הטלטלה והפולמוס תקיעת שופר בשבת בירושלים | שיעור מקיף בהלכה והיסטוריה הגאון הרב אברהם מימון

All right, let's begin the lesson. Today, with Divine assistance, we will discuss one of the major topics that have stirred the Jewish world in general, and the halachic world in particular. The issue of blowing the shofar on Shabbat. Rosh Hashanah that

falls on Shabbat. There was a certain Jew over 100 years ago who caused a great controversy throughout the halachic world, moving from one rabbinic authority to another, from place to place, and the entire Jewish world divided into two factions:

whether there are possibilities in such and such ways to blow the shofar on a Shabbat that coincides with Rosh Hashanah, like the year 5787. Why?

Because it is written in the book Minchat Tani by the author of Aruch HaNer, and also in the book Simchat Chachamim, regarding all the difficult years, as written in the Gemara in Tractate Rosh Hashanah 16: Any year that is not "blown" at its beginning,

is "broken" at its end. Even though Tosafot writes in the name of the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot that this does not mean it falls on Shabbat, but rather that an unforeseen event occurred, many already write otherwise—that even when it falls on Shabbat naturally, the

way Hillel II established the holidays and the months, it falls on Shabbat. He lists dates there; the First Temple and the Second Temple were destroyed—it fell on Shabbat. Also in the year 5151, there were very harsh decrees of

burning at the stake in Spain; there were difficult years there where tens of thousands of Jews were killed, and it fell on Shabbat. Scenes of madness where the Ishmaelite Arabs rose up, went crazy, and killed dozens of Jews

in Hebron; it fell on Shabbat. Chacham Ovadia passed away in the year 5774—Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, check it. In the year 5781, there was the Meron disaster; when did it happen? On Shabbat. 5784, when the disaster

happened there on the 7th of the 10th [month], it fell on Shabbat. Yes, heaven forbid, all these years it fell on Shabbat, because whatever is not "blown" at its beginning is "broken" at its end. We know, yes, I said that a second

ago, are you busy with a watermelon? Yes, I also said that Tosafot in the name of the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot.

Well, what do you want? Correct, we said that, and we said that there are Rishonim who disagree with this. In any case, how do we say it now, our Sages decreed for us; according to Torah law it is permitted, [and] it is necessary

to blow on Shabbat. We have several mitzvot that have the Rabbinic decree of Rabbah. As written in the Gemara in Tractate Megillah page 4 regarding Megillah. As written in the Gemara in Tractate Rosh Hashanah page 29 regarding blowing the shofar. As

written in the Gemara in Tractate Sukkah page 42b regarding the Four Species. There are two more things that are forbidden to do on Shabbat because of the decree of Rabbah. What are they?

Who knows? Lulav, we said the Four Species. Yes, that's beautiful. Good morning, Eliyahu, Megillah—we just said that—we said Megillah, shofar, the Four Species; there are two more things, who knows? Perhaps a circumcision knife?

No, a circumcision knife—no, we don't issue a decree on a circumcision knife. No, a slaughtering knife. There is a Gemara in Tractate Beitzah, 17, where the Gemara says it is forbidden to immerse vessels on Shabbat, lest one carry them four cubits. Also, the

Gemara says in Tractate Pesachim on page 69, side a, that it is forbidden to sprinkle [purification water] on Shabbat, lest one carry it four cubits.

So, we have five things, No, that's not right, someone is fixing an issue, that's a different topic, there are two reasons. What do we have that is the same? The same [applies to] bringing the stem to use on a person on the

third or seventh day when it falls on Shabbat, the *shevut* according to what is said in the Gemara in Pesachim 69, that perhaps he will carry the stem on Shabbat outside the Temple. And there the Gemara discusses that there is no *shevut* in the Temple; outside the Temple, regarding things related to inside the Temple, we will not enter.

