RoshHaShannah

Rosh HaShannah

Rabbi Bernard Fox

“Why do they sound the Shofar when they are sitting and again when they are standing? This is done in order to confound the accuser.” (Tractate Rosh HaShanna 16a)

One of the mitzvot that is strongly associated with Rosh HaShanna is the sounding of the Shofar. According to the Torah, we are required to sound nine blasts – the combination of Tekiah, Teruah, Tekiah three times. This is represented by the following table:

Table 1. Requirement described by Torah

Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah

However, in order to fulfill this obligation, we are required to sound thirty blasts. How, does the Torah obligation to sound nine blasts translate into an obligation to sound thirty blasts?

There are two factors at play in this conversion of a requirement to sound nine blasts into the requirement to sound thirty. The Torah requires that we sound the series of Tekiah, Teruah, Tekiah three times. Part of this obligation is easily understood. The Tekiah is an uninterrupted blast. There is little or no room for uncertainty regarding its character. However, the Teruah is a sound characterized by interrupted notes. This is a much more complicated sound. Complication leaves room for doubts. What is the exact description of the “interrupted” blast? The Sages identified three possibilities. First, the Teruah may be a series of minimal sounds – the sound we refer to as Teruah. Second, the true Teruah may be a more substantial sound that is interrupted – the sound we refer to as Shevarim. Finally, the true Teruah may be a combination of these first two possibilities – the sound we refer to as Shevarim/Teruah. In short, the Torah requires that we sound the combination of a Teruah preceded and followed by a Tekiah three times – a total of nine blasts. However, this nature of the central Teruah is unknown. The three central blasts that we sound – Teruah, Shevarim and Shevarim/Teruah – are actually three possible identities of the true Teruah required by the Torah.[1] The following table represents the result of the doubt regarding the exact nature of the central Teruah sound:

Table 2. Minimum series of sounds required to satisfy Torah obligation

Tekiah	Shevarim/Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Shevarim/Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Shevarim/Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Shevarim	Tekiah
Tekiah	Shevarim	Tekiah
Tekiah	Shevarim	Tekiah
Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah
Tekiah	Teruah	Tekiah

How many sounds are there in the above table? One might reasonably conclude that the above table includes 27 sounds. However by convention, the Shevarim/Teruah sound is counted as two sounds. So, traditionally this table is described as including 30 sounds. This calculation is represented in the following table:

Table 3. Calculation of total number of sounds required to satisfy Torah obligation

Series	Number of sound in series
Tekiah, Shevarim/Teruah, Tekiah	4
Tekiah, Shevarim/Teruah, Tekiah	4
Tekiah, Shevarim/Teruah, Tekiah	4
Tekiah, Shevarim, Tekiah	3
Tekiah, Shevarim, Tekiah	3
Tekiah, Shevarim, Tekiah	3
Tekiah, Teruah, Tekiah	3
Tekiah, Teruah, Tekiah	3
Tekiah, Teruah, Tekiah	3
Total sounds	30

At what point in the service are we required to sound these thirty blasts? The Torah does not establish a specific point in the service during which the blasts should be sounded. However, the Sages did respond to this issue. The Sages established that the blasts should be sounded in the context of the blessings of the Musaf Amidah.[2] The prevalent Ashkenazic custom is to sound the blast during the repetition of the Amidah. The Sephardic custom is to sound the blasts during the silent Amidah and during the repetition.

However, the Sages also established a practice of sounding an additional series of thirty blasts following the Torah reading and before the Amidah. The Talmud asks, “Why do they sound the Shofar when they are sitting and again when they are standing?” In the time of the Talmud, during the blasts sounded before the Amidah it was customary for the congregation to remain sitting. During the blasts sounded during the Amidah, the congregation stood. So, the Talmud is asking, “Why do they we sound the required thirty blasts before the Amidah and again during the Amidah?” The Talmud responds that we sound the required thirty blasts twice in order to confound the Satan – the accuser. Rashi is concerned with the meaning of this response. He explains that the response is to be understood allegorically. Rashi explains that meaning of the Sages response is that we wish to demonstrate our love for the mitzvah of Shofar. We demonstrate this love by performing the mitzvah twice.[3] In other words, we are judged on Rosh HaShanna. We do not want to be accused of performing the mitzvah of Shofar in a mechanical, superficial manner. In order to respond to this possible accusation, we sound the required sounds twice. In doing so, we demonstrate our love for the commandment.

Tosefot asks an interesting question on the Talmud’s response. The Torah commands us to not add or subtract from the commandments. The commandment against adding prohibits adding a new commandment or adding to an existing commandment. Tosefot ask, “How can the Sages add a practice to sound the required Shofar blasts both before the Amidah and during the Amidah? Why is this not a violation of the prohibition against adding to the commandments?” Tosefot respond that the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot is not violated by performing a mitzvah twice.[4] In other words, the Sages’ requirement to sound the Shofar both before and during the Amidah might potentially involve a violation of the prohibition against adding to mitzvot. However, the prohibition is not violated because we are merely performing the mitzvah twice. Repeating the performance of a mitzvah is not prohibited.

