ראו בעצמכם הרבה סיבות שיקולים לא לשמוע ולא לתקוע יותר מארבעים קולות שופר, המספר 40 שכתב רב משה הרמבם, ואף הוא הכביד מדי. למרות שהעיז להגיד "הרבה קולות שופר נחשב טורח הציבור" ברוע לב המאוחרים מתעלמים "מהשיקול" אותו שאפילו הרמבם קרא לו "טורח הציבור". ר
I do not hide the fact that later books require 100. obligate 100 that serves a purpose to show they CHANGE and BURDEN and replaced the original jewish customs with a burden as foriegn as ramadan
consider a dialog, noam: i invite you to come the time on schedule 10 am. to hear the unique horneric: i alreay fell for that trick last year… i heard the horn… then when i left they stopped me and said we have not yet OBEYED r. akiva to hear the horn between the blessings in the prayers… only after the many hours of not obeying r akiva… a long time for horn separate and blessings separate,u finally obey him and between the blessings blow, the total takes so much time therefore you are asking for too much. it is easier to be secular.
for saving time we start with two ideas from "tora shbal peh" oral law and climb from zero to nine sounds.
first to save time: the jewish religious tradition truly said that "not adding is more important than not subtracting" refferring to "bal tosif" meaning not adding beyond the commandments. source mishna zvahim and mishna mnahot. this caused the matching idea in jewish law "better prefferable to sit and not do" called "shev val taseh adif".
second from oral law: the mishna truly said to hear the horn so now we discuss is that rabbinic "drabanan"? or biblical "oriysa"? and how many sounds from the horn climbing from zero to nine.
the talmud provides everal clues, the easiest to notice is in chapter 4 it discussed the horn and asks "mna hani mili" linking to bible. this is refuted in the talmud there providing the first clue its a rabbinic obligation and indeed other mentions of the shofar in chapters 3 and 4 lack the phrase "mna hani mili" to even attempt to connect to biblical source.
in contrast to the famous phrases "tka bshofar gadol lkerusenu" and "shma yisroel" that have the "verb form of command" [as defined in rabbi david radak and matches these two quotes plus for this discussion i include "remember shabbis" despite a slight difference that r. david radak bothers to mention], when we search the section of "trua" neither of these terms were commanded neither commanding "hear" nor "sound". that means that whoever claims hearing was commanded, faces the challenge of "not adding" since their is no command verb. even if there would be "doubt" about "not subtracting" still as above more important not to add and instead be passive according to jewish religious tradition. furthermore only "after a command" such as "remember shabbis" then possible "do not negate that command" in contrast to any ideas never commanded each one is not truly negating from the bible. instead only one of that oair is relevant: must not add "claiming it is not rabbinic"
to do a rabbinic with intention it is biblical is not only an error but the sin caalled dont add", source torat habayit rashba as publicized by r. ovadya yosef for action/practice. after people insist, and in the shul emphasize it is not rabbinic, it is "preferable" according to halaka to be passive. although this alone does suffice, there are other factors.
part 2
this word "rememberance of the sound" has other issues too.
the idea of remember "zeker" has been defined by tradition, not by me, but by tradition as "mentioning by speaking." whether the meaning is remembering in mind or by speaking either way it is not the blowing of any horn, not even once this is similar to the problem "not adding" meaning forbidden to add beyond "remembering".
also in the context of shabbos the oral law defines this "remembering song" as "dont blow" if this is the definition of the words… and the commandment did not say shabbos, then the interpretation of "zikron trua" should be remembering and not blowing… and since we must not add words "shabbos" to alter the section, not in this section nor limit only shabbos because that is altering the command. instead we only have the interpretation same as remembering shabbos in the mind and speaking same for remembering the song with a slight difference that shabbos has two verbs for both nind and speaking in contrat to this section only the word remembrance might not require speaking and not a verb. the word "trua" means song as in the usage "kabalas shabbos" section famous words "bzmiros naria lo".
to "add beyong remembering in mind or speaking" as the mishna did, would be a sin unless the mishna meant meant rabbinic as above. claiming it is biblical as rambam did is a problem since the "quote he brought" for support lacks verbs… at all and does not match the command form as above "tka bshofar and shma yisroel".
until the leaders specify this is rabbinic the issue of "not adding" beyond the commands, such as beyond remember shabbos, is "more important" according to jewish religious tradition as above.
that points to the idea already taught in tradition "adif" better and preferable to be passive so in contrast to remember shabbos, this the halaka rules frame this rememberance of song as passive, not even one sound. next we climb to one sound.