We have five things, okay, but why are we getting into the shofar now? It is a shofar that the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 29 says that the prohibition to blow it, he should go to an expert. What is

meant by "go to an expert"? Not that he will teach him how to blow the shofar—everyone knows how to blow the shofar—but rather, there are laws in [Shulchan Aruch] Siman 590, so many laws in the Gemara in Masechet Rosh

Hashanah 33, what a *teruah* is, how much is a *shevarim*, how much is not a *shevarim*, how much is a *teruah*, when one needs to breathe, when one does not need to breathe, so many details, so many laws on the form of the blowing,

there are many details and many laws that many people do not know, so he should go to an expert on Rosh Hashanah. But there are two ways; since my time has been taken and we don't have much

time, whoever wants to see the whole debate, [in] my book "Shana Tova" that I published two years ago, there in the book "Shana Tova" in chapter 30, I bring the entire debate. I will try to summarize it; there is a huge

disagreement, there are two ways one can blow the shofar on Shabbat on Rosh Hashanah, two ways. What are these ways? One of the ways, as the Rambam writes in the Laws of Shofar in chapter 2, law 8, based on the Gemara in Masechet Rosh

Hashanah 29, is that one can blow in the Temple. In the Temple, one can blow. A huge and terrible dispute among the Rishonim, and this dispute will have a Halachic consequence later on. What is called the Temple? According to Rashi,

the Rashba, the Ramban, and the Ritba in Masechet Rosh Hashanah 29, "Temple" means the Temple itself. The Temple, literally, the place of the Temple. But according to the Meiri and the Rambam in three or four places: the Rambam in

his commentary on the Mishnah in Masechet Rosh Hashanah, chapter 1, Mishnah 1; in chapter 3 of Maaser Sheni; and also in Masechet Shekalim, chapter 1; and also in the Yad HaChazakah, chapter 2, law 8, the Rambam states that the "place of the

Temple" is any place where one can eat Maaser Sheni. Any place within the walls—that is called the place of the Temple. This is a very great innovation. We will soon see that also regarding these places, they say the rule written

in the Gemara in Pesachim 65, and the Gemara in Menachot in several places: there is no *shevut* in the Temple. They say this even outside the Temple. A great innovation. And we have other ways, yes, that one can blow, which is

—now, what is the reason that one can blow in the Temple? What is the reason?

Rabbeinu Yonatan says there on the Rif in Eruvin 34b of the Rif's pages, and also the Ran there in Masechet Sukkah 21 of the Rif's pages, and also the Kesef Mishneh in the Laws of Beit HaBechirah, chapter 8, law 12. Since it

is written in the Gemara in Pesachim, in Menachot, and in many places in the Shas, there is no *shevut* in the Temple.

What does that mean? There are all kinds of decrees that our Sages enacted because of "make a safeguard for My guard." They made a decree: do not blow the shofar, even though it is a positive commandment from the Torah.

The Sages uprooted the commandment from the Torah, and there are all kinds of explanations by the Rishonim as to how they did this; they did it in the Temple. No problem. Why? The Gemara says: The Kohanim are diligent. They

have, the Kohanim, they have diligence; they won't come to transgress a prohibition. Along comes the Tur-Even, the author of the Shaagat Aryeh, asking: It makes sense to play music in the Temple. The Gemara in Arachin: Why is

it forbidden to play on the Sabbath? The Gemara. In Beitzah it says: Lest he repair a musical instrument. Lest he repair a musical instrument in the Temple? There are no instruments in the Temple, right? The Beit Yosef brings

this in the context of the Temple itself. But here, the shofar—what does it have to do with the Temple? The shofar, shofar is a positive commandment, it has nothing to do with t

this in the context of the Temple itself. But here, the shofar—what does it have to do with the Temple? The shofar, shofar is a positive commandment, it has nothing to do with the Temple! That is how he challenges

it. Along comes Rabbeinu Yosef Chaim, author of the Ben Ish Chai, in his book Ben Ish Chayil, and answers this question in a most wonderful way. Next week is the Yahrtzeit of the Ben Ish Chai, of Rabbeinu Yosef Chaim. Next

week, God willing, we will speak. Here, to bring conclusive evidence, clear as the midday sun, that the book "Sefer Torah Lishmah" is by the Ben Ish Chai?

