Tractate Rosh Hashana
Regulations concerning the New Year's Day when it falls on Sabbath, and the prayers thereon-the ordinances of the Benedictions, etc.
MISHNA: When the feast of New Year happened to fall on the Sabbath, they used to sound (the cornet) in the Temple, but not outside of it. After the destruction of the Temple R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai ordained that they should sound (the cornet) in every place in which there was a Beth Din. R. Elazar says that R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai instituted that for Yamnia alone; but they (the sages) say the rule applied both to Yamnia. and every place in which there was a Beth Din. And in this respect also was Jerusalem privileged more than Yamnia, that every city from which Jerusalem could be seen, or the sounding (of the cornet) could be heard, which was near enough, and to which it was allowed to go on the Sabbath, might sound the (cornet) on the Sabbath; but in Yamnia they sounded (the cornet) before the Beth Din only.
GEMARA: Whence do we deduce all this? Said Rabha: The rabbis took a precautionary measure concerning them, as said: Although the duty of sounding (the cornet) is obligatory upon all, yet all are not skilled in sounding (it); therefore they feared lest one might take (the cornet) in his hand, and go to an expert and carry it more than four ells in public ground. The same rule applies to the palm branch (Iulabh) and also to the scroll (on which is written the) Book of Esther.
"After the destruction of the. Temple, R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai ordained," etc. The rabbis taught: Once it happened that New Year's Day fell on the Sabbath, and all the cities gathered together. Said R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai to the Bne Bathera: 1 "Let us sound (the cornet)." "First," said they, "let us discuss." "Let us sound it," replied he, "and then we will discuss." After they had sounded (the cornet) they said to him: "Now let us discuss." He answered: "The cornet has now been heard in Yamnia, and we cannot retract after the act has been performed."
"But they (the sages) say the rule applied both to Yamnia and everyplace in which there is a Beth Din." Said R. Huna: That means in the presence of the Beth Din. Does this preclude people from sounding (the cornet) out of the presence of the Beth Din? And, when R. Itzhak bar Joseph came (from Yamnia) did he not say: When the officiant ministers appointed by the congregation in Yamnia had finished sounding (the cornet) one could not hear his own voice on account of the sounds (of the cornets) used by individuals? (Even individuals) used to sound (the cornet) in the presence of the Beth Din. It was also taught: Rabbi said, "We may only sound (the cornet) during the time that the Beth Din is accustomed to sit."
"Jerusalem was privileged more than Yamnia," etc. (When the Mishna speaks of) "Every city from which Jerusalem could be seen," it means with the exception of a city located in the valley (from which it could be seen only by ascending to an elevated spot); by "the sounding (of the cornet) could be heard," it means to except a city located on the top of a mountain; by "which was near enough," it means to exclude a city outside the prescribed limit (of a Sabbath journey); and by "and to which it was allowed to go," it means to exclude a city (even near by) but divided (from Jerusalem) by a river.
MISHNA: Formerly the palm branch (lulabh) was taken to the Temple seven days, but in cities outside (of Jerusalem) it was taken (to the synagogue) one day. Since the destruction of the Temple, R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai ordained that the palm branch should everywhere be taken seven days, in commemoration of the Temple, and also it should be prohibited (to eat the new produce) the whole day of waving (the sheaf-offering; vide Lev. xxiii. 11-15).
GEMARA: Whence do we know that we do things in commemoration of the Temple? It is written [Jer. xxx. 17]: "For I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds, saith the Lord, because they called thee an outcast, saying, This is Zion whom no man seeketh after." By implication (we see) that it (Zion or the Temple) needs being sought after (or commemorated).
"And that it should be prohibited to eat . . . on the whole day of waving (the sheaf-offering)," etc. R. Na'hman b. Itzhak remarked: R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai says this according to the system of R. Jehudah, for it is written [Lev. xxiii. 14]: "And ye shall eat neither parched corn . . . until the self-same day," i.e., until the very day itself, and he holds that whenever the expression "until" (ad) occurs it is inclusive. How can you say the above according to (R. Jehudah); surely he differs from R. Johanan ber Zakkai? As we have learnt in a Mishna: Since the destruction of the Temple R. Johanan b. Zakkai ordained that it should be prohibited (to eat of the new produce) the whole of the day of waving (the sheaf-offering). Said R. Jehudah: Is this not prohibited by the passage which says: "Until the self-same day"? R. Jehudah was mistaken; he thought that R. Johanan b. Zakkai taught that (the prohibition) was rabbinical, and it was not so, for R. Johanan also said it was biblical. But does the Mishna not say "he ordained"? Yes; but what does it mean by "he ordained"? (It means) he explained the ordinance.
