Sukkah 54a — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

Lest you say that it is even according to the Rabbis

it is so, and if he wishes, he may make a brief interruption; and what Rav Kahana said, “There is nothing at all between the tekia and the terua,” means to say that even according to the Rabbis one may not make a lengthy interruption between the tekia and the terua, since both of them are needed for the fulfillment of the mitzva, despite the fact that they are two mitzvot.

And

the entire intention of Rav Kahana is only

to exclude

to exclude

Rabbi Yohanan, who said: If one heard nine blasts

which a person is obligated by Torah law to hear on Rosh Hashanah, even if there were lengthy interruptions between hearing them, so that even if he heard them

over nine hours of the day—

he has fulfilled his obligation.

он исполнил обязанность.

Therefore

it teaches us

the Gemara that according to Rav Kahana one may not make even a brief interruption, and his words are only according to Rabbi Yehuda.

And we inquire about it:

And say so as well

, that Rav Kahana said this also according to the Rabbis, and to exclude Rabbi Yohanan!?

And we answer:

If so, what

does he

“nothing at all”

say, implying that he may not make even a brief interruption? But since according to the Rabbis the tekia and the terua are two mitzvot, it is possible to interrupt between them a little.

We learned in the Mishna:

The eve of Shabbat that falls during the festival

they would sound forty-eight blasts.

And the Mishna counts among the other blasts: three for the upper gate, three for the lower gate, and three above the altar.

But

three blasts

for the tenth landing above—

it does not teach.

Whose opinion is the Mishna—

it is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

For it was taught: Three

blasts they would sound when they reached

the tenth landing above.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: Three

blasts they would sound

above the altar.

And the beraita adds: The first tanna

who says

that they sounded

at the tenth landing above—

does not say

that they sounded

above the altar.

And

whereas Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov

who says

that they sounded

above the altar—

does not say

that they sounded

at the tenth landing above.

What is the reason of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov?

Since he sounded the blast for the opening of the gates—

what do I need him to sound at the tenth landing above for?

For

this

place of the tenth landing above—

is not a gate.

Therefore,

to sound

above the altar

at the time of setting up the willow branch

is preferable.

And the Rabbis hold: Since he sounded

already

for the filling of the water,

what need is there for an additional blast

above the altar?

For these blasts are on account of the filling of the water, and they have no connection with the setting up of the willow branch.

Therefore,

the blast

at the tenth landing above,

which concerns the filling of the water,

is preferable.

And now the Gemara is dealing with the blasts for the additional offerings, and discusses the matter of sounding a blast for several additional offerings that come on one day.

When Rabbi Aha bar Hanina came from the south, he brought a teaching in his hand: [Numbers 10]

“

And the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall sound with the trumpets.”

».

There is no need

for the verse

to say

“

»,

they shall sound,”

since

it was already stated

“

».

And you shall sound with the trumpets over your burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings.”

What, then, does it teach

“

they shall sound”?

They sound according to the additional offerings.

He,

Rabbi Aha,

taught it

—he recited this beraita—

and he

also

explained it

—he interpreted it:

to say that they sound for each and every additional offering

a blast of its own.

And now the Gemara discusses Rabbi Aha’s words, and begins to raise an objection against them:

We learned

in our Mishna:

On the eve of Shabbat that falls during the festival, there were forty-eight.

And if it is so

according to Rabbi Aha’s words, that one should sound for each additional offering,

let it teach

as follows:

On Shabbat that falls during the festival—

you find fifty-one!

For on it three additional blasts—[tekia, terua, tekia—are to be sounded for the additional offering of the festival, besides the three blasts for the additional offering of Shabbat.

Rabbi Zeira said:

There are not fifty-one blasts on Shabbat of the festival,

because they do not sound

the three blasts

for the opening of the gates on Shabbat.

For they are not a mitzva, but only a signal to the priests and Levites that they should come to their service in the Temple. And since these three blasts are reduced, it follows that even on Shabbat of the festival they sound only forty-eight blasts, despite the fact that they sounded for the two additional offerings, each one separately.

Said

in astonishment

Rava

by way of a parable:

Who is this who has no concern for his flour?

Who is he who does not care about grinding his flour, grinding and producing bran without concern? That is to say, he multiplies statements that are incorrect.

First, that

“

каждый день »

every day”

we learned that they sound for the opening of the gates, including Shabbat.

And furthermore, alternatively,

even if it is as Rabbi Zeira says, that the eve of Shabbat during the festival and Shabbat during the festival

are identical,

since on both of them they sound forty-eight blasts, it is still difficult:

Let it teach

in our Mishna, instead of “the eve of Shabbat during the festival”:

On Shabbat that falls during the festival, there were forty-eight.

For you would infer from it

by informing us of the number of blasts on Shabbat during the festival

two things:

a.

You would infer from it

the law

of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov,

as above.

b.

And you would also infer from it

as well

the law of Rabbi Aha bar Hanina.

And the blasts of the eve of Shabbat have already been taught to us by the tanna concerning an ordinary eve of Shabbat.

Rather, Rava said: Because they do not sound for the filling of water on Shabbat,

since they filled the water on the eve of Shabbat,

for they are greatly reduced.

And therefore the many blasts that were for the purpose of filling the water are reduced on it, as are the blasts of the eve of Shabbat, and they do not reach forty-eight blasts.

And there is another difficulty to Rabbi Aha:

And let it also teach: Rosh Hashanah that occurs on Shabbat, for there are

in it

three additional offerings:

:

the additional offering of Rosh Hashanah, the additional offering of the new moon, and the additional offering of Shabbat.

And according to his words, that they sound nine blasts for each sacrifice, one should add to it twenty-seven blasts beyond the twenty-one blasts of every day, and together they are forty-eight; so let the tanna teach us the law of Rabbi Aha!? And we answer:

The eve of Shabbat during the festival was necessary for him—

—

to teach us in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

And we refute this:

Is that what he said

—did the one who raised the objection, “And let it teach Rosh Hashanah that occurs on Shabbat,” raise the objection

“Let it teach this, and not teach that”!?

Let it teach this and let it teach that

—his objection was that the tanna should teach both of them.

And we answer:

The tanna

taught the eve of Shabbat during the festival

and omitted

Rosh Hashanah that occurs on Shabbat.

And we inquire about it:

What did he omit

—what else did the tanna omit—

that he omitted this

one? For the tanna mentions one matter and omits those similar to it only when there are two omitted matters, but not when only one matter is omitted, for then the tanna mentions both of them.

And we answer:

He omitted the eve of Passover,

for at the time of slaughtering the Passover offering they would sound twenty-seven blasts during the recitation of the Hallel, when each group would recite the Hallel three times, and they would sound three blasts for each and every recitation.