Rashba asks an obvious question on Tosefot’s comments. The premise of Tosefot’s question is that an enactment of the Sages can be subject to the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot. Rashba objects to this premise. Rashba argues that the prohibition against adding to the commandments applies to individuals. As individuals, we do not have the authority to enhance mitzvot or modify them by adding or subtracting from them. However, this prohibition does not generally apply to the Sages. This can be easily proven. Outside of the land of Israel, we observe Succot for eight days. The eighth day was established by the Sages. On this eighth day we are obligated to fulfill the mitzvah of living in the Succah. In other words, although the Torah obligation is to live in the Succah for seven days, the Sages require those outside of the land of Israel to live in the Succah for eight days. This requirement is not a violation of the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot. The reason this requirement does not violate the prohibition against adding to mitzvot is obviously because a requirement established by the Sages is not generally subject to this prohibition! So, why are Tosefot concerned with the Sages’ requirement to sound two sets of Shofar blasts? [5]

Rav Yitzchok Zev Soloveitchik suggests that in order to answer Rashba’s question, it is necessary to more carefully analyze the two sets of Shofar blasts. Superficially, it would seem that a single set of thirty sounds is needed to satisfy our Torah level obligation and the Sages instituted a second set of thirty sounds in order to “confound the accuser.” However, a more careful analysis indicates that this superficial interpretation of the two sets of Shofar blasts in not accurate.

As explained earlier, the Torah does not require that the Shofar be sounded at any particular moment in the services. However, the Sages require that the Shofar be sounded during the Amidah. How many sets of Shofar blasts are required to satisfy both of these obligations? A single set of thirty blasts sounded during the Amidah is adequate to satisfy both the Torah level obligation and the obligation established by the Sages. The Sages did not create a new set of Shofar blasts. They merely added a qualification to the Torah level obligation. So, by sounding thirty blasts during the Amidah, both the Torah level obligation and the obligation established by the Sages are satisfied. However, this is not our practice. First, we sound thirty blasts before the Amidah. These thirty blasts completely satisfy our Torah level obligation. But we then sound a second set of Shofar blasts which are required to satisfy the obligation established by the Sages to sound the Shofar during the Amidah. In other words, we could economize and satisfy both our Torah level and Rabbinic level obligation with a single set of thirty blasts sounded during the Amidah. But instead, we fulfill our Torah level obligation separately through the blasts sounded before the Amidah and then satisfy our Rabbinic level obligation with a second set of thirty blasts sounded during the Amidah. Why do we choose this more elaborate system of two sets of Shofar blasts over the more economic option of a single set of blasts during the Amidah? The Talmud is providing the answer to this question when it explains that we sound two sets of blasts in order to “confound the accuser.” As interpreted by Rashi, the Talmud is explaining that in order to demonstrate our love for the mitzvah we do not try to economize. Instead, we intentionally fulfill our Torah level obligation separately from our Rabbinic level obligation.

Now, we can restate the dispute between Tosafot and Rashba. Had the Sages established a requirement to sound a second set of Shofar blasts, there would be no dispute between Tosafot and Rashba. The Sages have the right to create new halachic entities. These new entities are not regarded as additions to the mitzvot. However, the Sages did not do this. Instead, they first required that the Shofar blasts be sounded during the Amidah. Second, they instructed us to fulfill this Rabbinic obligation separately from our Torah obligation. Tosefot argue that a single set of Shofar blasts would be adequate to fulfill both our Torah level and our Rabbinic level obligation, but we are required to sound an extra set of blasts. As a result, a unique situation evolves. The Sages did not create a new set of Shofar blasts but nonetheless, two set of blasts are required in order to fulfill our Torah level and Rabbinic level obligations. According to Tosefot, when the Sages create a new entity, this new entity is not subject to the prohibition against adding to mitzvot. But in our case, no new entity is created. An extra set of blasts is required. Tosefot argue that this extra set of blasts is subject to the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot. However, Tosefot explain that the prohibition is not violated because we are merely performing the mitzvah multiple times. Performing a mitzvah multiple times does not constitute adding to mitzvot.

Rashba argues that this extra set of Shofar blasts does not involve a potential violation of the prohibition against adding to mitzvot. The prohibition against adding to the mitzvot only applies to individuals. Any activity required in response to either a Torah level or a Rabbinic level obligation is not subject to the prohibition against adding to mitzvot. Therefore, since each set of Shofar blasts fulfills a specific obligation – either Torah level of Rabbinic level – the prohibition against adding to mitzvot does not apply.[6]

It seems that according to Rashba, the primary objective of the prohibition against adding to or subtracting from mitzvot is to discourage innovations that in fact detract from the commandment. Therefore, the prohibition relates primarily to individuals. As individuals, we are not authorized to alter the commandments. However, the Sages are authorized to establish new laws and practices. They also have the wisdom to use this authority properly. Therefore, the laws and practices that they establish are not subject to the prohibition against adding to the mitzvot.

However, according to Tosefot, the objective of the prohibitions against adding to or subtracting from the mitzvot is not to discourage inappropriate innovations. These prohibitions even apply to the Sages. Therefore, it seems that according to Tosefot, these prohibitions are designed to permanently preserve the integrity of the Torah law. Even the Sages are subject to the prohibition against adding to a mitzvah in such a manner as to alter the Torah requirement. Instead, even the Sages are required to work within specific boundaries.

In summary, this dispute between Tosefot and Rashba reflects the unique structure of the Shofar blasts – specifically the interrelation between the set sounded before the Amidah and those sounded during the Amidah. The dispute also reflects two perspectives on the prohibition against adding to mitzvot.

[3] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on the Talmud, Mesechet Rosh HaShanna 16b.

[5] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Aderet (Rashba), Commentary on the Talmud, Mesechet Rosh HaShanna 16a.