MISHNA: Formerly they received evidence as to the appearance of the new moon the whole (of the thirtieth) day. Once the witnesses were delayed in coming, and they disturbed the songs of the Levites. They then ordained that evidence should only be received until (the time of) the afternoon service, and if witnesses came after that time both that and the following day were consecrated. After the destruction of the Temple, R. Johanan b. Zakkai ordained that evidence (as to the appearance) of the new moon should be received all day.
GEMARA: What disturbance did they cause to the songs of the Levites? Said R. Zera to A'hbha, his son: Go and teach to them (the Mishna) thus: "They ordained that evidence as to the appearance of the new moon should not be received, only that there might be time during the day to offer the continual and the additional sacrifices and their drink offerings, and to chant the (daily) song without disturbing the order."
We have learned in a Boraitha: R. Jehudah said in the name of R. Aqiba, What (song) did (the Levites) chant on the first day of the week? "The earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof" [Ps. xxiv.], because He is the Creator, the Providence and the Ruler of the Universe. What did they sing on the second day? "Great is the Lord and greatly to be praised" [Ps. xlviii.], because He distributed His works and reigned over them. On the third day they sang, "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty" [Ps. lxxxii.], because He, in His wisdom, made the earth appear and prepared the world for its occupants. On the fourth day they sang, "O Lord, to whom retribution belongeth" [Ps. xciv.], because (on that day) He created the sun and moon, and (determined) to punish in the future those who would worship them. On the fifth day they sang, "Sing aloud unto God our strength" [Ps. lxxxi.], because (on that day) He created birds and fish to praise Him. On the sixth day they sang, "The Lord reigneth, He is clothed with majesty" [Ps. xciii.], because (on that day) He finished His works and reigned over them. On the seventh day they sang, "A Psalm or Song for the Sabbath Day" [Ps. xcii.], for the day that is a perfect rest.
Said R. Nehemiah: "Why did the sages make a distinction between these sections (for the last refers to a future event, while all the others refer to the past)? It should have been said that they sang that Psalm on the Sabbath day because He rested!"
What did the Levites sing when the additional sacrifices were being offered on the Sabbath? R. Hanan bar Rabha said in the name of Rabh: Six sections of Deut. xxxii. 1 R. Hanan bar Rabha also said in the name of Rabh: "As these sections were divided (by the Levites), so they are divided for the reading of the law (on the Sabbath on which they are read)." What did they sing at the Sabbath afternoon service? Said R. Jo'hanan: A portion of the Song of Moses [Ex. xv. 1-10]; the conclusion of that song [ibid. 11-19], and the Song of Israel [Numb. xxi. 17].
The schoolmen asked: Did they sing all these on one Sabbath, or did they, perhaps, sing one section on each Sabbath? Come and hear! A Boraitha teaches: During the time that the first choir of (Levites who sang at the time of the additional sacrifice) sang their sections once, the second choir (that sang at that time of the afternoon sacrifice) had sung theirs twice; from this we may deduce that they sang but one section on each Sabbath.
R. Jehudah b. Idi said in the name of R. Jo'hanan: According to the rabbinical explanation of certain scriptural passages the Shekhinah made ten journeys, and according to tradition a corresponding number of times was the Sanhedrin exiled, viz.: from the cell of Gazith (in the Temple) to the market-place, from the market-place to Jerusalem, from Jerusalem to Yamnia from Yamnia to Usha, from Usha (back again) to Yamnia, from Yamnia (back again) to Usha, from Usha to Shapram, from Shapram to Beth Shearim, from Beth Shearim to Sepphoris, from Sepphoris to Tiberias, and Tiberias was the saddest of them all, as it is written [Is. xxix.]: "And thou shalt be low, and shalt speak out of the earth."
R. Elazar says they were exiled six times, as it is written [Is. xxvi. 5]: "For he bringeth down them that dwell on high; the lofty city he layeth low; he layeth it low even to the ground; he bringeth it even to the dust." Says R. Jo'hanan: And thence (from the dust) they will in future be redeemed, as it is written [Is. lii. 2]: "Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down," etc.
