12th CYCLE DEDICATIONS
 
ROSH HASHANAH 31-33 - Dedicated Dr. Shalom Kelman of Baltimore, MD. May the Zechus of helping thousands study the Torah provide a Refu'ah Sheleimah for his father, Dr. Herbert (Isser Chayim ben Itta Fruma) Kelman.

1)

(a)According to Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri in our Mishnah, the Shofar is not blown for the Pesukim of Malchuyos. Where are the Pesukim Malchuyos recited?

(b)Where are the three sets of Teki'os then blown?

(c)On what grounds does Rebbi Akiva disagree with Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri?

(d)Where are Malchuyos recited in his opinion, and when does one blow the three sets of Teki'os?

(e)What other major changes are there in the order of the first three Berachos and the last three Berachos in the Musaf of the Amidah of Rosh Hashanah?

1)

(a)According to Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri, the Shofar is not blown for the Pesukim of 'Malchuyos' - which are recited in the Berachah of Kedushas Hash-m.

(b)The three sets of Teki'os are blown - in Kedushas ha'Yom, Zichronos and Shofros.

(c)Rebbi Akiva disagrees with Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri - because, he argues, if one does not blow the Shofar for Malchuyos, then what is the point of saying them?

(d)In his opinion - Malchuyos are recited in Kedushas ha'Yom, and that is where one blows the first set, followed by Zichronos and Shofros.

(e)There are no other major changes in the order of the first three Berachos and the last three Berachos in the Musaf of the Amidah of Rosh Hashanah.

2)

(a)When Rebbi Akiva asks Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri 'If we don't blow by Malchuyos, then why do we mention them?', why can he not have meant this literally?

(b)So what did he mean?

(c)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Tehilim ...

1. ... "Havu la'Hashem Bnei Eilim"?

2. ... "Havu la'Hashem Kavod va'Oz"?

3. ... "Havu la'Hashem Kevod Shemo, Hishtachavu la'Hashem b'Hadras Kodesh"?

2)

(a)When Rebbi Akiva asks Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri that 'If we don't blow by Malchuyos, then why mention them?', he cannot have meant this literally - because we learn the recital of Malchuyos (Zichronos and Shofros) from Pesukim. Consequently, whether we blow Shofar together with them or not has no bearing on the obligation to recite them.

(b)What he really meant to ask was that, if, as Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri maintains, one does not blow for Malchuyos, then - seeing we draw a distinction between them and Zichronos and Shofros, why do we not also draw a distinction between the number of Pesukim that one recites by them (such as nine Pesukim instead of ten)?

(c)We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Havu la'Hashem Bnei Eilim" - to insert the Berachah of 'Avos' ('Magen Avraham') in the Amidah.

2. ... "Havu la'Hashem Kavod va'Oz" - to insert 'Gevuros' ('Mechayeh ha'Meisim').

3. ... "Havu la'Hashem Kevod She'mo, Hishtachavu la'Hashem b'Hadras Kodesh" - to insert 'Kedushos' ('ha'Kel ha'Kadosh').

3)

(a)The Torah writes in Emor "Shabason Zichron Teru'ah Mikra Kodesh". What does Rebbi Eliezer learn from ...

1. ... "Shabason"?

2. ... "Zichron"?

3. ... "Teru'ah"?

4. ... "Mikra Kodesh"?

(b)On what grounds does Rebbi Akiva disagree with his Rebbe? What does "Shabason" refer to, according to him?

(c)And what does he then learn from "Mikra Kodesh"?

3)

(a)The Torah writes in Emor "Shabason Zichron Teru'ah Mikra Kodesh". Rebbi Eliezer learns from ...

1. ... "Shabason" - to say 'Kedushas ha'Yom' in the Amidah.

2. ... "Zichron" - to say 'Zichronos'.

3. ... "Teru'ah" - to say 'Shofros'.

4. ... "Mikra Kodesh" - to sanctify Rosh Hashanah by refraining from doing Melachah on it.

(b)Rebbi Akiva disagrees with his Rebbe on the grounds that - since the major issue of Yom-Tov (dealt with in this Pasuk) is that of abstaining from Melachah, it would be more logical to ascribe that to the first word of the Derashah ("Shabason"), rather than the last ("Mikra Kodesh")?

(c)"Mikra Kodesh" he therefore says, comes to teach us - to insert 'Kedushas ha'Yom' in the Amidah.

4)

(a)What does Rebbi (who is coming to explain Rebbi Akiva) learn from "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem ... uva'Chodesh ha'Shevi'i"?