Wait until next week. Anyway, at any rate, what does the Ben Ish Chai say there: It is written in the Gemara in Tractate Rosh Hashanah 27, what is the difference between the Temple and the provinces? That in the provinces when

going to war or when there is trouble —they never blow the shofar and trumpets together. There is one place in the world where there is a commandment to blow the shofar and trumpets together, and that is in the

Holy Temple, as it is written: "With trumpets and the sound of the shofar, shout before the King, the Lord." He says, why specifically "shout before the King, the Lord, with trumpets and the sound of the shofar"? It implies

that there is a matter of blowing the shofar in the Holy Temple. Why? Because it is part of the Temple service. There is a tremendous innovation here. In other words, says the Ben Ish Chai, there is a tremendous innovation in

Torah analysis here. The Ben Ish Chai says that the shofar blown in the Temple has the status of service, like the status of service, and therefore it is indeed called part of the Temple, and therefore on the Sabbath, when Rosh

Hashanah falls on the Sabbath, it is permitted to blow the shofar on the Sabbath and it is considered part of the sacrificial service. Do you understand what is written here? Now listen to the Ben Ish Chai. What? If a

stranger blows the shofar, what is that ? Would that be invalid service? No. Just as a stranger can perform the slaughter and through that slaughter he can create a*pigul*(disqualified sacrifice). Yes. Why? Not*mevatai avodah*(nullifying service). Not* mevatai avodah*. Even*lechatchilah*(

from the outset). Even*lechatchilah*he can slaughter. What do you mean? Certainly. And they would sanctify the tool, the tool they would buy, the slaughtering tool, so it would be a holy vessel, etc., etc., war.

What is the connection? It is written in the Torah regarding the trumpets, that the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring it. The Chinuch explains why, because the trumpets make...this is the plain meaning, things do not require a

scriptural reason as is written in the Gemara in Tractate...the Rambam in Hilchot...Chapter 3...in Siman...in Siman 97 in Choshen Mishpat, we do not require a scriptural reason, the Chinuch? He explains: Since they are going to war, the man who is fearful

and soft-hearted shall not go to war, lest, et cetera, et cetera. If he spoke between the tefillin of the hand and the tefillin of the head, or spoke praise, as written in the Yerushalmi about. By means of the trumpets, they

would repent. In this order, the reason the Sefer HaChinuch writes. Now, an additional reason why specifically in the place of the Temple: The Rambam says in Hilchot Shofar, chapter 2, law 8, since the Great Sanhedrin were, for "out of Zion shall go forth the Torah

and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem ," they were located in the place of the Temple and people had enforcement, "judges and officers you shall appoint for yourself in all your gates which the Lord your God gives you." There was

enforcement, and so people would issue reminders to people not to go out with a shofar on Rosh Hashanah. But apart from that, there was another place and there was a beit din. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, peace be upon him, who was

the head of the sages in his time, in his era, he established that in any place where there is a beit din, they may blow the shofar on Shabbat. Now why does the Rambam say in his commentary on the Mishnah in chapter 2, Rambam in

Hilchot, excuse me, in the Yad HaChazakah in chapter 2, law 9. Since there is a beit din, the beit din would keep everyone in line. And they would know, they would know, they would do, how to appoint officers, appoint guards

. They would know, they had the possibility. Now there is a dispute. Wait, you are taking time from me, don't take time from me as well, there is a very major Rishonic dispute, write it down. Your question about the

promise, and afterwards we will talk about it. Good. Now we are talking about this, now we will talk about this , God willing. Maybe we will, maybe the Temple will be built. The year 5787 ( Tashpaz), these are the initials: may

it be a year of our redemption (pedut) and abundance (zevulenu), God willing. For you, Tashpaz means something else: may it be a year of cheap snacks ( pitzuchim zolim), you are snacking all the time. Time yes, may you be healthy

yes, Tashpaz yes. In any case, the Rambam says, in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah , chapter 2, law 9, that this is a commandment. Now there is a huge dispute, and all the disputes that existed between, we will talk about it

soon, between that sage from 100 years ago and also from 1000 years ago, 1100 years ago, there were huge controversies about this: what authority of beit din is needed? We know that we do not have ordained ( semuchim) rabbis today. Because there,

the Sefer HaIbbur by Rabbeinu Hay Gaon writes, a very deep book, Rabbi Meir Mazuz, who was the genius of geniuses, wrote a commentary on it. Rabbi Meir Mazuz, it is forbidden for him, he is doing a commentary. All those who

disagreed with him didn't reach his shoelaces, I tell you, he was the genius of geniuses, Rabbi Meir Mazuz.