MISHNA: R. Joshua b. Kar'ha said: This also did R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai ordain: That it mattered not where the chief of the Beth Din might be, the witnesses need only go to the meeting-place (of the Beth Din).
GEMARA: A certain woman was summoned for judgment before Ameimar in Neherdai. Ameimar went away to Me'huzza, but she did not follow him, and he wrote a letter to put her in the ban. Said R. Ashi to Ameimar: "Have we not learned that it mattered not where the chief of the Beth Din might be, the witnesses need only go to the meeting place (of the Beth Din)?" Answered Ameimar: "That is true in respect to evidence for the new moon; but with regard to my action, in which case she has been summoned for debt, 'The borrower is servant to the lender,' and she must come to the place where the chief court is" [Prov. xxii. 7].
The rabbis taught: Priests may not ascend the platform in sandals to bless the people; and this is one of the nine ordinances instituted by R. Jo'hanan b. Zakkai; six are to be found in this chapter, one in the first chapter; another one is, if one become a proselyte nowadays, he must pay a quarter of a shekel for a sacrifice of a bird (so that if the Temple should be rebuilt the authorities would have a contribution from him towards the daily sacrifices). R. Simon b. Elazar, however, said that R. Jo'hanan had already withdrawn this regulation and annulled it, because it easily led to the sin (of using the money for different purposes). And what is the ninth (ordinance of R. Jo'hanan)? R. Papa and R. Na'hman b. Itz'hak dispute about this. R. Papa says it was with regard to a vineyard of the fourth year's crop; but R. Na'hman b. Itz'hak says it was with regard to the crimson-colored strap (displayed on the Day of Atonement (on the scapegoat).
MISHNA: The order of the benedictions (to be said on New Year is as follows): The blessings referring to the patriarchs (Abhoth), to the mighty power of God (Gebhuroth), and the sanctification of the Holy name; to these he adds the selection in which God is proclaimed King (Malkhioth), after which he does not sound the cornet; then the blessing referring to the sanctification of the day, after which the cornet is sounded; then the biblical selections referring to God's remembrance of His creatures (Zikhronoth), after which the cornet is again sounded; then the biblical selections referring to the sounding of the cornet (Shophroth), after which the cornet is again sounded; he then recites the blessings referring to the restoration of the Temple, the adoration of God, and the benediction of the priests. So is the decree of R. Johanan b. Nouri. Said R. Aqiba to him: If the cornet is not to be sounded after the Malkhioth, why are they mentioned? But the proper order is the following: The blessings referring to the patriarchs (Abhoth), to the mighty power of God (Gebhuroth), and the sanctification of the Holy name; to this last the biblical selections referring to the proclamation of God as King (Malkhioth) are joined, and then he sounds the cornet; then the biblical selections referring to God's remembrance of His creatures (Zikhronoth), and he then sounds the cornet; then the biblical selections referring to the sounding of the cornet (Shophroth), and he again sounds the cornet; then he says the blessings referring to the restoration of the Temple, the adoration of God, and the priestly benedictions.
GEMARA: The rabbis taught: Whence do we know that we should recite the Malkhioth, Zikhronoth, and Shophroth? Said R. Eliezer: From the passage [Lev. xxiii. 24] in which it is written: "Ye shall have a Sabbathon, a memorial of blowing cornets, a holy convocation," the word "Sabbathon" refers to the consecration of the day; "a memorial" refers to the Zikhronoth; "blowing of cornets" refers to the Shophroth; "a holy convocation" means the hallowing of the day in order to prohibit servile work. Said R. Aqiba to him: Why is not the word "Sabbathon" construed to mean the prohibition of servile work, since the passage (quoted above) begins with that? Therefore, let the passage be interpreted thus: "Sabbathon" means the hallowing of the day and the prohibition of servile work; "memorial" refers to the Zikhronoth; "blowing of the cornets" refers to the Shophroth "a holy convocation" means the consecration of the day.
Whence do we know that we should recite the Malkhioth? From the following Boraitha: Rabbi said: The words, "I am the Lord your God"; and "in the seven month" (stand together) [Lev. xxiii. 22, 24], which may be interpreted to refer to the proclamation of God as King. R. Jose b. R. Jehudah says it is not necessary to cite this passage; for it is written [Numb. x. 10] "that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the Lord your God." These concluding words "I am the Lord your God" are entirely superfluous, but since they are used, of what import are they? They form a general rule, that in every selection in which (God's) remembrance of His creatures is mentioned there should also be found the thought that He is the King of the Universe.
