Rosh Hashanah 23a — the Talmud in English

But if you say that we should also light beacons after a full month,

if you say that beacons should also be lit when the preceding month was full,

they will come ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the folio")

to make a mistake,

they will come to err.

They say:

let them determine the matter from this: whether

this

month

is deficient.

And the reason that they did not light beacons yesterday

and the reason that they did not light beacons yesterday

is that it was impossible

to light them on the night of Shabbat.

Or perhaps

perhaps

it is a full month, and they lit them at the proper time.

That is why they lit the beacons on Saturday night, at the fixed time—that is, on the evening of the thirty-first day.

And we challenge this:

Then let them light beacons both after a full month and after a deficient month,

let them light beacons whether the month was full or deficient,

and when the new moon falls on Friday evening—

let them not light beacons at all.

And when the new moon follows a deficient month and falls on Friday evening, they should not light beacons at all.

And once

they know

that we do not light

beacons after a deficient month on

Saturday night, but we do light

beacons on Saturday night only

after a full month,

after a full month, then since they will not light them on Saturday night, it will automatically be

known

that they will understand

that it is deficient.

And because the new moon fell on Friday evening, they could not light beacons that evening [because it was Shabbat]!

And we answer:

Even so, they will still come to make a mistake.

Even despite this, they will still err.

For when

they say,

they will say:

This—

is a full month.

And the reason that they did not light them—

they were prevented by intoxication.

They became intoxicated at the Shabbat meal, and therefore did not light the beacons on Saturday night.

And we challenge this:

Then let them light

beacons only

after a full month, and let them not light

beacons

after a deficient month at all.

Let them always light beacons only after a full month, and not after a deficient month [even when it falls on another day of the week]. Then, when they sanctify the new moon on the thirtieth day, which falls on Friday evening, and do not light the beacons on Saturday night, everyone will know that they sanctified the new moon that day and will not attribute the matter to intoxication. Since they never light beacons after a deficient month, they will say that this month, too, was deficient, and will attribute it to the common occurrence [rather than to uncommon intoxication]!

Abaye said

to answer:

Because

if they lit beacons only after an intercalated month, there would always be

a cessation of labor for the people

on Rosh HaShana

for two days.

For when Rosh HaShana falls on the thirtieth day and they do not light the beacons that evening, the people will still not know that the new moon was sanctified until the following evening [when they see that no beacons are lit that evening either]. Thus, because of the uncertainty [perhaps that day is Rosh HaShana], they would refrain from work for two days.

Therefore, they instituted that beacons be lit only after a deficient month. If they sanctified Rosh HaShana on the thirtieth day, they would light beacons at the end of Rosh HaShana, and everyone would then know that they had sanctified the new moon on the thirtieth day; the next day they could work. They would refrain from work only after an intercalated month [because even on the thirtieth day they refrained from work, lest that day be a festival].

We learned in the Mishna:

How did they light the beacons?

They would bring poles

of cedar

and so on.

Rav Yehuda said: There are four kinds of cedar: cedar, katrom, oil tree, and cypress

[types of trees].

And what is

katrom?

Rav said: Adra.

The scholars of Rav Sheila’s academy said: Mavliga.

And some say,

and some say:

This is gulmish.

All of these are names of trees that were known in their time.

And

what Rav Yehuda said, that there are four kinds of cedar,

disagrees

with the statement

of Rabba bar Rav Huna:

For Rabba bar Rav Huna said, in the name of the students of Rav

[this is what Rav’s students said]:

There are ten kinds of cedar,

and some of them are mentioned in the biblical text.

As it is stated

[Isaiah 41]:

“I will place in the wilderness: cedar, acacia, and myrtle, and oil tree.

I will set in the desert cypress, plane tree, and box tree together.”

Cedar

is

arza.

Acacia

is

toranita.

Myrtle

is

asa

[myrtle].

Oil tree

is

afarsema

[persimmon].

Cypress

is

barata.

Plane tree

is

shaga.

Box tree

is

shorivna.

These,

all together,

are seven.

When Rav Dimi came, he said: Three more were added to them

another three trees, which are also kinds of cedar:

oaks, pistachio trees, and coral trees.

Oaks

are

botemei.

Pistachio trees

are

belutei

[terebinths].

