2) HALACHAH: ANATOMY OF THE ROSH HASHANAH MUSAF SHEMONEH ESREH
The Gemara discusses which verses may be used as the ten verses in each of the three sections of the Musaf Shemoneh Esreh on Rosh Hashanah -- Malchiyos, Zichronos, and Shofros. Although the Shemoneh Esreh of Musaf which appears in today's Machzorim generally reflects the conclusions of the Gemara, there are a number of specific practices in today's Musaf which do not seem to conform with the Gemara's conclusions.

(a) The Gemara discusses an argument whether the verses of "Se'u She'arim Rosheichem" (Tehilim 24:7-10), which include several mentions of Hashem's Kingship, are considered three mentions of Malchiyos or five. In the text of the Shemoneh Esreh of Rosh Hashanah recited today, two verses from Kesuvim are recited in addition to the verses of "Se'u She'arim." Apparently, the verses of "Se'u She'arim" count as only one verse of Malchiyos. The Gemara, however, says that they count at least as three verses of Malchiyos.

The ROSH answers that when the Gemara says that ten verses must be recited, it is giving the minimum number of verses. We certainly are permitted to mention additional verses of Malchiyos. Accordingly, we mention two additional verses of Malchiyos from Kesuvim besides the verses of "Se'u She'arim," even though there are already ten verses of Malchiyos (as the verses of "Se'u She'arim" count as either three or five).

(b) We recite as one of the ten verses of Zichronos the verse, "Hash-m remembered Noach" (Bereishis 8:1). Why do we recite this verse? The Gemara says that we do not mention a Zikaron which is associated with an individual and not with the Tzibur.

The answer is that the Gemara itself allows the recitation of the verse, "Hash-m remembered Sarah" (Bereishis 21:1), even though it is a Zikaron of an individual, because "many people (the entire Jewish nation) came from her" through this Zikaron. Similarly, since the entire world was repopulated through Noach, the Zikaron of Noach counts as a Zikaron of many people.

This explains why we introduce the verse, "Hash-m remembered Noach," in the Shemoneh Esreh with a declaration that Hash-m saved Noach "in order to make his children as numerous as the dust of the earth and his offspring like the sand of the sea." Noach's repopulation of the world is what justifies mentioning the verse even though it seems to be a Zikaron of an individual. (M. Kornfeld)

(c) In the section of Shofros, besides the three verses of Shofros from Kesuvim, we recite the entire chapter of "Haleluhu b'Teka Shofar" (Tehilim 150). Since we have already recited three verses of Shofros, why do we add these verses from Tehilim?

The ROSH cites the RAVYAH who says that we recite this chapter of Tehilim (which mentions the blowing of the Shofar) because we never properly concluded the Shofros section with a tenth verse from the Torah. The verse from the Torah mentions "Teki'ah" and "Chatzotzeros" (Bamidbar 10:10) but does not mention "Teru'ah" or "Shofar," and therefore it does not count as one of the ten verses of Shofros. It must be that this verse is mentioned only as part of the blessing (because its mention of Teki'ah relates to Rosh Hashanah) but not as one of the verses of Shofros. Accordingly, we recite "Haleluhu b'Teka Shofar" to complete the number of ten verses of Shofros. Even though this passage is from Kesuvim, and the Mishnah says that we should conclude with a verse from the Torah, we are permitted to end with a verse from Kesuvim or Nevi'im as the Gemara said.

The Rosh rejects this suggestion. He asserts that the verse from the Torah which mentions Teki'ah does count as the tenth verse of Shofros even though it does not mention Teru'ah or Shofar. "Teki'ah" is the same as "Teru'ah"; both count as a verse of Shofros. The reason why we say the verses of "Haleluhu b'Teka Shofar" is merely to recite additional verses of Shofros, for we are allowed to add extra verses to the minimum number of ten (as the Rosh explained earlier). (The Rosh cites support for this approach from the Sifri.)

The AVUDRAHAM adds that there is good reason to mention these extra verses from Tehilim: the Gemara itself (32a) lists these verses (the ten Haleluhu's) as the source for saying ten verses of Malchiyos, Zichronos, and Shofros.

3) AGADAH: THE ACCEPTANCE OF HASHEM'S KINGSHIP ON ROSH HASHANAH
QUESTION: The Gemara discusses a dispute whether the verse, "Shema Yisrael Hash-m Elokeinu Hash-m Echad," is considered a verse of Malchiyos such that it counts as one of the ten verses which must be recited in the Musaf Shemoneh Esreh of Rosh Hashanah.