And in the Sefer HaIbbur, as it says there that, what is it called, the last sages who were ordained were Hillel the Second, the grandson of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. It is also in the Sefer HaZechut in Gittin 18, it also brings

it in the name of the Sefer HaIbbur. In the Rambam, in Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh, chapter 1, law 3, he writes that Abaye and Rava, Abaye and Rava, they were the last of the ordained. Now , what is required according to the

Ritba and Rabbenu—did Rabbenu show the Ritba's teacher? For a court, 71 are needed, a Sanhedrin. Now, what is the difference between 71 and 23? 71 would judge collective capital cases: a wayward city, a king, a minister, all sorts of things, matters involving the

lives of the masses. 23 would judge individual capital cases. Three would judge cases of fines, four or five, ransom, and so on and so forth. Now, the question is whether one needs an ordained judge today? In our time, we

do not have ordained judges. There are early authorities who hold: the Rosh writes that you don't need 20, you don't need 71; the Rosh and the Tosafot write that 23 is enough; some say that three ordained judges are required.

According to the Rif's method—we will see his method shortly—one does not even need ordained judges. This is how the Rosh brings it in Chapter 4 of Tractate Rosh Hashanah, section 1, in the name of the Rif, and several other

early authorities bring that...that we don't even need ordained judges now. This debate did not begin in the year ...5642—it did not begin then. We will soon speak about the wise man who started it 1,100 years ago: it was

Rabbi Isaac Alfasi, the author of the Rif, the author of the*Sefer HaHalachot *, who, how shall we say, determined that one does not need, for the most distinguished judge of his generation, for a fixed judge. Now one must know:

the Rif—there was no one like him in the world. There is a book called, what is that book called? The book*Tzedah LaDerech*by Rabbenu—ah, I forgot his name, ah, his name I forgot, ah, I forgot the name of Rabbenu, Rabbenu the

author of*Tzedah LaDerech*, who writes about him, about, what do you call it, about the, um, Rabbenu, Rabbenu Zerachiah ha-Zerach, that is his name, I think. He writes in the introduction to*Tzedah LaDerech*that he was at the grave of the Rif, and it was written on

his tombstone: "Rabbenu Isaac Alfasi, Holy of Holies." Now, that was—back then, they used to write "Holy of Holies" for someone who was truly a Holy of Holies. The Ra'avad writes, he says the Ri Migash writes in a responsum, he says that even in the

generation of Moses our teacher—the Ri Migash was the primary student of the Rif—he says: "Even in the generation of Moses our teacher, none was found like him in wisdom and understanding." The Ra'avad, author of the*Hasagot*(Criticisms), in the introduction where he would criticize

the Rif—and there are the battles of the Ramban against these criticisms— he writes in the introduction: I will read his language: "I rely on the words of the Rabbi even if he says of right that it is left and of left that it is

right." And he writes there in*Shut Temim De'im*in the introduction, he writes: "The fingernail of Alfasi, of the Rif, is better than the whole body of others, and he who disparages his words—he is the one who is flawed." It is a great wonder; the Ra'avad

disagreed with him a lot, but I don't know, that is how he writes. Therefore, the Rambam writes in a letter to his student, Rabbi Samuel ibn Tibbon, he writes to him in the letter: I tell you , if you want to be a halachic decisor,

your hand should not depart from the Rif. All the Rishonim—the Rashba, the Ramban, the Ra'ah, the Ritba, the Meiri , the Ran, Rabbeinu ben HaYatom, the author of the Ravyah, the author of the Sefer HaGelim on the Rif—all the

known and unknown Rishonim call the Rif's book "the Little Talmud." There is a book called "Kupat HaRochlim" written by Rabbeinu Baruch Albalia, one of the Rishonim from the time of the Rashba, who is not well known; he is

angry there at the Rashba: Why do you call it "the Little Talmud"? You are causing people to study the Rif instead of studying the Talmud! There was no one like the Rif, one of the three great codes of law. The Rambam would

defer to him. And he, the Rif, said if there is a permanent Beit Din—what does permanent mean? That the majority of Israel accepted it—it is permitted to blow the shofar. But in this ruling, his halakha was not accepted. I have

copied here the expressions of the Rishonim. Rabbeinu Zerachiah HaLevi writes on page 11a of the Rif's pages, saying this is one of the only few instances where his rulings are found.