2: rabbi yehuda said the shofar should be from a certain animal. maybe he agrees many sounds and maybe not. since rabbi meir is the one that said "hear" we can infer that r. yehuda defined the usage different than hear as i explained in a different article. but how many? the halaka provides a solution "grab less, but dont grab more" so interpreting he agrees more woud violate the tradition. instead grab less, one, not more.
3. rabbi akiba said say the blessing of kings and blow "tokea" he counts three blows called tkia. does he mean a reference to a series? maybe and maybe not so again "grab less but graabbing more is not grabbing" according to tradition itself.
also the reason later add is because of the "shvarim" but the sound called tkia that r. akiva said does not have this doubt so no cause for more than three that he actually said. maybe r. yehuda agrees three but maybe not he did not say in contrast r. akiva said 3. also the tradition said "go like r. akiva" so that would point to three total not one nor nine but see below.
first to save time: the jewish religious tradition truly said that "not adding is more important than not subtracting" refferring to "bal tosif" meaning not adding beyond the commandments. source mishna zvahim and mishna mnahot. this caused the matching idea in jewish law "better prefferable to sit and not do" called "shev val taseh adif".
second from oral law: the mishna truly said to hear the horn so now we discuss is that rabbinic "drabanan"? or biblical "oriysa"? and how many sounds from the horn climbing from zero to nine.
the talmud provides everal clues, the easiest to notice is in chapter 4 it discussed the horn and asks "mna hani mili" linking to bible. this is refuted in the talmud there providing the first clue its a rabbinic obligation and indeed other mentions of the shofar in chapters 3 and 4 lack the phrase "mna hani mili" to even attempt to connect to biblical source.
in contrast to the famous phrases "tka bshofar gadol lkerusenu" and "shma yisroel" that have the "verb form of command" [as defined in rabbi david radak and matches these two quotes plus for this discussion i include "remember shabbis" despite a slight difference that r. david radak bothers to mention], when we search the section of "trua" neither of these terms were commanded neither commanding "hear" nor "sound". that means that whoever claims hearing was commanded, faces the challenge of "not adding" since their is no command verb. even if there would be "doubt" about "not subtracting" still as above more important not to add and instead be passive according to jewish religious tradition. furthermore only "after a command" such as "remember shabbis" then possible "do not negate that command" in contrast to any ideas never commanded each one is not truly negating from the bible. instead only one of that oair is relevant: must not add "claiming it is not rabbinic"
to do a rabbinic with intention it is biblical is not only an error but the sin caalled dont add", source torat habayit rashba as publicized by r. ovadya yosef for action/practice. after people insist, and in the shul emphasize it is not rabbinic, it is "preferable" according to halaka to be passive. although this alone does suffice, there are other factors.
part 2
this word "rememberance of the sound" has other issues too.
the idea of remember "zeker" has been defined by tradition, not by me, but by tradition as "mentioning by speaking." whether the meaning is remembering in mind or by speaking either way it is not the blowing of any horn, not even once this is similar to the problem "not adding" meaning forbidden to add beyond "remembering".
also in the context of shabbos the oral law defines this "remembering song" as "dont blow" if this is the definition of the words… and the commandment did not say shabbos, then the interpretation of "zikron trua" should be remembering and not blowing… and since we must not add words "shabbos" to alter the section, not in this section nor limit only shabbos because that is altering the command. instead we only have the interpretation same as remembering shabbos in the mind and speaking same for remembering the song with a slight difference that shabbos has two verbs for both nind and speaking in contrat to this section only the word remembrance might not require speaking and not a verb. the word "trua" means song as in the usage "kabalas shabbos" section famous words "bzmiros naria lo".
