Rosh Hashanah 19b — the Talmud in English

And the Sages deem it pure.

Since the principal part of the vessel is made of glass, the law of a glass vessel applies to it.

And since Yehuda ben Shemua stated his words in the name of Rabbi Meir, it implies that he was his student.

And it is proven that Yehuda ben Shemua lived after the destruction, and that enactment that the twenty-eighth of Adar is a holiday was enacted after the destruction. And the question returns upon those who hold that the Scroll of Fasts was nullified after the destruction of the Temple!

And we answer:

It is a dispute among tannaim.

The tannaim disputed this matter. And although it is proven from the Scroll of Fasts that the Scroll of Fasts was not nullified, nevertheless there are those who dispute this:

For it was taught: These days written in the Scroll of Fasts, both when the Temple is standing and when the Temple is not standing,

they

are prohibited, the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yosei says:

only

when the Temple is standing

were they

prohibited, because they are days of rejoicing for them.

But when

the Temple is not standing

they

are permitted

with regard to eulogies and fasting,

because

it is a time of

mourning for them.

And we conclude: a.

And the halakha—

they were nullified.

b.

And the halakha—

they were not nullified.

And we question:

The halakha contradicts the halakha.

There is a contradiction among the halakhot that we stated!

And we answer:

It is not difficult:

Here, where we said that they were not nullified, it is speaking

about

Hanukka and Purim.

Here, where we said that they were nullified, it is speaking

about

the other days

that were mentioned in the Scroll of Fasts. ,

We learned in the Mishna: The messengers would go out

for Elul, because of Rosh Hashana, and for Tishrei, because of the regulation of the festivals.

And we question:

Since they go out for Elul,

since the messengers had already gone out and informed the inhabitants of the Diaspora when the New Moon of Elul occurred, if so,

for Tishrei—

why do they need

to go out? For it is known that Elul is always deficient [29 days], and Rosh Hashana falls on the thirtieth day of Elul!

And if you say

perhaps you will explain that one must be concerned

lest they intercalate Elul,

lest they intercalate Elul and make it thirty days.

This cannot be answered in this way. For:

Did Rabbi Hinena bar Kahana not say in the name of Rav: From the days of Ezra onward, we have not found an intercalated Elul!

And if so, there is no need to be concerned about this!

And we answer: Indeed, Rav said that from the days of Ezra

we have not found

an intercalated Elul, but his reason is

that it was not necessary,

they did not need to intercalate it.

But

if it was necessary—

we intercalate it.

If they needed to intercalate it, they would intercalate it.

And when did they need to intercalate Elul? When Yom Kippur fell adjacent to Shabbat, or when the other festivals fell adjacent to Shabbat, they would intercalate the month, because the vegetables that had been detached from the field would remain for two days after being detached and would rot.

And likewise because of the dead: if they waited two days before burying them, they would decompose. And we question: How is it possible that because of the regulation concerning vegetables they would intercalate Elul?

But Rosh Hashana will be disrupted!

There will be a mishap for the inhabitants of the distant Diaspora, who will not know that they intercalated the month, and will observe Rosh Hashana not at its proper time!

And we answer:

It is preferable that Rosh Hashana be disrupted, and not

all the festivals be disrupted!

For when Shabbat goes out adjacent to Rosh Hashana, it also goes out adjacent to the first festival day of Sukkot, and even to Shemini Atzeret, so that they will not be able to eat vegetables on them.

It is also precise,

one may infer from our Mishna that in order that the other festivals not be disrupted, they intercalate Elul, despite the fact that Rosh Hashana will be disrupted for the inhabitants of the Diaspora:

For it teaches:

the messengers go out

for Tishrei—

because of the regulation of the festivals,

in the plural.

And we conclude: Indeed,

learn from it.

We learned in the Mishna:

And for Kislev

the messengers would go out

because of Hanukka, and for Adar because of Purim.

According to Rabbi [below], if it happened that the messengers went out concerning the month of Adar, and only afterward the court sat and decided that it was necessary to intercalate the year and add a second Adar, they must send messengers again in the second Adar as well, so that people will know when the month was sanctified and will know when to observe Purim in the second Adar.

And the Gemara infers from the language of the Mishna that they go out concerning the first Adar, but it did not say that they go out concerning the second Adar; therefore our Mishna is not according to Rabbi:

But “if the year was intercalated

after the messengers had already gone out concerning the first Adar”—

they also go out concerning the second Adar because of Purim”—

this matter

it does not teach

in the Mishna.

And from here

our Mishna,

our Mishna—is

not according to Rabbi.

For it was taught: Rabbi says: If the year was intercalated—

they also go out concerning the second Adar, because of Purim.

And we consider it:

Shall we say that they dispute this:

is it to be said that Rabbi and the tan­nay of our Mishna disputed this matter:

For one,

the tan­nay of our Mishna,

holds: All mitzvot that apply

ideally

in

Adar

the second, [namely, the mitzvot of Purim],

they

apply in the first.