The Ramban also writes in his sermons; he has sermons on the Shofar on page 240, and also in his "Milchamot" he writes that the world did not rely on this, and there is no place in the world that blows on Shabbat. The Ritba

also writes in Tractate Rosh Hashanah 29, "We have not found anyone who ruled like him." The Rosh also writes in Tractate Pesachim, Chapter 4, Sign 1, saying that even his students after him —all his great students—did not follow this; and therefore in the books

of the Acharonim, we do not find anyone who blew the shofar. I found in Rabbeinu Manoach in Chapter 2, Law 2 of the Laws of Shofar, that he testifies in the name of the book "Sefer HaEzer." I searched for this book—who, what is

this book? I did not find it. He says there was one of the early sages in Damascus who would act like the Rif and would blow on Shabbat. Until the year 5642, about 150 years ago, there was one, a genius, a righteous man, they

called him Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger, author of the book "Lev HaIvri." In his biography, in the introduction to his biography, it is told that even before those Zionists dreamed of establishing a state here, he had already established the state

here; he established an army, an army of God-fearing men, a Hebrew army. Yes, Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger, peace be upon him, was holy, truly holy. And in the year 5642, when Rosh Hashanah was on Shabbat, he went to all the sages of

the generation: to Rabbi Shmuel Salant, to Rabbi Avraham Ashkenazi who was the Rishon LeZion, to the author of the Aruch LaNer, to the Maharil Diskin. He went, he troubled himself, he knocked on doors. Now this controversy was printed in its entirety in the "Tzel

Talpiot" collection in the year 5665. The controversy lasted from 5642 to 5669, 30 years, it lasted many years.

Now why, what is the reason that he was so, what do you call it, persistent?

Now he has a detailed plan in the " Talpiot" collection, he writes there: Yes, it is a Torah commandment, but not only that. He says many efforts, many persuasions, many struggles; there was almost a period where he was almost

beaten. Yes, there was a period, there were opponents. The head of his opponents was the genius author of " Simlat Chaim," Rabbi Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld; he was also the leader of those opposing him. Also, Rabbi Shimon Sofer, author of the book "Hisorerut

Teshuva," who was...what do you call it , in Erlau abroad, was also a leader of the opposition. We will talk in a moment about what the objections were.

And there he writes, he says, he has an idea that there should be...what do you call it? He writes, he says in the year 5642 (1882): before the great Torah scholars of Israel, whether to sound the shofar on Shabbat in the holy city

of Jerusalem, in a special synagogue, before all the rabbinical courts, in this most auspicious place; where will they sound it? In the Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai synagogue. They placed its lock as he had ordained. Now, why was it called the Rabban Yochanan ben

Zakkai synagogue? I don't know. There is some great researcher, I won't say his name, who claims that in this place of the Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai synagogue, that is where Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai was brought out by Vespasian, I don't know what, there,

they brought him out there. There, he is there in that same place, I don't know where he gets his sources. I told him, tell me your sources. He said to me, that’s how it seems to me. I told

him, well, I also dream a lot of dreams at night. You need sources for these things. Yes, okay. It was called Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai because he was a great sage in the Land of Israel. Good, now he writes down every little detail.

Now he writes there, that there should be ushers, what color the ushers should wear, what color vest, just like there are ushers, everything, what kind of tickets. He says: I said to station police officers as they do on festivals

at the Western Wall. He suggests, for example, using tickets— "billetn" is tickets—and it’s good to make the tickets now so there won't be crowding, so there won't be a Meron disaster part two. He says to make only 10,000

tickets, and each ticket will cost half a "nezer"—I don't know what kind of currency that was there—and all the proceeds, 5,000 nezer, will go to all the orphans and widows in Jerusalem, for one mitzvah leads to another. Now,

what was such a great urge for this? What drove him to do all this, that they hounded him and he had so many troubles from it? What drove him? He writes there about the multitude of troubles the Jewish people have, and

there he brings a long list of the hardest years the Jewish people had, as the "Minchat Chinuch" and other sages write: Any year in which they sound the shofar at its beginning, they will wail at its end. He writes there, saying: I

almost gave up, I almost threw up my hands. But he says: When I heard this thing, I was already despairing, until letters of lamentation came from Russia — "Russland" is a city in Russia— that would make one's ears tingle,

cries of suffering for children and the needy, and all kinds of Jews being dragged to slaughter, Heaven forbid, and other troubles and false accusations. I heard about this, I said : I will go to Rabbi Shmuel Salant to

ask for his opinion. He writes, saying: If Mordechai the Jew, when he saw Sarah was fasting on the holiday of Passover —which involves several positive commandments of eating Matzah—would we hold back from saving the many? On what? On what is it called? On a

