Rosh Hashanah 22b — the Talmud in English

And it is difficult:

One —

is he trustworthy!?

Is one witness trustworthy to testify concerning the witness that he is fit]]?

But it was taught,

and after all it was taught in a beraita:

It happened that he came,

he,

the witness, before the court on Shabbat to testify about the renewal of the moon,

and his witnesses

came

with him to testify concerning him,

that he was trustworthy.

And since two witnesses had to come with him on Shabbat, from here there is proof that one witness is not trustworthy!

Rav Pappa said

an answer:

What [

what is ]

“another”

that was mentioned in the Mishna? —

Another pair.

So too, it is reasonably evident.

This too appears from the words of the Mishna:

For if you do not say so,

for if you do not say so, but say that “another” means one — how will you explain the beginning of the Mishna, where we learned:

“If they do not recognize him”.

What is “him”?

If we say, one

if we say that “him” means the one witness, then there is a difficulty:

And one —

is he trustworthy?

Is one witness trustworthy for testimony concerning the new moon?!

But

“judgment” is written concerning it,

for concerning the sanctification of the new moon it is said: “For it is a statute for Israel, a judgment of the God of Jacob” [Psalms 81]]!

And judgment means monetary law, and testimony in monetary law is valid only with two [witnesses]!

Rather, what is “him”?

That pair.

If so,

so too

also with regard to what we learned, “they send another with him to testify concerning him,”

what is “another”?

Another pair!

In any event, the Gemara concluded that one witness is not trustworthy to testify concerning a witness that he is fit.

And we wondered:

And

is one

witness not trustworthy?!

But it was taught,

and after all it was taught in a beraita:

It happened with Rabbi Nehorai, who went to the witness to testify concerning him on Shabbat in Usha,

when the Sanhedrin was sitting there, and there they sanctified the new moon. From here, Rabbi Nehorai was trustworthy concerning this, even though he was only one witness!

They said

an answer:

Rabbi Nehorai —

another witness was with him.

Another witness was with Rabbi Nehorai.

And the fact that it did not count him,

why did the tan[n]ay not mention him? —

Because of Rabbi Nehorai’s honor.

For the tan[n]ay mentioned Rabbi Nehorai only in order to prove that it is permitted to do this on Shabbat, since even Rabbi Nehorai acted permissively in this matter; and it would not be respectful to bring our proof even from his colleague, who was lesser than he.

Rav Ashi said

another answer:

Rabbi Nehorai —

there was another witness in Usha,

Rabbi Nehorai knew that there was another witness in Usha who also recognized this witness.

And Rabbi Nehorai went to join him,

and Rabbi Nehorai went to Usha in order to join him, so that the two of them would testify concerning the matter.

And we object:

If so —

what is it teaching!?

If there was another witness there, what did the tan[n]ay come to teach?

And we answer:

What you might have said is that we do not desecrate Shabbat on a doubtful basis,

I might have said that one must be concerned lest that witness not be found at home, and on a doubtful basis we do not desecrate Shabbat.

It teaches us

the tan[n]ay that we do desecrate it. The Gemara brings that there is testimony concerning the sanctification of the new moon that is exceptional, and even one witness is trustworthy to testify concerning it:

When Ulla came,

when Ulla came from the Land of Israel to Babylonia,

he said: They sanctified the month in the West.

They sanctified the month in the Land of Israel on the thirtieth day.

Rav Kahana said: It is not necessary to say

there is no need to say concerning

Ulla, who is a great man, that he is trustworthy.

Rather, even an ordinary person,

even another person,

is also trustworthy.

What is the reason?

Anything that is destined to become known, people do not lie about it!

Concerning something that is destined to become clear to everyone, people do not lie. So that they will not be established as liars.

It was taught likewise: If one came from the end of the world and said, “The court sanctified the new moon,” he is trustworthy.

We learned in the Mishna:

At first, they would accept testimony

concerning the new moon from every person;

when the Boethusians corrupted matters, they instituted that they would accept testimony only from those whom they recognized.

The Sages taught:

What corruption did the Boethusians corrupt?

Once the Boethusians sought to mislead the Sages.

They hired two men for four hundred zuz, one

was

from our group [

from the Pharisees, whom the court did not recognize ],

and one

was

from their group [

from the Boethusians ].

The witness

from their group testified to his testimony

as usual,

and left.

And the witness

from our group, they said to him

the court:

Say, how did you see the moon?