(b)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah argues with Rebbi. In his opinion, this Derashah is not necessary, because we can derive Malchuyos from the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "v'Hayu Lachem l'Zikaron ... Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" (in connection with the trumpets). How would we learn Malchuyos from there?

(c)Why should one include Kedushas ha'Yom in ...

1. ... Malchuyos, according to Rebbi (like Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah)?

2. ... Zichronos, according to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel?

4)

(a)Rebbi (who is coming to explain Rebbi Akiva) learns from "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem ... uva'Chodesh ha'Shevi'i" - to say Malchuyos in the seventh month (on Rosh Hashanah).

(b)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah argues with Rebbi. In his opinion, this Derashah is not necessary, because we can derive Malchuyos from the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "v'Hayu Lachem l'Zikaron ... Ani Hash-m Elokeichem" (in connection with the trumpets) - to teach us that wherever there are Zichronos, there are Malchuyos.

(c)One should include 'Kedushas ha'Yom' in ...

1. ... Malchuyos, according to Rebbi (like Rebbi Akiva in our Mishnah) - because it is the fourth Berachah (which is where 'Kedushas ha'Yom' is said on every other Yom-Tov).

2. ... Zichronos, according to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel - because it is the middle Berachah (seeing as on Rosh Hashanah at Musaf the Amidah contains nine Berachos, instead of the usual seven) which is where it is said on every other Yom-Tov.

5)

(a)What did Raban Shimon ben Gamliel comment in Usha one Rosh Hashanah ...

1. ... when Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah included Malchuyos in Kedushas Hash-m on Rosh Hashanah (like Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri)?

2. ... when, on the second day, Rebbi Chanina Beno shel Rebbi Yosi Hagelili included it in Zichronos, like Rebbi Akiva?

(b)But how can Raban Shimon ben Gamliel agree with Rebbi Chanina Beno shel Rebbi Yosi Hagelili, when he specifically disagrees with Rebbi Akiva (because in his opinion, one includes Kedushas ha'Yom in Zichronos, and not in Malchuyos)?

(c)What is the problem with 'the second day' mentioned by the Beraisa? Why can it not be taken literally?

(d)So what did the Tana mean?

5)

(a)Raban Shimon ben Gamliel commented in Usha one Rosh Hashanah ...

1. ... when Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah included Malchuyos in 'Kedushas Hashem' (like Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri) - that that was not* the custom in Yavneh.

2. ... when, on the second day, Rebbi Chanina Beno shel Rebbi Yosi Hagelili included it in Zichronos, like Rebbi Akiva - that this was the custom in Yavneh.

(b)Raban Shimon ben Gamliel agreed with Chanina Beno shel Rebbi Yosi Hagelili, not with regard to the location of Kedushas ha'Yom (with which he specifically argues) - but with the fact that Malchuyos is said in the fourth Berachah, with the result that one blows Shofar then.

(c)The problem with 'the second day' mentioned by the Beraisa - is from Rav who said that since the time of Ezra up until his time, Elul had never been a full month (so how could there have been two days Rosh Hashanah in the time of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel (before the Minhag of always observing two days came into effect)?

(d)What the Tana really meant by the 'second day' - was on a second occasion (i.e. a year later).

6)

(a)According to the Tana Kama in our Mishnah, one inserts a minimum of ten Pesukim for Malchuyos, ten for Zichronos and ten for Shofros. What does Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri say?

(b)What does Rebbi Levi mean when he ascribed the ten Pesukim to the ten 'Hilulim'?

(c)According to Rav Yosef, they correspond to the Aseres ha'Dibros. What does Rebbi Yochanan ascribe them to?

(d)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Tehilim "bi'Devar Hash-m Shamayim Na'asu"? What difficulty do we dispel with that?

6)

(a)According to the Tana Kama, one inserts a minimum of ten Pesukim for Malchuyos, ten for Zichronos and ten for Shofros. Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri says - a minimum of three Pesukim for each.

(b)When Rebbi Levi ascribed the ten Pesukim to the ten Hilulim - he meant the ten "Haleluhu's" in Tehilim (Kapitel 150).

(c)According to Rav Yosef, they correspond to the Aseres ha'Dibros. Rebbi Yochanan ascribed them to - the ten commands with which Hash-m created the world.

(d)We learn from the Pasuk in Tehilim "bi'Devar Hash-m Shamayim Na'asu" - that Hash-m created the world with words (and not with physical acts). Consequently, "Bereishis" tenth command (which is otherwise missing).

