded specifically during his prayer and not during Shacharit?

It is

because “with the multitude of the people is the glory of the King”

in Proverbs. Even those who arrive late for Shacharit attend Musaf, and the shofar is sounded then, when there is a large crowd, because of the glory of the King.

If so, Hallel too—

let it be recited during the second one’s service!

If so, Hallel should also be recited after Musaf,

because “with the multitude of the people is the glory of the King”!

Rather,

necessarily,

what is different about Hallel, which is recited during the first one’s service,

why is Hallel recited after the service of the first prayer leader [Shacharit]?—

because the diligent anticipate mitzvot!

If so, the opposite difficulty arises:

the sounding of the shofar too—

let it be performed during the first one’s service!

The shofar should also be sounded during Shacharit,

because “the diligent anticipate mitzvot”!

Just as with regard to Hallel it is preferable to hasten and perform the mitzva early rather than recite it before a large crowd, so too this should apply to the sounding of the shofar!

And we answer:

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They taught our Mishna in a time of royal persecution,

when the government decreed that the shofar not be sounded.

Since at first they were accustomed to sound the shofar during Shacharit, before midday, the gentiles would wait until the end of the sixth hour, which was the end of the time for Shacharit, and then leave. Therefore, they transferred the sounding to Musaf, and they would recite Musaf after midday.

We learned in the Mishna: And at the time of Hallel [on Festivals on which Hallel is recited], the first one leads the congregation in Hallel.

And we infer:

From the fact that

the tanna

said “at the time of Hallel” -

it follows that on Rosh HaShana itself

there

is no

recitation of

Hallel.

And we inquire:

What is the reason?

Why is Rosh HaShana different from the other Festivals, on which Hallel is recited?

Rabbi Abbahu said: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of the Universe! Why do Israel not recite song

[Hallel]

before You on Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur?

He said to them:

Is it

possible that the

King is seated upon the Throne of Judgment, with the books of the living and the books of the dead open before Him, and Israel recite song?!

King is seated upon the throne of judgment, with the books of the living and the books of the dead open before Him, and Israel should sing praise?!

It is not fitting to do so!

Mishna:

Our Mishna concerns matters that one may not do on a Festival in order to fulfill the mitzva of sounding the shofar:

a.

With regard to the shofar of Rosh HaShana, one may not cross the Shabbat limit for it.

One may not cross the Shabbat limit [two thousand cubits] in order to hear the sounding of the shofar.

And one may not clear away a mound covering it.

If a mound of stones fell upon the shofar, it is forbidden to move the stones in order to reach the shofar and sound it, because the stones are muktzeh and may not be moved on Shabbat.

One may not climb a tree or ride upon an animal

in order to reach the shofar. [For these activities are rabbinically prohibited on Shabbat and Festivals, lest one detach a branch from the tree, as explained in tractate Beitza, chapter “Mashilin.”]

And one may not swim upon the water

in order to reach the shofar or to hear its sounding, because the Sages prohibited sailing and swimming on Shabbat and Festivals, lest one make a boat in which to sail. [Beitza, there.]

And one may not cut it,

the shofar, in order to repair it,

whether with something whose

prohibition

is due to shevut,

a rabbinic prohibition,

or with something whose

prohibition

is due to a prohibition from the Torah

—a biblical prohibition.

[The Gemara will explain what is prohibited due to shevut and what is prohibited by Torah law.]

But if he wishes to place inside it

[inside the shofar]

water or wine

[to polish it],

he may place it,

as this is not prohibited as the repair of a utensil.

b.

One does not prevent children from sounding the shofar.

One does not prevent children from sounding voluntary blasts on Rosh HaShana [after they have already fulfilled their obligation].

But one engages with them,

telling them to sound the shofar and helping them [Maggid Mishne; Tosafot Yom Tov]

until they learn.

c.

One who handles the shofar

without intending to sound it, but sounds it,

has not fulfilled his obligation.

And one who hears it from the one who was merely handling it

also

has not fulfilled his obligation.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: With regard to the shofar of Rosh HaShana, one may not cross the Shabbat limit for it.

And we inquire:

What is the reason,

why does the mitzva of sounding the shofar, which is a positive mitzva, not override the prohibition against going beyond the limit on a Festival, which is a negative commandment? After all, a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment!

And we answer:

the shofar

is a mitzva of

positive commandment, ["

a day of sounding"].

And

if refraining from labor on

Yom Tov is a positive commandment ["

a complete rest"]

and a negative commandment ["

You shall not perform any laborious work.” Leviticus 23:24–25].

And no

positive commandment

overrides a negative commandment and a positive commandment.

And even prohibitions of rabbinic origin are not overridden by the shofar, because everything that the Sages instituted, they instituted in the likeness of Torah law.

We learned in the Mishna:

one may not climb a tree, nor ride upon an animal.

And so on.

These prohibitions are of rabbinic origin, decreed lest one transgress prohibitions of Torah origin: it is prohibited to ride an animal lest one cut a branch in order to lead the animal, and it is prohibited to climb a tree lest one detach something from it.

And we object:

Now

with regard to prohibitions of

rabbinic origin—

you said no,

since we already learned at the beginning of the Mishna that it is prohibited to transgress the prohibition of the techum or to clear a fallen wall, even though these are prohibitions of rabbinic origin in which there is no concern lest one transgress a prohibition of Torah origin.

Prohibitions of

Torah origin—

is it necessary

to say that it is prohibited?!

Does the tanna need to teach us that one does not sound the shofar in a place where they were concerned that a person might transgress a prohibition of Torah origin, such as while riding, lest he cut a branch, or while climbing a tree, lest he detach something?!

And we answer: Our Mishna is taught in the manner of

“This, and it is unnecessary to state that”

[it was taught].

This is what the tanna intended to say: With regard to the shofar of Rosh Hashana, one may not violate the techum for its sake, and one may not clear a fallen wall for its sake. And it is unnecessary to state that one may not climb a tree, for this follows by kal va-chomer.