rabbinic prohibition that is a doubt? What, is it not set aside? Now, in his entire response—I will summarize it because we don’t have time—he focuses on three things: First, is a Bet Din needed? Was Raba's decree even applicable in Jerusalem? Because it is

possible that Raba's decree did not apply to Jerusalem or the site of the Temple. He wants to prove, like the Rambam, that the site of the Temple is not inside the Temple Mount, but rather the entire area within the walls. Yes,

that is one thing. Second thing, in Jerusalem the decree did not exist. And furthermore, carrying is not applicable there, because there is no public domain according to the Torah today, since there are not 600,000 people walking on the roads, and so on and so

forth as written. And there he proves that the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch in Siman 344, like the Magen Avraham in Siman 303, is that 600,000 are needed; that is not enough to constitute a public domain. There is a long response

where Chacham Ovadia Yosef says what the opinion of the Maran is. He himself , in the beginning, early in his life, held that the Maran's opinion was like that, but at the end of his days, Chacham Ovadia retracted that. He made

a double doubt, okay. Now, he says there were two Batei Din in Jerusalem that were constantly arguing and having disputes. Jews always love disputes, what can you do, that was the reality.

There was the Bet Din of Rabbi Shmuel Salant, who was a holy and awesome man, who was sick at that time, and they brought Rabbi David Teumim, author of the Aderet, who was the father-in-law of Rav Kook, yes, author of the Aderet.

And they also brought the Maharil Diskin. There were two Ashkenazi Batei Din. There are all kinds of polemics by crazy researchers and so on, who say all sorts of things about these Batei Din—we don't listen to them, they are

distorted. But there were many, many pushes and pulls between them, many halachic disputes, okay? Now he wanted to say: If I try to combine both of them together, to make them work together, you have no greater permanent Bet Din than that, the story is over.

Now he, what did he do now? He, first of all, there was Rabbi Avraham Ashkenazi, he was the Rishon LeZion, he had a lot of influence on both Sephardim and Ashkenazim. He had, there was also one very great sage who he

said: If he agrees with me—everyone would follow him. Who is that? The Av Bet Din of Hebron, Rabbi Chaim Chizkia Medini, author of the Sdei Chemed. Look at what power he had! He says: If he agrees, I will agree, we will follow

him, follow Rabbi Chaim Chizkiya Medini , and also Rabbi Shmuel Salant, follow him, there is no greater Beit Din than this. He went to Rabbi Avraham Ashkenazi, the Rishon LeZion, and said to him: Let us go, let us travel to

Hebron. Now look at what humility, incredible! Look, the Ashkenazim would yield to him with such complete self-effacement. There are letters where they begged, begged the Sdei Chemed to be Rishon LeZion, and he did not want to. He said: I am not worthy

of this. They begged him! Those were the great ones of the past, the giants of the generations; what humility, what holiness, what purity they had, holy of holies. We today are in a generation of orphans of orphans; we have become

orphans. I say this to you with true humility. And he, what is it called?

They went to the Sdei Chemed. Of course , the Sdei Chemed was in Veten Kehilal, there he describes this whole story, and so on and so forth, saying: What am I, let me...what is it called? It will be on my neck, if it is forbidden, it

will be on everything, on my neck. It is true that there are all kinds of sides here to be lenient, and so on and so forth. There are great sides here that maybe it is not the site of the

Temple, and maybe one does not really need the site of the Temple, maybe there is no permanent Beit Din here, and so on and so forth, but he says: No , I am waiting for the word of Rabbi

Shmuel Salant. Regarding Rabbi Shmuel Salant, he writes there that he was not in the best of health. He was the Rabbi of Jerusalem, and they brought the Gaon HaAdrat during his lifetime, because he was a righteous man. Rabbi Shmuel

Salant writes a letter; he wrote a resignation letter to himself. Show me a rabbi today who says: Gentlemen, I am not lucid enough, I don't have the strength, I am getting old, I am resigning. Do you know such a rabbi?