MISHNA: Not less than ten scriptural passages should be used for the Malkhioth, ten for the Zikhronoth, and ten for the Shophroth. R. Jo'hanan b. Nouri says: If by three of each class, one will have done his duty.
GEMARA: To what do the ten scriptural passages used for the Malkhioth correspond? Answered Rabbi: To the ten expressions of praise used by David in the Psalms. But there are more expressions of praise found? Only those are meant, in conjunction with which it is written "praise him with the sound of the cornet" [Psalm ci. 3]. R. Joseph says: "They correspond to the ten commandments that were proclaimed to Moses on Sinai." R. Jo'hanan said, they correspond to the ten words with which the universe was created.
"By three of each class, one will have done his duty." The schoolmen asked: "Does he mean three from the Pentateuch, three from the Prophets, and three from the Hagiographa, which would make nine, and they differ about one (passage)? or perhaps one from the Pentateuch and one from the Prophets and one from the Hagiographa, which would make three, and they differ about many passages?" Come and hear! We have learned in a Boraitha: Not less than ten scriptural passages should be used for the Malkhioth, ten for the Zikhronoth, and ten for the Shophroth; but if seven of them all were recited, corresponding to the seven heavens, the duty has been fulfilled. R. Johanan ben Nouri remarked: He that recites less (than ten of each) should not, however, recite less than seven; but if he recited but three, corresponding to the Pentateuch, Prophets, and Hagiographa, according to others corresponding to the Priests, Levites, and Israelites, it is sufficient. Said R. Huna in the name of Samuel: The Halakha prevails according to R. Jo'hanan b. Nouri.
MISHNA: We do not cite scriptural passages for the above three series that contain predictions of punishment. The passages from the Pentateuch are to be recited first, and those from the Prophets last. R. Jose, however, says "if the concluding passage is from the Pentateuch one has also done his duty."
GEMARA: Passages, proclaiming the kingdom of God that should not be used (because of the above), are such as the following [Ezekiel, xx. 33]: "As I live, saith the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out, I will rule over you," and although as R. Na'hman says (of this passage): Let Him be angry with us, but let Him take us out of captivity, still, since it refers to anger, we should not mention "anger" at the beginning of the year. An example of the same idea being found in conjunction with the Zikhronoth is to be read in [Ps. lxxviii. 39], "For he remembered they were but flesh;" in conjunction with the Shophroth an example is found in Hosea, v. 8: "Blow ye the cornet in Gibeah," etc.
We must not mention the remembrance of the individual (in the Zikhronoth) even if the passage speaks of pleasant things, as, for example [Ps. cvi. 4], "Remember me, O Lord, with the favor that thou bearest unto thy people." However, passages that contain the expression of "visiting" may be used in the Zikhronoth, e.g., "And the Lord visited Sarah" [Gen. xxi. 1] or "I have surely visited you" [Ex. iii. 16], so says R. Jose; but R. Jehudah says, they may not. But even if we agree to what R. Jose says (shall we say that) the passage "and the Lord visited Sarah" speaks of an individual (and therefore it should not be used)? Nay; since many descended from her, she is regarded as many and therefore that passage, though speaking of one only, is regarded as though it spoke of many.
(In the Malkhioth, they used Ps. xxiv. 7-10, which is divided into two parts.) The first part can be used as two of the required passages, and the second as three, so said R. Jose; but R. Jehudah said: The first part can be used only for one, and the second for two. 1 So too [Ps. xlvii. 7, 9], "Sing praises to God, sing praises, sing praises to our king, sing praises; for God is the King of all the earth." R. Jose said: This may be used for two of the Malkhioth; but R. Jehudah said: "It is to be reckoned as one only." (He rejects one, because the words "our king," referring to one people only, was not a sufficiently broad expression of praise for Him who is the King of the universe.) Both, however, agree that the next verse of the same Psalm, "God is King over the nations; God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness," is to be used for one only. A passage containing a reference to God's remembrance of His creatures and also to the cornet. as for instance [Lev. xxiii. 24], "Ye shall have a Sabbath, a memorial of blowing of cornets," may be used in the Zikhronoth and the Shophroth; so said R. Jose; but R. Jehudah said: It can only be used in the Zikhronoth. A passage in which God is proclaimed King, containing also a reference to the cornet, as for instance [Numb. xxiii. 2 1], "The Lord his God is with him, and the shout (Teruath) of a king is among them," may be used in the Malkhioth and in the Shophroth, said R. Jose; but R. Jehudah said: It may only be used in the Malkhioth. A passage containing a reference to the cornet, and nothing else, as for instance [Numb. xxix. 1], "It is a day of blowing the cornet," may be used for the Shophroth, so said R. Jose; R. Jehudah, however, said: Must not be used at all.
"The Passages from the Pentateuch are to be recited first and those from the Prophets last." R. Jose said: "We should conclude with a passage from the Pentateuch, but if one concluded with a passage from the Prophets, one has done his duty." We have also learned: R. Elazar bar R. Jose says: "The Vathiqin 1 used to conclude with a passage from the Pentateuch. It is correct as far as Zikhronoth and Shophroth are concerned, for there are many such passages; but as for the Malkhioth there are but three in the Pentateuch, viz.: "The Lord his God is with him, and the shout of a King is among them" [Numb. xxiii. 21]; "And he was king in Yeshurun" [Deut. xxxiii. 5]; and "The Lord shall reign forever" [Ex. xv. 18], but we require ten and there are not so many? Said R. Huna: We have learned that, according to R. Jose, the passage, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one" [Deut. vi. 4], may be considered as Malkhioth, but R. Jehudah said, it may not; so also they differ with regard to the passages, "Know, therefore, this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the Lord, he is God; there is none else" [Deut. iv. 39], and "Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the Lord, he is God; there is none else beside him" [Deut. iv. 35]. According to the one they are considered Malkhioth, but according to the other not.
MISHNA: The second of those who act as ministers of the congregation on the feast of New Year shall cause another to sound the cornet; on days when the HALLEL (Service of Praise, Ps. cxiii.-cxviii.) is read, the first (minister) must read it. In order to sound the cornet on New Year's Day it is not permitted to go beyond the Sabbath limit, to remove a heap of stones, to ascend a tree, to ride on an animal, to swim over the waters, nor to cut it (the cornet) with anything prohibited either by the (Rabbinical) laws against servile work or by a Biblical negative commandment; but if one wishes to put water or wine in a cornet (to cleanse it) he is allowed to. Children must not be prevented from sounding the cornet, but on the contrary we are permitted to occupy ourselves with teaching them until they learn to sound it; but one who thus teaches, as also others who listen to sounds thus produced, do not thereby fulfil their duty.
GEMARA: What is the reason of the above prohibitions? Because the sounding of the cornet is a positive commandment; now, the observance of a festival involves both positive and negative commandments, and the one positive cannot supersede two (negative and positive.)
"Children must not be prevented from sounding the cornet," etc. But women are to be prevented? Have we not learned in a Boraitha: Neither women nor children may be prevented from sounding the cornet on the New Year's Day? Said Abayi: "It presents no difficulty, the one is according to R. Jehudah and the other is according to R. Jose and R. Simeon, who say that as women are permitted (in the case of sacrifices) to lay their hands on the animals, so here, if they desire to sound the cornet, they may.
"Until they learn." Said R. Elazar: Even on the Sabbath; so also we have learned in the following Boraitha: We are permitted to occupy ourselves with teaching (children) until they learn (to sound the cornet) even on the Sabbath: (and if we do not prevent them doing this on the Sabbath) how much less do we, on the feast (of New Year). Our Mishna says, "We do not prevent them" (from this we may infer that we do not start to tell to a child: Go and sound the cornet)? It presents no difficulty: a child already initiated in the performance of religious may be told also: Go and sound! but not a child not yet initiated; however, we do not prevent him.
MISHNA: The order of sounding the cornet is three times three. The length of a TEQIA is equal to that of three TERUOTH, and that of each Terua as three moans (YABABHOTH). If a person sounded a Teqia and prolonged it equal to two, it is only reckoned as one Teqia. 1 He who has just finished reading the benedictions (in the additional service for the New Year) and only at that time obtained a cornet, should then blow on the cornet the three sounds three times. As the Reader of the congregation is in duty bound (to sound the cornet) so too is each individual; R. Gamaliel, however, said the Reader can act for the congregation.
GEMARA: But have we learned in a Boraitha, that the length of a Teqia is the same as that of a Terua? Said Abayi: The Tana of our Mishna speaks of the three series, and means that the length of all the Teqioth is the same as that of all the Teruoth. But the Tana of the Boraitha speaks of only one series and says that one Teqia is equal to one Terua (which is the same thing).