7)

(a)When Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri rules that if one said three Pesukim from each, he is Yotzei, we are not at first sure what he means. What are the two possible explanations of his statement?

(b)According to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, l'Chatchilah one inserts ten Pesukim of Malchuyos ... b'Di'eved, three. What does Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri say?

(c)How do we resolve our original She'eilah from there?

7)

(a)When Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri said that if one said three from each, he is Yotzei, we were not at first sure what he means - three from Torah, three from Nevi'im and three from Kesuvim (which one says by Malchuyos, Zichronos and Shofros); or whether he means three Pesukim (one from Torah, one from Nevi'im and one from Kesuvim) together with Malchuyos, three with Zichronos and three with Shofros.

(b)According to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, one inserts ten Pesukim of Malchuyos ... l'Chatchilah; b'Di'eved, three. Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri says: l'Chatchilah, seven from all of them, b'Di'eved, three.

(c)We resolve our She'eilah from the fact that Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri requires seven of each, l'Chatchilah. If he meant seven Pesukim of Torah, seven of Nevi'im and seven of Kesuvim - then he would turn out to be more stringent than the Tana Kama; whereas it is clear from his original statement, that he is coming to be more lenient than him (because he said 'three' against the Tana Kama's 'ten').

8)

(a)Some ascribe the minimum three Pesukim of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri in our Mishnah to Torah, Nevi'im and Kesuvim. What do others say?

(b)To what do the seven Pesukim (b'Di'eved of the Tana Kama - and presumably the seven l'Chatchilah of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri) correspond?

(c)Like whom is the Halachah?

8)

(a)Some ascribe the minimum three Pesukim of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri in our Mishnah to Torah, Nevi'im and Kesuvim - others, to the three sections of Klal Yisrael, Kohanim, Leviyim and Yisraelim.

(b)The seven Pesukim (b'Di'eved of the Tana Kama - and presumably the seven l'Chatchilah of Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri) correspond to the seven heavens (via which the tone of the Shofar ascends to Hash-m's Throne).

(c)The Halachah (at least as far as b'Di'eved is concerned) is like Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri.

32b----------------------------------------32b

9)

(a)Which kind of Pesukim of punishment are we permitted to insert among the Malchuyos, Zichronos and Shofros?

(b)In which order must the Pesukim from Tanach be inserted, according to ...

1. ... the Tana Kama?

2. ... Rebbi Yosi?

(c)The Navi Yechezkel warns us that Hash-m will, if need be, "rule over us with a strong hand ... and with seething wrath". What did Rav Nachman comment on this Pasuk?

(d)Does this mean that it is in order to insert it in the Pesukim of Malchuyos?

9)

(a)We are permitted to insert - Pesukim of punishment of the nations of the world, but not of Yisrael.

(b)The order of the Pesukim from Tanach according to ...

1. ... the Tana Kama - is Torah, Kesuvim, Nevi'im.

2. ... Rebbi Yosi - Torah, Nevi'im, Kesuvim, Torah.

(c)The Navi Yechezkel warns us that Hash-m will, if need be, "rule over us with a strong hand ... and with seething wrath" - on which Rav Nachman commented 'Let Hash-m only be so angry with us, as long as He redeems us from Galus.

(d)It is nevertheless not in order to insert it in the Pesukim of Malchuyos - because it was said in an angry tone.

10)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi, one may insert the Pasuk from Vayera "va'Hashem Pakad es Sarah ... ". On what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah disagree with him?

(b)Why is this Pasuk not invalid even according to Rebbi Yosi (who considers Pikdonos like Zichronos), because it is Pikdonos d'Yachid?

(c)Rebbi Yosi counts the Pesukim in Tehilim "Se'u She'arim Rosheichem ... v'Yavo Melech ha'Kavod. Mi Zeh Melech ha'Kavod ... " and "Zamru Elokim ... l'Malkenu Zamru, Ki Melech Kol ha'Aretz Elokim", as two Malchuyos. Rebbi Yehudah disagrees. Why, according to him, is ...

1. ... "Se'u She'arim Rosheichem ... v'Yavo Melech ha'Kavod. Mi Zeh Melech ha'Kavod ... "?

2. ... "Zamru Elokim ... l'Malkenu Zamru, Ki Melech Kol ha'Aretz Elokim" ... counted as only one Malchus?

(d)Is a reference to Hash-m's Throne considered a Pasuk of Malchus?

10)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi, one may insert the Pasuk from Vayeira "va'Hashem Pakad es Sarah ... ". Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with him - on the grounds that 'Pikdonos' are not the same as Zichronos (see above 16a.).