How could that be? They, how should I put it, take superglue, put it on the chair, sit on it, and only when the pulse stops beating do they put them under the ground. But he writes, Rabbi Shmuel Salant writes that they should

bring another rabbi to his city, the Gaon HaAdrat, bring another rabbi to his city who will be in my place, who will be Rabbi Sham...he arrived to see him. Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger recounts, saying: I arrived at Rabbi

Shmuel Salant's, and he was on his sickbed and had no strength. He says: In any case, when I arrived, he got up from his sickbed and asked for his top garment, to put on his top garment, and agreed with me. But he says: What will

it help that I agree with you? Since I have resigned and I am not the Rabbi of Jerusalem, I am not the Mara D'atra ( local authority), you have a Mara D'atra here. How can I issue a ruling

in front of the Mara D'atra? Marvel of marvels, what humility. Go to the Gaon HaAdrat. Now, with the Gaon HaAdrat, there were all kinds of situations, all kinds of things that he initially did agree to, then didn't agree. And there,

Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger writes something immense and awesome in the name of the Vilna Gaon. The Vilna Gaon: In the book Pe'at HaShulchan by Rabbi Yisrael of Shklov, a student of the Vilna Gaon, it is stated that the Gaon

commanded him to move to the Land of Israel with self-sacrifice; his daughter passed away on the journey due to the intense commitment to move here to the Land of Israel, as did several other students of the Gaon—whose names I don't recall—who moved here

to the Land of Israel with self-sacrifice. Why didn't the Vilna Gaon come here to the Land of Israel?

Rabbi Akiva Yosef Schlesinger says that it is because the Vilna Gaon argued— according to what is written in several places in the laws of holidays—that in the Land of Israel, Rosh Hashanah is celebrated for only one day. An

enormous innovation! He says, since he knows that here they are accustomed to celebrating for two days. Now, this is a bit of a great wonder, because in the chronicles of the Vilna Gaon, it says something like this: in the book Chut

HaMeshulash by Rabbi Chaim of Volozhin, it is implied that he did start to move to the Land of Israel and then turned back. So what, like, did this doubt start for him exactly on the way? What happened here? Yes. Now, since Rabbi

Akiva Yosef Schlesinger saw that he was not succeeding in doing it, he decided that there was no need to form a Rabbinical court, because he could not get Rabbi Diskin and Rabbi Shmuel Salant together, as there were disputes

between them—he couldn't manage it— and also the Sdei Chemed did not want to mediate between them, and also Rabbi Avraham Ashkenazi, the Rishon LeZion at the time, in his era, said: whatever the Sdei Chemed says, everyone says whatever the Sdei Chemed says. So he

says: we don't need a court; after all, Jerusalem is not included in the decree , and the site of the Temple is all of Jerusalem, and furthermore, Jerusalem's doors are closed at night according to the law of a public domain, and there

he elaborates at great length that a public domain is required. There were many opponents. Rabbi Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld was a major opponent; he says: you are now creating a situation where there will be here—what do you call it?—the reckless of the

generation will come to scorn the ordinances of the Sages, they will say: it is permitted to blow the shofar on Shabbat. Also, the author of Hit'orerut Teshuvah writes there in his responsa in section 187, saying: one must not

rely on this ruling at all, even if it came from a great man—do not rely on it. And there he writes about him, what do you call the author of Hit'orerut Teshuvah, he says: I say about him: he

loves commandments, he is never sated with commandments—that is what I say about him, but one must not rely on him . This struggle over blowing [the shofar] on Shabbat was so great, that in the book Orech David by the author

of the Aderet, he was there—he was a young rabbi, he wasn't old—it says there, his father says, he was—what do you call it?—wanting to blow the shofar. So before the blowing of the shofar, he went to the mikvah, to

immerse in the mikvah there in the area of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, and there were some people there who invalidated his shofar, to that extent.

That is apparently because the shofar is muktzeh on Shabbat, it is written in section 588 that it is muktzeh on Shabbat, you know, it is muktzeh on Shabbat, yes? Or according to his approach—it is not muktzah, because it is permitted to blow on Shabbat, and

if one did blow on Shabbat, whether they fulfilled their obligation, like the Eiger and the Tosafot in Tractate Sukkah 3, and all the pilpulim if it is not proper according to the Torah and so on and so forth. Yes, and yet he

writes there that his son brought him a different shofar, and he writes there that he blew that year on Shabbat, in the year 5664, it was blown with a shofar on Shabbat, and he said that they saw the leader of the opponents,

Rabbi Yosef Hinzun Alfad, standing in one of the windows of the Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai synagogue, that he also came to hear the shofar blowing.

How do they say it? It leaves us only to wait to hear the sound of the shofar of the Messiah, and with the help of God that He will gather the scattered of His people Israel, may it be His

will, and let us say Amen.