"Each Terua is (as long, as) three moans." But we have learned in a Boraitha, a Terua is as long as three broken (staccato) tones (SHEBARIM). Said Abayi: About this they do indeed differ, for it is written [Numb. xxix. i], "It is a day of blowing the cornet," which in the (Aramaic) translation of the Pentateuch is, "It is a day of sounding the alarm (YABABA). Now it is written concerning the mother of Sisera [Judg. V. 28], "The mother of Sisera . . . . moaned" (VAT'YABEB); this word, one explains to mean a protracted groan, and another to mean a short wail.
The Rabbis taught: Whence do we know (that one must sound) with a cornet? From the passage [Lev. xxv. 9], "Thou shalt cause the cornet . . . . to sound, etc." Whence do we know that (after the Terua) there should be one Teqia? Therefore it is said (later in the same verse), "Ye shall make the cornet sound." 2 But perhaps this only refers to the jubilee? Whence do we know that it refers also to New Year's Day? Therefore it is written (in the same verse) "in the seventh month." These words are superfluous; for what purpose then does the Torah use them? To teach us that all the sounds of the cornet during the seventh month should be like each other. Whence do we know that the sounds are to be three times three? From the three passages, "Thou shalt cause the cornet . . . to sound" [Lev. xxv. 9]; "A Sabbath a memorial of blowing of cornets" [Lev. xxiii. 24]; "It is a day of blowing the cornet" [Numb. xxix. i]. But the Tana of the following Boraitha deduces it by analogy of expression from (the rules given in) the wilderness [Numb. x, 1-10]. As we have learned, the words "When ye sound an alarm" [Numb. x. 5] mean one Teqia and one Terua. Whence do we know that they shall be separated, perhaps it means that both together should be sounded? Since it is written [ibid. 7]: "But when the congregation is to be gathered together, ye shall blow but ye shall not sound an alarm," we may infer that they must be separated, a Teqia by itself, and a Terua by itself. But whence do we know that there should be one Teqia before the Terua? From the words [ibid. 5]: "When ye sound an alarm" (i.e., first a "sound," or Teqia, and then an "alarm," or Terua). And whence do we know that there should be one after the Terua? From the words [ibid. 6]: "An alarm shall they sound!" R. Ishmael, the son of R. Jo'hanan bar Berokah, however, says: It is not necessary, as it is written: "When ye sound an alarm the second time" [ibid. 6]. The words "a second time" are unnecessary, and to what purpose are they used? To form a general rule that on every occasion on which "alarm" (Terua) is mentioned, a sound (Teqia) must be used with it as a second (or following) tone. Possibly all this only refers to the practices followed in the wilderness, but how do we know that they refer to New Year's Day also? Therefore it is written: Terua twice to make us infer by an analogy of expression, and as concerning the New Year Terua is written thrice in the three passages, [Lev. xxiii. 24]: "A sabbath, a memorial of cornets"; [Numb. xxix. 1]: "It is a day of blowing of cornets"; and [Lev. xxv. 9]: "Thou shalt cause the cornet . . . to sound"; and for each Terua there are two Teqioth, we therefore learn that on New Year's Day must be sounded three Teruoth and six Tekioth.
R. Abbahu enacted in Cæsarea that the order should be first a Teqia 1 then three single staccato sounds, or Shebharim, then a Terua and then again a Teqia. At all events it is not right: If by Terua is meant "a protracted groan" then he should have instituted the order to be a Teqia, a Terua, and then a Teqia; and if it means "a short wail," then he should have instituted the order to be, a Teqia, then Shebharim (three single broken sounds), and then again a Teqia? He was in doubt whether it meant one or the other (and therefore he enacted that both should be sounded).
"If a person sounded a teqia and prolonged it equal to two," etc. R. Jo'hanan says: If one heard the nine sounds at nine different hours during the day, he has fulfilled his duty. The same we have learned in the following Boraitha: "If one heard the nine sounds at nine different hours of the day it is sufficient, and if he heard from nine men at one time, a Teqia from one and a Terua from another, etc., he has also done his duty, even if he heard them intermittently, and even during the whole day or any part of the day." The rabbis taught: (Generally) the soundings of the cornet do not prevent each other (if one can blow a Teqia, but not a Terua, or pronounce one benediction and not another, it might be said he should not blow or pronounce any benediction at all. We are taught that the one does not prevent the other on the fasts of the congregation and other occasions when these are needed), nor do the benedictions; but on New Year's Day and the Day of Atonement they do.
