Questions and answers I wrote from Saba, I would be happy for his insightful comments…

A. In this matter, he welcomed the opinion of another group and another group:
The Mishnab (Tikvah, 2 Skad) stated in the name of the eternal building that if they took the shofar in the middle of the blowing and brought another shofar, they should repeat the blessing. But if they took the shofar between the blessing and the beginning of the blowing, they should repeat the blessing, meaning that the blessing applies to the mitzvah – the shofar that was before it. And Tza, Debspiya explains in the Shulchan Ar that if one recites the blessing to count four days and remembers five days, he does not repeat the blessing, because one is preparing to perform the mitzvah, and Tza Ha Sus does not prepare for the mitzvah of this day, and May Shana Mushofer Dish is required to prepare for the mitzvah itself.
This is what I thought,

Regarding the shofar being taken from him before blowing – what does the blessing apply to? Like a fruit that fell from his hand after the blessing and before eating, but in the Sifiya the blessing is not for the day but for the mitzva itself and the blessing is issued despite mistakenly counting another day. (For example, if the shofarer was replaced by the one blowing the shofar before blowing – he certainly does not recite the blessing again).
Again, I am not basing this on sources, but on my own opinion.

on. Regarding the law of reciting Shema as a Torah study:
The text of the R.F.B. of Debarchot: And it ends at the break of dawn, the R.Y. says until three hours, etc., the one who reads from here on out does not lose as much as the one who reads the Torah, because. And in the Shulchan (Och 40) in the Haggai: And it is good to say in the morning after Shema Yisrael, etc. in Shekmel 6, because sometimes one lingers with a khash to read it at an untimely time and it is omitted. And the latter interpreted it, meaning that when it is seen that the congregation will exceed the time of the khash, then one should intend to omit the khash in it. And in the Shulchan Shulchan HaGar (ibid. 9) he added that it means that if the public exceeds the time of the KSh, it will be done in this way, and if not, it will be as if the Torah reader, and so on in the KIH Reka. And we have already awakened, from what is stated in the Ketubot (Ad, 2) that in every condition in them it is possible to fulfill it by a messenger, and from the KIH when they say to him, “Halutz, let her give you two hundred zuz,” his KShulchan is kosher even if she does not give it, because all conditions are fulfilled according to the KIH and the KIH, and there Moses commanded Joshua to give them the land, and he is the KShulchan of Moses in all KIH, who has conditions, but a KShulchan by a messenger of God does not have conditions in it. And here we find that the conditions of the KShulchan are beneficial even if he cannot fulfill the mitzvot of the KShulchan through a messenger, and as in the KIH we find about the Afikoman and the counting of the Omer, the KIH, and the KIH. I would be happy to know the level of the Shlita’s rabbi.
In all the conditions that a person stipulates between himself and himself for his actions, both for the sake of a mitzvah (Iruv, Taanit) and according to the authority, he does not need to stipulate according to the conditions of the sons of Gad and the sons of Reuven. Therefore, the question does not exist in principle. Even in matters of money between him and his friend, there is a disagreement among the Rishonim about whether the laws of conditions are necessary. However, in any condition between himself, the conditions of the 3rd and 4th centuries do not apply.