RAV YITZCHAK HUTNER zt'l (in PACHAD YITZCHAK, Rosh Hashanah, Ma'amar 11) asks that the Gemara earlier (32a) says that "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" is the source for reciting verses of Malchiyos. Why, then, is there any argument whether the verse of Shema Yisrael counts as an expression of Malchiyos? The words "Hash-m Elokeinu" in the verse of Shema Yisrael should be the ideal expression of Malchiyos, because the verse of "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" is the undisputed source for Malchiyos!

Conversely, when one recites Keri'as Shema he must recite the verse in its entirety, including the words "Hash-m Echad," in order to properly fulfill the Mitzvah to accept Hashem's Kingship upon oneself. If he omits the words "Hash-m Echad," he has not properly expressed his acceptance of Hashem's Kingship; the words "Hash-m Elokeinu" are not sufficient. Why, then, is "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" a valid source for reciting Malchiyos if those words do not fully express Hashem's Kingship?

Another difference exists between the acceptance of Malchus Shamayim of Keri'as Shema and the acceptance of Malchus Shamayim in the blessing of Malchiyos on Rosh Hashanah. In Keri'as Shema, one accepts upon himself the Kingship of Hash-m with an emphasis on the love of Hash-m, "*v'Ahavta* Es Hash-m." On Rosh Hashanah, in contrast, one accepts upon himself the Kingship of Hash-m with an emphasis on the fear of Hash-m (as Rosh Hashanah is the first day of the "Yamim Nora'im," the Days of Awe). What is the basis for this difference?

ANSWER: RAV HUTNER zt'l cites the words of Rashi on the verse of Shema Yisrael. Rashi explains that the verse means, "Listen, O Israel: Hash-m, Who is our G-d now in this world, will be One G-d [accepted by all people] in the World to Come." This principle is expressed in the Gemara in Pesachim (50a) which says that in this world Hash-m is not recognized by all as One. The Gemara adds that in this world man does not recognize the singular goodness behind all that happens. Consequently, in this world a person recites one blessing for bad tidings ("Dayan ha'Emes") and a different blessing for good tidings ("ha'Tov veha'Metiv"). Times of suffering appear to be times of strict judgment and punishment, while times of prosperity appear to be times of mercy and goodness. Olam ha'Ba will be different; there, one will recite one blessing, "ha'Tov veha'Metiv," on all that happens, because "on that day Hash-m will be One and His Name will be One" (Zecharyah 14:9). (See Insights to Pesachim 50:1.)

Rav Hutner explains that man's mission on Rosh Hashanah is to accept Hash-m as King in this world according to the limits of his perception in this world. A person in this world cannot fathom the concept of Hashem's Kingship the way it will be revealed in the World to Come when "Hash-m will be One and His Name will be One." In this world, we do not see Hash-m as Echad, but rather as both "Dayan ha'Emes" and "ha'Tov veha'Metiv." Therefore, when we accept upon ourselves Hashem's sovereignty on Rosh Hashanah, we must do so with the expression of "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" -- without the additional "Hash-m Echad" -- "Hash-m is One." This verse expresses the way we perceive Hash-m as King in this world. The acceptance of Hash-m as King the way He will be perceived in the future is not part of our present experience, and thus such an acceptance cannot comprise a full-hearted acceptance of Malchus Shamayim.

In contrast, in our acceptance of Hashem's sovereignty in Keri'as Shema, we proclaim our belief in the way Hash-m will be recognized in the future when His true Oneness will be revealed to and perceived by all. Accordingly, one does not fulfill his obligation properly if he recites Shema Yisrael without the words "Hash-m Echad," for he omits the essential component of the future acceptance of Hashem's sovereignty, that Hash-m will be recognized as One. On Rosh Hashanah, however, these words are not an ideal expression of the this-worldly Kingship of Hash-m which we proclaim in Malchiyos. (Even though the verse "Shema Yisrael" also contains the words "Hash-m Elokeinu," that phrase is not the main point of the verse and thus "Shema Yisrael" does not count as a verse of Malchiyos. Alternatively, the phrase "Hash-m Elokeinu" in the verse is not an expression of our acceptance of Hash-m as King, but it is a statement of fact: "Hash-m, Who right now is our G-d...." In order to be considered a verse of Malchiyos, the verse must contain an acceptance of Hash-m as King and not merely be a statement of the fact that Hash-m is our G-d. See PACHAD YITZCHAK, ibid. #22.)

This also explains the emphasis in Keri'as Shema on the love of Hash-m ("v'Ahavta"). Keri'as Shema refers to the time in the future when we will perceive Hash-m as "ha'Tov veha'Metiv" and we will be drawn to Hash-m through our love for Him. In this world, in contrast, when we accept Hash-m as our King as we perceive Him now -- as the judge of mankind, "Dayan ha'Emes," and as "ha'Tov veha'Metiv" -- we accept His Kingship through an expression of awe and fear.