"He who has just finished reading (the additional service) and only at that lime obtained a cornet shall sound on the cornet the three sounds three times." This means, only when he did not have a cornet at the beginning (of the service): but if he had one at the beginning of the service when the sounds of the cornet are heard, they must be heard in the order of the benedictions of the day.
R. Papa bar Samuel rose to recite his prayers. Said he to his attendant, When I nod to you sound (the cornet) for me. Rabha said to him: "This may only be one in the congregation." We have learned in a Boraitha in support of this: "When one hears these sounds, he should hear them both in their order and in the order of the benedictions (in the additional service of the New Year)." This only applies to a congregation, but one should hear them in the order of the benedictions only, if he is not in a congregation; and a private individual who has not sounded the cornet (or heard it sounded) can have a friend sound it for him; but a private individual who has not recited the benedictions cannot have a friend say them for him; and the duty to hear the cornet sounded is greater than that of reciting the blessings. How so? If there be two cities (to which a person may go) and in one city they are about to sound the cornet and in the other to recite the benedictions, he should go to the city in which they are about to sound the cornet; and not to that in which they are about to recite the benedictions. Is this not self-evident, because the sounding is Biblical and the benedictions are only Rabbinical? The case is when the reciting of the benedictions in one city was certain; sounding the cornet in the other city was doubtful. He must nevertheless go to the city where they are about to sound the cornet.
"Just as the reader of the congregation is in duty bound (to sound the cornet) so too is each individual." We have learned in a Boraitha: The schoolmen said to R. Gamaliel, Why according to thy opinion should the congregation pray? Answered he: In order to enable the Reader of the congregation to arrange his prayer. Said R. Gamaliel to them: "But why, according to your opinion, should the Reader act for the congregation?" Answered they: "In order to enable those who are not expert to fulfil their duty." And he rejoined: "Just as he enables the illiterate, so too he causes the literate to fulfil their duty." Rabba bar bar 'Hana said in the name of R. Johanan: The sages later accepted the opinion of R. Gamaliel; but Rabh said there is still a difference between them; could (the same) R. Jo'hanan say this? Did not R. 'Hana of Sepphoris say in the name of R. Jo'hanan: "The Halakha prevails according to R. Gamaliel; "from these words ("the Halakha prevails according to R. Gamaliel") we see that there must have been some that differed from him! Said R. Na'hman b. Itz'hak: "By the words, "the sages accept the opinion of R. Gamaliel," R. Meir is meant, and the rule arrived at through those who differed from him (was arrived at) through other rabbis; for we have learned in the following Boraitha: R. Meir holds that with regard to the benedictions of New Year's Day and the Day of Atonement, the Reader can act for the congregation; but the sages say: "Just as the Reader is in duty bound, so too is each individual." Why only for these benedictions (and no other)? Shall we assume it is because of the many Biblical selections used? Does not R. 'Hananel say in the name of Rabh: As soon as one has said (the passages beginning with) the words, "And in thy law it is written," he need say no more? It is because there are many (more and longer) benedictions (than usual).
It was taught, R. Jehoshua ben Levi said: Both the private individual and the congregation as soon as they say (the passages beginning) with the words, "And in thy law it is written," need say no more.
R. Elazar says: A man should always first prepare himself for prayer and then pray. R. Abba said: "The remarks of R. Elazar seem to apply to the benedictions of New Year's Day and the Day of Atonement, and to the various holidays, but not to the whole year." It is not so; for did not R. Jehudah prepare himself (even on a week day) before his prayers and then offer them? R. Jehudah was an exception, for since he prayed only once in thirty days, it was like a Holiday. When Rabbin came (from Palestine) he said in the name of R. Jacob bar Idi quoting R. Simeon the Pious: R. Gamaliel did not excuse from public service any but field-laborers! What is the difference (between them and others)? They would be forced to lose their work (if they went to a synagogue), but people in a city must go (to the House of Prayer).
71:1 The cornet is sounded three times, corresponding to the Malkhioth, Zikhronoth, and Shophroth. The order of the sounds is Teqia, Terua, Teqia; Teqia, Terua, Teqia, etc. The case here supposed is that the one who sounded the cornet sustained the second Teqia as long as two Teqioth, intending thereby to sound the second and third Teqioth. This, we see, is not permitted.
Source: Sacred Texts