He said to them: I was going up on Ma'aleh Adumim, and I saw it [

the moon ]

lying between two rocks, its head resembling a calf, its ears resembling those of a kid, its horns resembling those of a gazelle, and its tail lying between

its thighs; and I peered at it, and I recoiled and fell backward.

And if you do not believe me —

here are two hundred zuz bundled in my sheet

that I received in order to give false testimony [half of the four hundred zuz that the two witnesses received together].

They said to him:

Since you did not give false testimony —

what compelled you to this,

to this testimony?

He said to them: I heard that the Boethusians sought to mislead the Sages.

Therefore

I said: I shall go myself

to testify

and inform them

that the testimony was false testimony.

For if I had not gone myself,

perhaps unworthy people would come and mislead the Sages.

They said to him,

the Sages: Even though you accepted payment from the Boethusians in order to give false testimony, and you did not do so [and a person who accepts money as payment is obligated to fulfill his condition], nevertheless,

these two hundred zuz

are

given to you as a gift!

For the court has the authority to penalize a person through his money.

And the one who hired you

to mislead the Sages —

let him be stretched out on the pillar

for lashes [for this is how one liable for lashes is flogged: his two hands are bound to the pillar, as explained in Tractate Makkot 22b].

At that time they instituted that they would accept

the testimony concerning the new moon

only from those whom they recognized.

Mishna:

Our Mishna brings another enactment that the Sages instituted because of the corruption of the Cutheans:

At first,

they would not send messengers to the Diaspora to inform them of the fixing of the month; rather,

they would raise signal fires

carrying torches beside the court, so that the inhabitants of the nearby cities would see them and understand that they had sanctified the new moon, and in those cities they would again light torches until they reached the Diaspora [as explained below].

When the Cutheans corrupted matters,

for the court would raise signal fires only when it sanctified the new moon on the thirtieth day, at which time they would raise signal fires in the evening; and when they did not raise signal fires on the evening of the thirtieth day, everyone knew that the court had made the month full.

Once the court made the month full, and therefore they did not raise signal fires on the evening of the thirtieth day. And the Cutheans raised them on the mountains on which they sat, and misled the inhabitants of the Diaspora and caused them to make it deficient.

And from that point onward

they instituted that messengers should go out.

And

how would they raise signal fires

at first?

They would

bring long cedar poles,

so that when they kindled a fire at their tops, the fire would be visible from afar,

and reeds, and oil wood, and flax tow,

all of which increase the flame.

And he would bind

them

with a cord [

a kind of thread ] at the tops of the poles.

And he would go up to the top of the mountain and kindle the fire in them.

And he would move it back and forth, and raise it, and lower it

the signal fires [so that they would not mistakenly think it was a star. Jerusalem Talmud].

Until he saw his fellow,

who was standing on another mountain,

doing likewise on the top of the second mountain.

And so

it was

on the top of the third mountain,

and so on.

And from where,

from which mountains

were signal fires lit?

From the Mount of Olives

[from the Mount of Olives] they would begin, since it is close to Jerusalem,

to Sartaba

until they saw that they were doing so also in Sartaba,

and from Sartaba to Grofina, and from Grofina to Hauran, and from Hauran to Beit Baltin.

And from Beit Baltin they did not move from there, but carried and brought, and raised and lowered

the signal fires

until he saw

the

entire diaspora before him like a bonfire

explained in the Gemara].

Gemara:

And we inquire concerning this:

What indicates that “they light signal fires” is an expression of kindling?

From where do we learn that the expression “they light signal fires” means “kindling a fire”?

And we answer:

as it is written

[Samuel II 5]:

“And David and his men burned them.”

And we translate it: And he burned them

[burned them]

David.

The Sages taught: Signal fires are lit only for the new moon

[the renewal of the moon]

that was seen in its proper time

on the thirtieth day.

And when do they light them? —

At the light of its intercalation.

On the thirtieth day at night, which is the night at the beginning of the thirty-first day. ["

“Light” is a designation for night. And the thirtieth day is called the day of intercalation, because they make it an intercalation for the preceding month].

This is to say,

that the baraita informs us

that when it is deficient we do it, but when it is full we do not do it,

only when the preceding month was deficient did they light signal fires, but not when it was full and they sanctified the new month on the thirty-first day.

What is the reason?

Rabbi Zeira said: A decree, on account of a deficient new month,

a new month established on the thirtieth day of the preceding month [and thereby the preceding month is deficient],

which occurs on the eve of Shabbat,

and it is forbidden to light signal fires on the night following it, for it is Shabbat.

When do they do it,

when are they able to light signal fires?

At the departure of Shabbat,

on Saturday night.