That is, if they performed them in the first Adar, they fulfilled their obligation.

And therefore the tan­nay of our Mishna holds that the messengers did not go out concerning the second Adar, because in his view, if they observed Purim in the first Adar, they fulfilled their obligation.

And the other,

Rabbi, who said that they also go out concerning the second Adar,

holds: All mitzvot that apply in the second

ideally,

do not

they

apply in the first,

and even if they performed them in the first, they did not fulfill their obligation.

And we reject this:

No,

they did not dispute this!

Rather,

everyone agrees

that

mitzvot that apply in the second do not apply in the first,

and even if they performed them after the fact in the first, they did not fulfill their obligation.

Nevertheless, the view of the tan­nay of our Mishna is that the messengers do not go out concerning the second Adar when they intercalated Adar [and they knew about the intercalation of the year and that a second Adar must be observed from the fact that the messengers for Nisan would not arrive. Tosafot].

And here—

they dispute concerning the intercalation of the year.

The tan­nay of our Mishna and Rabbi disputed how many days the first Adar has when the year is intercalated:

For it was taught: How many

days does the first Adar have when they make an

intercalation of the year—

thirty days.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A

new

month.

And the Gemara understood that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel intended to say that the first Adar is twenty-nine days.

And the view of the tan­nay of our Mishna is like the view of the Sages, who hold that the first Adar is always thirty days; therefore there was no need to inform the inhabitants of the Diaspora whether the first Adar had been intercalated.

And immediately the Gemara is astonished: It follows from the words of the respondent that Rabbi agrees with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and this is difficult:

What is the difference

between the view of the Sages, who hold that the first Adar is

thirty days,

concerning which we said that there is no need to send messengers to the Diaspora, because

they know

that everyone knows that the first Adar is thirty days? If so, since according to him it is

a

new

month,

that is, it is always twenty-nine days,

they also know,

for according to his words everyone knows that the first Adar is twenty-nine days!

And why, according to Rabbi, do they send messengers when they intercalate Adar?

Rav Pappa said

an answer:

The one who says a

new

month,

this is what he intended to say: If the court

wishes, it makes the first Adar

a

new

month

[that is, 29 days]. And if it

wishes, it makes it

thirty

days.

тридцать

дней.

And therefore Rabbi, who agrees with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, said that messengers are sent concerning the second Adar, so that the inhabitants of the Diaspora will know whether they intercalated the first Adar or not, and accordingly they will know when Purim occurs.

And the Gemara brings another opinion concerning how many days the first Adar has:

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi testified in the name of the holy congregation of Jerusalem concerning

a year that has

two Adars, that they sanctify them on their intercalation days.

That is, on the thirtieth day of the first Adar they sanctify the second Adar; it follows that the first Adar was deficient [29 days]. And likewise, on the thirtieth day of the second Adar they sanctify Nisan; it follows that the second Adar also was deficient.

The thirtieth day is called “the day of intercalation,” because when they intercalate the month, they make the thirtieth day an addition to the preceding month. Rashi.

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi came

to say

[to say]

that we make them deficient,

they make both Adars deficient.

But

full—

we do not make them

[we do not make them].

To exclude

from

what Rav Nahman bar Hisda expounded: Rabbi Simai testified in the name of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi concerning two Adars:

If they wished to make both of them full—

they make them so.

And if they wished to make

both of them deficient—

they make them so.

And likewise, if they wished to make

one full and one deficient—

they make them so.

And this is how they would practice in the Diaspora.

And in the name of our teacher,

Rav,

they said: Always

the inhabitants of the Diaspora would assume that they had made

one full and one deficient, until it became known to you

through the inhabitants of the Land of Israel who descend to the Diaspora

that the New Moon had been established

of the second Adar

at its proper time,

on the thirtieth day of the first Adar. And they had made the first one deficient [29 days].

They sent word

the Sages

to Mar Ukva: The Adar adjacent to Nisan—

is always deficient.

Whether in Adar II of a leap year, or in Adar of a non-leap year.

Rav Nahman raises an objection

a contradiction to their words:

We learned in the Mishna [below 21b]:

on two months

the witnesses who saw the moon renewing itself on the thirtieth day would go out to Jerusalem, and

desecrate Shabbat

by going beyond the Shabbat limit [which is two thousand cubits], so that the court in Jerusalem would be able to sanctify the new month in its time:

For Nisan and for Tishrei,

because all the festivals depend upon the beginnings of these months.

If you say that sometimes it is full and sometimes it is deficient,

if you say that the Adar adjacent to Nisan is sometimes full and sometimes deficient, it is understandable that

for this reason we desecrate Shabbat,

so that the court would know that the moon had been seen on the thirtieth day, and that the new month must be sanctified on that day, and not on the following day.