Coral trees

are

kesita.

Some say,

there are those who say that three different kinds were added:

arones, chestnut trees, and coral trees.

Arones

are

arei.

Chestnut trees

are

dulvei

[chestnuts].

Coral trees

are

kesita.

These are corals that grow on the sea floor.

Since corals were mentioned, the Gemara brings an aggadic passage about them:

Isaiah prophesied that a narrow stream of water would eventually emerge from the Temple and later widen greatly, to the point that

“a mighty fleet—

it will not cross it.”

What is meant by “a mighty fleet”?

Rav said: This is a burini—

a ship

large

that is used for acts of strength, and therefore it is called “a mighty fleet.” The word “mighty” denotes strength.

What did they do with it,

what was this ship intended for, and what act of strength did they perform with that ship?

They would bring six thousand men for twelve months of the year,

bringing six thousand men to work throughout the twelve months of the year.

And some say,

some say:

twelve thousand men for six months of the year.

They would bring twelve thousand men to work for six months.

They would position the ship at sea, in an area where corals grew, in order to uproot the corals from the sea floor.

And they would fill it with sand until it settled.

They would fill it with sand until its bottom rested on the sea floor and its sides rose above the surface of the sea. In the area where corals grew, the sea was not very deep.

And a diver would descend, and tie thick flax ropes to the corals, and tie them to the ship.

A diver would descend and fasten thick flax ropes [which did not come loose easily], with one end attached to the corals and the other to the ship.

Then they would take the sand and throw it outside,

removing the sand from the ship and throwing it overboard,

and as it rose, it would uproot and bring them.

As the ship rose, it would uproot the roots of the coral trees and bring the corals with it.

And

those corals were so valuable that

one was exchanged for

two in silver.

They were exchanged for twice their weight in silver.

The Gemara adds another matter concerning corals:

There were three major ports

in the sea:

Two belonged to the Romans,

two ports belonged to the Romans.

And one belonged to the Persians.

One port belonged to the Persians.

At the Roman ports—

they would bring up corals.

The Romans brought corals up from the sea using a diver [literally, “a sea diver”].

At the Persian port—

they would bring up pearls.

The Persians brought pearls up from the sea.

And it was called “the royal port of Mashmaheg.”

The Persian port was called the royal port.

Since the verse “I will place in the wilderness cedar” was cited above, the Gemara brings a teaching expounded from this verse:

Rabbi Yohanan said: Every

tree

of acacia that the gentiles took from Jerusalem—

the Holy One, blessed be He, will eventually return it to her.

As it is stated

[Isaiah 41]:

“I will place in the wilderness cedar, acacia.”

And “wilderness” can refer only to Jerusalem.

As it is stated

[Isaiah 64]:

“Zion has become a wilderness; Jerusalem a desolation.”

The Gemara brings another aggadic statement of Rabbi Yohanan:

And Rabbi Yohanan said: Woe to the idolaters, for they have no remedy

who

are compared to a myrtle in the wilderness

[which is a myrtle, but is surrounded by wilderness],

for no one benefits from it,

as no one enjoys its fragrance.

Some say,

some say that the myrtle in the wilderness was compared to something praiseworthy:

Anyone who studies Torah and teaches it in a place where there are no Torah scholars—

is like a myrtle in the wilderness, which is precious.

The Gemara brings another aggadic statement of Rabbi Yohanan:

And Rabbi Yohanan said: Woe to the idolaters, for they have no remedy.

As it is stated [Isaiah 60]:

“In place of copper

that the Babylonians took from Israel,

I will bring

in the future

gold

, which is superior to copper.

And in place of iron I will bring silver.

And in place of wood—

copper. And in place of stones—

iron.”

From here we learn that in place of everything the nations took from Israel, Israel will receive something superior to it.

But if so,

in place of Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues,

whom the idolaters killed cruelly—

what will they bring!?

That is, they have no remedy.

And concerning them,

those idolaters,

it is stated

[Joel 4]:

“I will acquit

if I come to acquit the gentiles of their other sins,

I will not acquit them of their blood.”

I will not acquit them for having spilled the blood of Israel.

We learned in the Mishna:

And from where did they light the beacons

and so on,

and from Beit Biltin

and so on.

And we explain:

What is Beit Biltin?

Rav said: