Question: Must we specifically recite ten p’sukim for Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros?
Short Answer: There is a dispute in the poskim whether we need to recite ten references each for Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros (even if one pasuk contains more than one reference) or if we specifically require ten p’sukim (regardless of the references therein).
Explanation:
I. The Source of Ten
The Mishnah (Rosh HaShanah 32a) states that one must recite at least ten p’sukim of Malchiyus, ten p’sukim of Zichronos, and ten p’sukim of Shofaros in Musaf on Rosh HaShanah. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri adds that, b’dieved, if you say three of each, you are yotzei.
The Gemara (ibid) cites a few opinions what the number ten (in Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros) represents: either the ten times it says the word “halleluhu” in the perek “halleluhu b’seika shofar,” or the Ten Commandments, or the ten “maamaros” with which Hashem created the world.
The Gemara (Rosh HaShanah 32b) also lists a dispute how to calculate the number of “Malchiyus” included in the p’sukim of “S’u sh’arim rasheichem.” According to Rabbi Yosi, the first part (consisting of two p’sukim) has two “Malchiyus” references, while the second part (consisting of two p’sukim) has three “Malchiyus” references. Rabbi Yehudah disagrees, and holds that the first part has only one reference, while the second part has only two references.
The Ritva (ibid) explains that the machlokes between Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Yehudah makes clear that, according to both opinions, one pasuk, with two words that refer to a king, can count as two (out of our ten) Malchiyus references. In other words, we don’t need ten separate p’sukim to reach our ten Malchiyus references. See also the Tosefta (Rosh HaShanah 2:11).
II. Rambam’s Ruling
The Rambam (Hilchos Shofar 3:8), in contrast to the above Gemara and Ritva, appears to require ten separate p’sukim (regardless of the actual references therein) for Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros. Indeed, the Rambam writes that you need ten “p’sukim” (as opposed to ten references within the p’sukim) for each brachah. The Tur (Orach Chayim 591:4) similarly uses this language.
The Beis Yosef (ibid), however, dismisses this interpretation of the Rambam and Tur. Certainly the Rambam and Tur do not argue with Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Yehudah in the Gemara, and thus their usage of the word “p’sukim” must simply mean “references in the p’sukim.” There would be no reason why the Rambam and Tur would need specifically ten p’sukim (each with at least one reference to Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros).
III. Rav Soloveitchik’s Y’sod
Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik zt”l (cited in the new Batei Yosef, Yamim Nora’im, p. 41-42) explains that the word “(ten) p’sukim” in the Rambam (and Tur) is actually very intentional. See also Har’rei Kedem (Rosh HaShanah 23).
The Gemara (Megillah 21b) explains that each k’rias haTorah must have at least ten p’sukim. The Gemara adds that these ten p’sukim represent either the Ten Commandments or the ten “maamaros” with which Hashem created the world. These are the same reasons that we noted above are listed in the Gemara (Rosh HaShanah) in regard to the ten p’sukim of Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros. Accordingly, the Rambam holds that the ten “p’sukim” of Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros are actually fulfillments of the mitzvah of Talmud Torah, and thus we need specifically ten p’sukim (not just references to Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros). This likewise fits with the opinion of Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri who holds that, b’dieved, if you say three p’sukim of each, you are yotzei. Indeed, each aliyah needs at least three p’sukim.
[As an aside, the Har’rei Kedem explains how the Rambam/Tur reconcile the machlokes between Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Yehudah, who both clearly hold that two references in one pasuk actually count as two Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros, not only one. The Har’rei Kedem writes that these Amoraim must hold like the third opinion of the Gemara, that the “ten” Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros correspond to the ten times it says the word “halleluhu” in the perek “halleluhu b’seika shofar.”]
IV. Rashi vs. Tosafos
Rav Soloveitchik continues that this opinion of the Rambam is actually a dispute between Rashi and Tosafos. The Gemara (Rosh HaShanah 35a) discusses the opinion that holds that a chazan may be motzi the tzibur in Sh’moneh Esrei for Musaf on Rosh HaShanah. The Gemara suggests reasons why this Sh’moneh Esrei is different from during the year, where a chazan may not be motzi the tzibur (according to this opinion). Perhaps Musaf on Rosh HaShanah has “many p’sukim” and is hard for the tzibur to recite itself? This answer is debunked, based on the words of Rabbeinu Chananel in the name of Rav, that simply reciting the phrase “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor” is sufficient and there is no actual need to recite “many p’sukim.” Thus, the Gemara concludes that the reason is because Musaf Sh’moneh Esrei has many long brachos that the tzibur will likely get tripped up on.
But what are these “many p’sukim” that the Gemara held may be omitted as long as the words “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor” are recited? Rashi understands that these p’sukim are the p’sukim of Musfei Rosh HaShanah and Rosh Chodesh. These p’sukim, however, are not crucial and may be satisfied by simply reciting the words “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor.”
Rashi does cite a second opinion, that of his rebbeim. According to Rashi’s rebbeim, these p’sukim are Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros, and they may be satisfied by simply reciting “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor.” Rashi challenges this opinion because it appears to contradict the above-mentioned mishnah (Rosh HaShanah 32a-b) that required at least ten (and b’dieved, at least three) p’sukim.
Tosafos, on the other hand, cites Rabbeinu Tam, who defends the opinion of Rashi’s rebbeim. The early Mishnah required ten (or three) p’sukim only if you start reciting p’sukim. The Mishnah would agree, however, that you can simply omit p’sukim by stating “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor.” This is in contrast to the p’sukim of Musfei Rosh HaShanah, which must be recited in its entirety.
Rav Soloveitchik explains that Rashi requires an actual ten p’sukim, because he holds like the Rambam, that these p’sukim are fulfillment of the mitzvah of Talmud Torah and may not be replaced by the phrase “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor.” Rabbeinu Tam disagrees and holds that these p’sukim are only a fulfillment of davening and may therefore be replaced by “u’v’soras’cha kasuv leimor.”
Rashi’s opinion, that the p’sukim of Malchiyus, Zichronos, and Shofaros are actually a fulfillment of the mitzvah of Talmud Torah, can be seen further in Rashi in Emor (Vayikra 23:24) where Rashi implies that the requirement to recite these p’sukim on Rosh HaShanah is d’Oraisa and are part of the meaning of the words “zichron t’ruah” in the Torah. The Rash (Rosh HaShanah 33b, s.v. seder) implies the same idea, that the requirement to recite these p’sukim on Rosh HaShanah is d’Oraisa. Rav Soloveitchik says that the only way that reciting these p’sukim in davening (which itself is only d’Rabbanan) can be d’Oraisa is if we understand it is a fulfillment of Talmud Torah d’Oraisa.
Rabbi Ephraim Glatt, Esq. is Associate Rabbi at the Young Israel of Kew Gardens Hills and a practicing litigation attorney. Questions? Comments? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