to "add beyong remembering in mind or speaking" as the mishna did, would be a sin unless the mishna meant meant rabbinic as above. claiming it is biblical as rambam did is a problem since the "quote he brought" for support lacks verbs… at all and does not match the command form as above "tka bshofar and shma yisroel".
until the leaders specify this is rabbinic the issue of "not adding" beyond the commands, such as beyond remember shabbos, is "more important" according to jewish religious tradition as above.
that points to the idea already taught in tradition "adif" better and preferable to be passive so in contrast to remember shabbos, this the halaka rules frame this rememberance of song as passive, not even one sound. next we climb to one sound.
2: rabbi yehuda said the shofar should be from a certain animal. maybe he agrees many sounds and maybe not. since rabbi meir is the one that said "hear" we can infer that r. yehuda defined the usage different than hear as i explained in a different article. but how many? the halaka provides a solution "grab less, but dont grab more" so interpreting he agrees more woud violate the tradition. instead grab less, one, not more.
3. rabbi akiba said say the blessing of kings and blow "tokea" he counts three blows called tkia. does he mean a reference to a series? maybe and maybe not so again "grab less but graabbing more is not grabbing" according to tradition itself.
also the reason later add is because of the "shvarim" but the sound called tkia that r. akiva said does not have this doubt so no cause for more than three that he actually said. maybe r. yehuda agrees three but maybe not he did not say in contrast r. akiva said 3. also the tradition said "go like r. akiva" so that would point to three total not one nor nine but see below.
r. meir was a "later generation" so his teachings were "his" not r akiva nor hillel in earlier generation when they thought DIFFERENTLY differently before meir's teaching.
4. another mishna said "three for each of three" blessings that totals nine. we know this is the opinion of r. meir because the mishna hid the name . this category of mishna causes big problems on many issues… perhaps "rabbi yehuda the nasi" agrees adding weight to the opinion and if we asssume as several orthodox INSIST that this category of mishna is "halaka" meaning "go like that opinion" for practice, if so then not only is the number "three for each" of the three blessings, which admittedly could be stretched to twelve, as an amora "fixed" [not repeated as rambam later burdened a thousand years after the mishna was already written] but also another mishna in the same category and same book is equally obligated… to check the moon each month instead of "calculating a calendar" in advance as later rabbis changed without mishna nor sanhedrin.
this leads to a "date problem" douts about days and months and adding thirteenth month unless we check the moon each year and still the month might not be th emonth kuz precalculated, or we can agree that this category of mishna is "not halaka" because it is rabbi meir and that the leaders already taught "there is a reason not to act like rabbi meir" in first chapter eruvin… then the law does not require either of these quotes in this category of mishna. so either way "nine on the pre-calculated date" conflicts one or the other sources, so that leaves…
r. akiva idea "tkia" one for each blessing. also the rule is "go like r. akiva" pointing to total three called tkia as above and he was not refferring to his student meir because he was the teacher. so either way "more than three called tkia" on a pre-calculated date would violate one or other halaka which circles back to "be passive" in contrast to remembering shabbos this "rememberance" has reasons to be passive according to religius tradition itself.
the change is notice-able when we see that the mishna never said more than nine… only if the source of those who say 100 would be "in the mishna" would that be "preserving the original custom" however we must notice the changes that happened, at least to know. i add my emotion is the CHANGE annoys me.
so when you do the hundred as i started… my point is not to change the practice, but to inform: know that the jews did not "sound 100" in the generations of the mishna, maybe nine maybe less… and in generation of moshe rabenu perhaps not even one sound from any animal horn in the generation of moshe rabbenu and at those times plausibly using a second and third caalendar respectively, not pre-calculated in month length with pre-calculated "month additions," the month length also has issues as i discussed in a different article but the month length only affects the date, not the number of the sounds. enuf for now. w
;){kind=link}