Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 586 - Laws Relating to the Shofar Used on Rosh HaShanah

SECTION 586 Laws Relating to the Shofar Used on Rosh HaShanah. (1–27)

1 [For optimal fulfillment of] the mitzvah, the shofar [sounded] on Rosh HaShanah should be curved,1 [as a reminder that people] should bend their hearts [in submission] to the Holy One, blessed be He, in prayer.

All curved Shofaros2 are valid3 except those of a cow and an ox, for their [outgrowth] is not called a shofar but a keren (“horn”), as implied by the verse,4 “Like a firstborn ox…, his horns are like the horns of a wild ox.”5 Similarly [excluded] is the horn of most beasts, which is bone[-like] and monolithic. This is not called a shofar, for that term refers only to a hollow horn, inside which there is a solid protrusion whose outer layer6 can be peeled off.7 This is the case with sheep, rams, and goats. For the word shofar derives from shfoferes [meaning “tube”].8 In contrast, the horns of most beasts9 are bone[-like] and monolithic, and are unacceptable, even after the fact, like those of a cow or an ox.10

2 The choicest [way to perform] the mitzvah is to sound a ram’s horn, so that G‑d should recall the Binding of Yitzchak for our merit. If one does not have a ram’s horn,11 he may fulfill his obligation with the horns of other animals, except those of a cow or the like.

[Moreover,] if he does not have a curved horn, he may use even a straight horn.12 For a curved horn is recommended only as the initial, preferred option;13 after the fact,14 one who sounds a straight horn fulfills his obligation. When one does not have a curved [shofar], this is considered as after the fact.

3 A shofar from a non-kosher species15 should be considered invalid,16 even after the fact, for only kosher species of animals are fit to be used for our Divine service.17

4 If one stole18 a shofar and sounded it, he has fulfilled his obligation, even if the owner has not despaired of its recovery.19 [Its status] differs from that of a stolen lulav,20 matzah,21 or tzitzis,22 because the mitzvah of the shofar involves hearing alone. No concept of theft is involved here, for when hearing the sound one does not touch the shofar at all. Therefore, even though sounding such a shofar involves the prohibition against theft, since the essence of the mitzvah — hearing [the shofar blast] — does not contravene a prohibition against theft, the person fulfills his obligation.

Nevertheless, since the fulfillment of the mitzvah came about through theft, one should not recite a blessing over it, as is the law with regard to [any] mitzvah that is made possible by a sin, as explained in sec. 11[:11,] and sec. 649[:5].23

5 It is permitted to take a shofar belonging to another without his knowledge in order to sound it as required by the mitzvah, and the blessing may be recited. [The rationale is] that it is assumed that a person is willing to allow a mitzvah to be performed with his property provided he does not suffer a loss, as stated in sec. 14[:9-13].24

6 If one sounded a shofar owned by a Jew who worships it as a false deity by prostrating himself before it, for example,25 he has not fulfilled his obligation.26 [The rationale is that] the shofar must be at least a handbreadth long, as will be explained.27 Since this shofar is a false deity belonging to a Jew, it is due to be destroyed by fire28 — for a false deity belonging to a Jew can never be nullified even if a non-Jew [seeks to] nullify it, as stated in [the Shulchan Aruch,] Yoreh Deah, sec. 139.29 Instead it must be destroyed by fire. And since it is due to be destroyed by fire, it is considered as if it had already been destroyed. Thus it does not possess the required measure of one handbreadth.30

Part of the text is missing.31

7 The same law applies32 if a crack is wide and when it was glued closed, the glue is noticeable between the cracks because it fills the empty space between them. This is considered as closing a hole with a substance alien to the shofar, as explained above.33

8 [Opinions differ if] less than half of the length of the shofar became cracked,34 leaving the majority of the length intact, and [the cracked part] was not glued together or fused with fire. Some [authorities] maintain that [this situation] is governed by the same laws that apply to a perforated [shofar]. Thus, even if the length that remains — from the end of the crack until the mouthpiece35 — is less than the minimum length of a shofar,36 the shofar remains valid, as was explained.37

Other authorities maintain that a crack cannot be likened to a hole, where the absence of material from the body of the shofar allows the current of air caused by the shofar-blast to enter and then frees it, without pressure that might extend the crack. In the case of a crack, in contrast, nothing is missing from the substance of the shofar. Since the current of air has no way out, the resulting pressure may cause the crack to extend further, and eventually split the entire length of the shofar. [These authorities argue,] therefore, that any crack — even of the slightest size — disqualifies the shofar. It cannot be called a shofar, because ultimately38 it will become cracked from end to end. However, if it is held together tightly with string or a cord, it is acceptable, because the string will prevent it from splitting further.

With regard to the halachah, one should be stringent and follow the latter opinion. In a pressing situation, when there is no other shofar available, one may rely on the first opinion.

9 [The following laws apply] if the shofar becomes cracked around its circumference.39 If the crack encompasses the minority of the circumference and the majority of the circumference remains intact at that point, the shofar is valid. [This applies] even if the sound of the shofar changed from what it was originally, before it was cracked, for all sounds [produced by] a shofar are acceptable. The shofar [is valid] even if nothing is missing from its substance at the point of the crack and thus the current of air has no way out, for an air current will not extend a crack unless the shofar is cracked along its length.

[Different rules apply, however,] if the majority of the circumference of the shofar does not remain intact. If the length that remains — from [the end of] the crack until the mouthpiece — is less than the minimum length of a shofar,³⁶ the shofar is invalid. Since the majority is cracked, it is considered as if the shofar has been entirely cut off at that point, and thus [the length of] the shofar is less than its required minimum measure. Therefore, even if its sound did not change from what it was originally, before it was cracked, the shofar is invalid.

If, by contrast, the length that remains — from [the end of] the crack until the mouthpiece — is [at least] equal to the minimum length of a shofar, [the shofar] is valid, even if its sound changed from what it was originally, before it was cracked. Even if the sound emerges from the part [of the shofar] which is above the crack, it is not disqualified on the grounds that the sound of the shofar is [now] combined with the sound coming from another source40 or on the grounds that the sound [now emerges from] two shofaros.41 [The rationale is that] at the time the shofar was made, this part was connected to the main body of the shofar and was never [actually] separated from it. [The two parts] are therefore considered as one shofar in this respect, and [the shofar] is not disqualified on the grounds that the sound [now emerges from] two shofaros. [The two parts] are not, however, entirely considered as one shofar [to the extent that their joint length can be held to constitute] the minimum required length of the shofar,42 because [the shofar] is cracked and [the two parts] are separated from each other over the majority of its circumference.

10 If broken pieces of a shofar were fused together43 to produce a single complete shofar, it is invalid,44 because this is not called a shofar.

Moreover, even if the part of the shofar near the mouthpiece has the minimum measure of a complete shofar on all sides, it is nevertheless invalid, because of the broken pieces of the shofar which were added to this piece, and from [those pieces] the sound emerges — for the Torah requires a sound that emerges from one shofar, not from two shofaros.45

11 Following the same rationale, if even a minimal addition is made to the length of a complete shofar in a manner that causes the sound to emerge from that addition, [the shofar] is disqualified.46 [This applies] whether the addition is made of the material of which the shofar is made or from a different substance, and whether the addition is made to the narrow end47 of the shofar or to the wider end,48 for the reason explained [above].

12 One does not fulfill his obligation by sounding [a shofar] if he first reversed [its shape],⁴⁷ whether by turning it inside out as one does a cloak, so that its interior is on the outside and [vice versa], or by leaving that aspect [of the shofar] as it was, but widening its narrow end and narrowing its wider end by means of boiling water. [In the latter case] one does not fulfill his obligation, whether he sounds [it from] the end which is [now] narrow, or from the end that was originally narrow and is now wide.

[This concept is derived from] the verse,49 והעברת שופר [תרועה] — “You shall cause the sounds of the shofar to pass… [throughout your land].” [Implied is that the shofar] should be sounded in the same manner in which the ram carries it50 on its head while alive. This excludes [a shofar] that has been reversed. See also sec. 590[:20].51

13 If a shofar was long and was shortened,⁴⁷ but the minimum required measure remained, it is valid.

What is the minimum measure of a shofar? A handbreadth,52 so that [when] the person sounding the shofar holds it in his hand,53 i.e., [covering the width of] four medium-sized fingers, the shofar will [still] be visible from either side of his hand, for a handbreadth is equal to four thumbbreadths.54 [This minimum length is required] so that no one will say [that the person sounding the shofar] is blowing into his hand.

Even if the person sounding the shofar is very large and the shofar cannot be seen outside his hand, [the shofar] does not have to be larger than the handbreadth of an ordinary person, i.e., four thumbbreadths. One measures at the wide part of the thumb, as mentioned in sec. 11[:5]. This applies wherever the term “fingerbreadth” is mentioned in Torah [law].

14 If one files a shofar, whether from the inside or from the outside, until he makes it very thin like parchment, it is still valid.⁴⁷ Although this is not exactly the way a ram carries it on its head,55 nevertheless, since this is the manner in which it grows on the ram’s head, it is called “the way it carries it.” [The verse] excludes only a situation where one reverses [the shape of the shofar], changing it from the way it grows on the ram’s head.

15 If one extracted the solid protrusion from the horn [of the shofar] and turned it into a shofar — for example, by making a hole through it — it is not valid,⁴⁷ because the term shofar, from shfoferes [meaning “tube”], signifies only something that is hollow by nature. And since the protrusion [inside the shofar] is not naturally hollow, it is not called a shofar.

If, by contrast, one did not extract the protrusion from the horn [of the shofar], but [simply] made a hole through it, it is valid. Indeed, this may be done even as an initial option. Even though this [perforated] protrusion intervenes between [the current of air that produces] the sound and the entity that is naturally hollow and is therefore called a shofar, this is immaterial. An intervening [layer] is not considered as intercepting if it is made of the same type of substance.56 Thus it is as if there was no protrusion there at all.

16 Nothing may intervene57 between the mouth of the person sounding [the shofar] and the shofar.58 Therefore, the shofar is invalid59 if the place that the mouth [touches] was coated with gold foil as an adornment, or even if the coating extended along the length of the shofar and reached [that] end — because the person sounding it will place its rim in his mouth and his lip will cover it. The gold will thus intervene between his lip and the shofar. If, however, the coating is distant from the mouth of the person sounding the shofar, the shofar is valid.

When does this apply? When the sound [of the shofar] was not changed by the coating, or [even] if one does not know whether it has changed,⁴⁷ for a thin coating will presumably not change the sound. If, however, one knows that the coating has caused even a minor change, [the shofar] is invalid, because [what is now heard] is not the sound of the shofar alone, but the sound of the shofar combined with a sound from another source, the coating.

17 When does the above apply? When the coating adds to the thickness of the shofar or its width. If it adds to the length of the shofar — even at its wider end — i.e., even a very small amount of gold was added to the circumference of the shofar and thereby lengthened it [even] slightly, [the shofar] is invalid for the reason stated above,60 even if its sound did not change.

18 Those who decorate a shofar with drawings61 are not acting in a desirable manner, for even if [a shofar] is not covered entirely [with drawings], its sound sometimes changes.

It is, however, permitted to decorate a shofar with engravings. Even if this changes the sound of the shofar, that is not significant, because no sound from another source is heard, only the sound of the shofar alone. And all the sounds produced by a shofar are acceptable.⁴⁶

19 If one holds a shofar at a small distance from his mouth, blows into it, and produces a sound, he has not fulfilled his obligation, because of the slight space that intervenes between his mouth and the shofar.

20 [The following laws apply if one] places one shofar inside another shofar [and blows].⁴⁶ If one hears only the sound of the inner shofar, uncombined with any sound from the outer shofar, [he has fulfilled his obligation. This is possible if] the narrow end of the inner shofar protrudes beyond the outer shofar and [touches] the mouth of the person who sounds it, and if the wider end of the outer shofar does not extend more than the inner one: either the inner shofar protrudes more, or they are level. [In such a situation,] he has fulfilled his obligation, because only the sound of one shofar [is heard].

[The above applies,] provided the [inner] shofar does not change its sound by being placed inside the outer one. The obligation is not fulfilled if the sound [of the inner shofar] changes, or if the wide end of the outer shofar extends beyond that of the inner [shofar], or if the narrow end of [the outer shofar] is level with that of [the inner shofar] — for in any of these cases, it is impossible that one should not hear a sound from both shofaros. And the Torah requires a sound [that emerges] from one shofar, not one [that emerges] from two shofaros.⁴⁶

21 Any factor that disqualifies a shofar on the first day [of Rosh HaShanah] disqualifies it on the second day, even though [the observance of] the second day is of Rabbinic authority.

22 The festival may not be desecrated [by performing prohibited labor] in order [to obtain] a shofar for Rosh HaShanah.62 [The rationale is] that the observance of a festival is mandated by both a positive and negative commandment, as stated in sec. 495[:1].63 And the positive commandment of [sounding] a shofar does not override both a negative and a positive commandment.

Moreover, the festival may not be desecrated [for this purpose] even by [the performance of] an activity forbidden only by the Sages. For the Sages equated their rulings with those [stemming] from Scriptural Law and buttressed the authority of their rulings even though they led to the negation of Scriptural Law, in cases in which one remains inactive and [simply] refrains from performing [an action required of him by the Torah].64

23 What is implied? If a shofar is at the top of a tree or across a river, [even though one] does not have another shofar, he may not climb the tree or swim across the water to bring it.65 If a pile of stones fell on [the shofar], they may not be removed in order to take it. Nor may one walk beyond the [Shabbos] limits66 to hear the sounding of the shofar. Needless to say, one may not bring a shofar from beyond the [Shabbos] limits.

24 When does the above apply? [When the forbidden activities are performed] by a Jew. It is, however, permitted to have any activity forbidden by Rabbinic Law performed by a non-Jew [to make a shofar available], e.g., to have him climb a tree [to bring a shofar], or to have him bring it from beyond the [Shabbos] limits,67 or the like.68

It is, however, forbidden to tell a non-Jew to perform labor [forbidden by Scriptural Law]69 for oneself [so that one will have a shofar]. Nevertheless, if a non-Jew performed an utterly forbidden labor on his own initiative, e.g., he made a shofar on the festival, a Jew is permitted to sound it. Even though the non-Jew made the shofar for the sake of the Jew, we are not concerned that the Jew may tell a non-Jew to make [a shofar] for him [on the festival]. This is a cause for concern only regarding matters that bring a person physical satisfaction. Since the mitzvos, by contrast, were not given for the sake of physical satisfaction,70 there is no reason for concern that someone may transgress a prohibition in order to perform a mitzvah.

25 When does [the license to use a shofar made by a non-Jew on Rosh HaShanah] apply? When the non-Jew made the shofar from a horn that he owns, for then the prohibition against using nolad — something that came into existence on the festival71 — does not apply. For during the period72 between sunset and the appearance of the stars,73 the horn was in the possession of the non-Jew, and the non-Jew did not divert his attention from making it into a shofar. Since it was in his possession, it was his option to make it into whatever he desired.

[Different laws apply,] by contrast, if a non-Jew made a shofar on the festival from a horn that belongs to a Jew. At the time between sunset and the appearance of the stars, it was not [feasible] to make a shofar from this horn, for it was not in the non-Jew’s domain at that time. This shofar is thus nolad on the festival. A Jew is therefore forbidden to move it in order to sound it, for [his obligation] does not override [even a Rabbinic prohibition in the category of] shvus.

Nevertheless, if no other shofar is available, it is permitted to sound it, relying on the [more lenient] authorities who permit the use of nolad on a festival so that the observance of a Scriptural commandment will not be negated.74

26 If during the festival a non-Jew brought a shofar for a Jew from beyond the [Shabbos] limits, even the Jew for whom it was brought is permitted to sound it. [This applies] even if [the non-Jew] brought it from beyond 12 mil.75 Even those who maintain that the prohibition [against going beyond] twelve mil [from a town] is Scriptural in origin [would accept this ruling], for it is permitted to move an object that was brought from beyond the [Shabbos] limits. It is forbidden only to eat or derive benefit from it, i.e., to use it for one’s own purposes, as stated in sec. 515[:13]. And one who sounds the shofar for the sake of the mitzvah is not at all considered as deriving personal satisfaction [i.e., pleasure] from this, as explained above.76

One must, however, be careful not to move the shofar four cubits [or more], as stated in sec. 515[:15].77 See also the end [i.e., subsection 22] of that section.

27 Water or wine may be placed in [a shofar] to cleanse it;78 this is not considered as repairing a utensil on the festival.79 Urine, however, may not be used [for this purpose] even on weekdays, for this would be disrespectful.