Page 70 - Chayei Adam LAYOUT sivan 5782

Chayei Adam - K’lal 140 - The Laws of the Shofar

52
]16[ If it is partially cracked on its width, it is valid, but if it is mostly cracked it
is not valid for it is like it was removed, [and is not kosher] unless a minimum size
53
remains on the part closer to his mouth, and some say even if it is the side
54
further away from his mouth, as the additional section is not considered a hefsek
because a like species does not serve as an chatzitza. 55

]17[ If one distanced the shofar from his mouth and blew into it, it is not valid
since the shofar doesn’t touch his mouth. 56

]18[ If one steals a shofar, he may not blow it, as it is a mitzva which was
57
facilitated by a sin. Nevertheless, b’dieved one fulfills his obligation even if the
owners did not give up on [getting] it [back], because sounds cannot be stolen.
58
Nevertheless, one may not recite a beracha on it. However, one may use and
recite a beracha on a borrowed shofar. Although the posuk says “it will be a day of
59
teruah for you” and even though regarding lulav the posuk says “and you shall

םדו רשב
status of a nick from a crack or vice versa. that a shofar with a hole is in fact valid (see
If so, regarding shofar, since it doesn’t above siman 11) although it is missing a
teach a case of nicked, it is clear that it is piece, מ while a cracked shofar is not, so
kosher, and the Elya Rabba agrees that if it clearly, the two cases are not comparable, and
is valid for nicked it is the same as [a the Chayei Adam here concurs with the Elya
shofar which] has a hole. Rabba’s critique.
The mishna (Bechoros 37a) lists blemishes
which are deemed sufficient grounds to 52. A beraisa (Rosh Hashana 27b) teaches
permit one to slaughter a firstborn animal for that if a shofar was cracked along its width it is
regular consumption (i.e. and not offered as a still valid provided the minimum size of shofar
sacrifice). Among them, if the ear is nicked or remains intact. The Rosh explains that this is
cracked. The mishna mentions both in order to because we view the rest of the shofar as if it
teach that not only is a nicked ear considered was removed, yet this is only the case if it is
sufficiently blemished, because it is missing a mostly cracked. A small crack however is no
piece, but even one which is cracked, although worse than a hole in a shofar which is
otherwise fully intact. The Malbushei Yom Tov technically permitted as above, and so a
draws a comparison to shofar in that if one minorly cracked shofar will remain kosher even
may not use a cracked shofar, then he if less than a tefach remains, as there is also
certainly may not use one which is nicked as little concern of a crack of this nature
well. The Elya Rabba disagrees since we find spreading when the shofar is blown.

71