(b)This Pasuk is only invalid according to Rebbi Yehudah who holds that Pikdonos are not like Zichronos, but not according to Rebbi Yosi, because of Pikdonos d'Yachid - because it refers to the birth of one of the fathers of Klal Yisrael (and is therefore considered Pikdonos d'Rabim).

(c)Rebbi Yosi counts the Pesukim in Tehilim "Se'u She'arim Rosheichem ... v'Yavo Melech ha'Kavod. Mi Zeh Melech ha'Kavod? ... " and "Zamru Elokim ... l'Malkenu Zamru, Ki Melech Kol ha'Aretz Elokim", as two Malchuyos. Rebbi Yehudah counts ...

1. ... "Se'u She'arim Rosheichem ... v'Yavo Melech ha'Kavod. Mi Zeh Melech ha'Kavod? ... " as only one Malchus - because the latter Pasuk is in the form of a question, and not a statement.

2. ... "Zamru Elokim ... l'Malkenu Zamru, Ki Melech Kol ha'Aretz Elokim" - as only one Malchus - because in the first Pasuk, Hash-m is described as our King, and not as King of the world.

(d)A reference to Hash-m's Throne is not considered a Pasuk of Malchus according to either Tana - that is why the Pasuk in Tehilim "Malach Elokim al Goyim Elokim Yashav al Kisei Kodsho" is only counted as one Malchus, and not as two.

11)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi, a Pasuk that contains both 'Zikaron' and 'Teru'ah' can be inserted both in Zichronos and in Shofros, and the same principle applies to a Pasuk that contains both 'Malchus' and 'Teru'ah'. What does Rebbi Yehudah say about a Pasuk that contains ...

1. ... both 'Zikaron' and 'Teru'ah'?

2. ... both 'Malchus' and 'Teru'ah'?

(b)Rebbi Yosi permits inserting a Pasuk which contains 'Teru'ah' in Shofros. What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

11)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi, a Pasuk that contains both 'Zikaron' and 'Teru'ah' can be inserted both in Zichronos and in Shofros, and the same principle applies to a Pasuk that contains both 'Malchus' and 'Teru'ah'. According to Rebbi Yehudah, a Pasuk that contains ...

1. ... both 'Zikaron' and 'Teru'ah' - can only be inserted in Zichronos.

2. ... both 'Malchus' and 'Teru'ah' - can only be inserted in Malchuyos.

(b)Rebbi Yosi permits inserting a Pasuk which contains 'Teru'ah' in Shofros. Rebbi Yehudah maintains that Teru'ah is not a Lashon of Shofar (presumably because it pertains equally well to trumpets).

12)

(a)With which section of Tanach should one conclude the Pesukim, according to Rebbi Yosi?

(b)How do we therefore emend his statement in the Mishnah 've'Im Hishlim ba'Torah, Yatza'(implying b'Di'eved)?

(c)Rebbi Yehudah does not consider any of the three following Pesukim in the Torah valid to be inserted in Malchuyos: "Shema Yisrael ... "; "v'Yada'ta ha'Yom va'Hashevosa el Levavecha"; "Ata Har'eisa la'Da'as Ki Hash-m Hu ha'Elokim ... ". What does Rebbi Yosi say?

(d)Why is Rebbi Yosi's opinion here particularly significant?

12)

(a)According to Rebbi Yosi - one should conclude the Pesukim with one from Torah.

(b)We therefore emend his statement in the Mishnah 've'Im Hishlim ba'Torah, Yatza' (b'Di'eved) to read - 've'Im Hishlim ba'Navi, Yatza'.

(c)Rebbi Yehudah does not consider any of the three following Pesukim in the Torah valid to be inserted in Malchuyos: "Shema Yisrael ... "; "v'Yada'ta ha'Yom va'Hashevosa el Levavecha"; "Ata Har'eisa la'Da'as Ki Hash-m Hu ha'Elokim ... " - Rebbi Yosi permits all of them. (Note: Rebbi in question 4a., as well as Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah in 4b. [who both learn Malchuyos from "Ani Hash-m Elokeichem"] seem to concur with the opinion of Rebbi Yosi here.)

(d)Rebbi Yosi's opinion is particularly significant here - because otherwise, his previous statement (that one concludes with a Pasuk from Torah), would be meaningless, seeing as according to him, one requires four Pesukim of Malchuyos, and without these three, there are only three altogether ("Hash-m Elokav Imo, u'Seru'as Melech Bo" [Balak]; "Vayehi bi'Yeshurun Melech ... " [ve'Zos ha'Berachah], and "Hash-m Yimloch Le'olam Va'ed" [Beshalach]).

13)

(a)Hallel is said during Shacharis, whereas the Shofar is blown during Musaf. What reason ...

1. ... do we initially give for the latter statement?

2. ... do we give for saying Hallel during Shacharis (despite the fact that there are more people in Shul for Musaf)?

(b)Having said that, why did Chazal institute blowing the Shofar only at Musaf?

(c)How do we deduce from our Mishnah that Hallel is not said on Rosh Hashanah?

13)

(a)Hallel is said during Shacharis, whereas the Shofar is blown during Musaf. The reason ...

1. ... that we initially gave for the latter - is because, based on the fact that there are more people in Shul for Musaf than there are for Shacharis, we follow the principle 'be'Rov Am Hadras Melech'.

2. ... that we give for saying Hallel during Shacharis (despite the fact that there are more people in Shul for Musaf) - is because of the principle 'Zerizin Makdimin l'Mitzvos' (that one should always perform a Mitzvah as soon as possible). Note, that from here we see that 'Zerizin Makdimin l'Mitzvos' overrides that of 'be'Rov Am Hadras Melech'.

(b)That being the case, the reason that Chazal instituted blowing the Shofar only at Musaf - is because, after having issued a decree forbidding the blowing of the Shofar, the enemy used to lie in wait to see whether the Jews would adhere to their decree. When by midday, they saw that the Shofar had not been blown, they would go away. So Chazal decreed that the Shofar should only be blown then (see also Tosfos DH 'be'Sha'as'), after the enemy had departed.

(c)We deduce from our Mishnah that Hallel is not said on Rosh Hashanah - from the Lashon 'uve'Sha'as Hallel', which suggests another day other than that of Rosh Hashanah, to which the previous statement was referring.

14)

(a)Why did Chazal not introduce its recital?

(b)Who was Rebbi Avahu citing when he said this?

(c)To whom did Hash-m say it?

14)

(a)Chazal did not introduce its recital Hallel is not said on Rosh Hashanah - because of the Sevara 'How can one possibly say Hallel at a time when Hash-m is sitting on the Throne of judgment, and the Books of those who are going to live and of those who are going to die (that year), are open before Him'?

(b)When Rebbi Avahu said this, he was reciting Hash-m ...

(c)... who said it in response to the angels' question.

15)

(a)Our Mishnah forbids crossing the Techum Shabbos on Yom-Tov, moving a pile of rubble, climbing a tree, or contravening any other Isur (d'Oraisa or d'Rabanan) in order to hear the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah. Why is that?

(b)May one pour water or wine in the Shofar on Yom-Tov to clear it? Why might it be forbidden?

(c)What do we mean when we ask on the Mishnah (that forbids first crossing the Techum and moving a pile of rubble, and then climbing a tree and riding an animal in order to hear the Shofar), 'Hashta d'Rabanan Amrat Lo, d'Oraisa Miba'i'? Which Isur d'Oraisa is this referring to?

(d)What is the answer?

15)

(a)It is forbidden to cross the Techum on Yom-Tov, move a pile of rubble, climb a tree, or contravene any other Isur (d'Oraisa or d'Rabanan) in order to hear the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah - because Yom-Tov is both an Aseh and a Lo Sa'aseh - which the Aseh of Shofar does not have the power to override (presumably, the reason why the Mitzvah of Shofar does not even override the Isurim d'Rabanan of Yom-Tov, is because the Rabanan gave their Isurim the power of a d'Oraisa ('ke'Ein d'Oraisa Tiknu').

(b)One may pour water or wine into the Shofar on Yom-Tov to clear it - in spite of the fact that it resembles the Isur of 'Tikun Mana'.

(c)When we ask on the Mishnah (that forbids first crossing the Techum and moving a pile of rubble, and then climbing a tree and riding an animal in order to hear the Shofar), 'Hashta d'Rabanan Amrat Lo, d'Oraisa Miba'i' - it means to ask that having forbidden the Isur of Techum and that of removing a pile of rubble (which do not lead to the transgression of any Isur d'Oraisa), in order to hear the Shofar, why did the Tana need to forbid riding an animal (which Chazal only prohibited because it might lead to an Isur d'Oraisa (breaking off the branch of a tree)? Is that not obvious? Rashi however, erases this entire section from the text, because this is not what the Kashya implies.

(d)The answer is that this Mishnah takes on the unusual format of 'Zu v'Ein Tzarich Lomar Zu' ('this and it is unnecessary to mention that').

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF