Rosh Hashanah 5a — the Talmud in English

Just as the Festival of Matzot requires lodging overnight,

meaning that one must spend the night in Jerusalem on the night after the first day of Passover

— so too, the Festival of Sukkot requires lodging overnight.

And the Gemara explains

: And there,

with regard to the Festival of Matzot itself

, from where do we know

that it requires lodging overnight?

It is because

it is written

[in Deuteronomy 16], concerning the Passover offering

: “You shall turn in the morning and go to your tents.”

The verse cannot be referring to the morning of the first day of the Festival, since that is a day on which one is obligated to appear in the Temple courtyard.

Rather, the verse is referring to the first morning of the intermediate days of the Festival.

The conclusion from the Gemara’s discussion is:

a. According to the first tanna and Rabbi Shimon, the verse states, “On the Festival of Matzot, on the Festival of Weeks, and on the Festival of Sukkot,” to teach by analogy that if three pilgrimage Festivals pass without a person fulfilling his obligation, he violates the prohibition against delaying.

b. According to Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, “the Festival of Matzot” is stated in order to compare the Festival of Weeks to the Festival of Matzot, teaching that the offerings of the Festival of Weeks may be made up throughout all seven days.

c. “The Festival of Sukkot” is written in the verse in order to compare it to the Festival of Matzot with regard to lodging overnight.

They raise an objection:

But the first tanna and Rabbi Shimon,

who expounded the verse with regard to the prohibition against delaying

, from where do they derive

the make-up period for the Festival of Weeks?

From where do they know that the offerings of the Festival of Weeks may be made up throughout all seven days?

They answer:

They derive it

this law

from what

was taught by

Rabba bar Shmuel:

Rabba bar Shmuel taught: The Torah said:

a. With regard to the New Moon

, count

thirty

days, and sanctify

the beginning of the

month

through the additional offerings.

As it is stated [in Numbers 11]: “Until a month of days.” From here they learned that a month is counted in days.

The intention is not that there is a mitzva to count the days of the month, but rather that a month is reckoned by days and not by hours, even though the interval between one new moon and the next is not thirty full days, but twenty-nine days, twelve hours, and 793 parts [Rabbeinu Tam in Tosafot, Hagiga 17b].

b. Similarly, the Torah said with regard to the Festival of Weeks

, count

fifty

days, and sanctify

the Festival of

Assembly

through its offerings.

And we learn this through a foundational inference:

Just as

the beginning of the

month,

whose sanctification through the additional offerings is

according to its counting,

is on one of the units by which it is counted,

that is, because the month is counted by units of time consisting of days, since thirty units of a day are counted for it,

and on one of those days by which it is counted, the beginning of the month is sanctified by bringing the additional offerings,

so too

the Festival of

Assembly,

whose sanctification through the offerings of the Festival of Weeks is

according to its counting,

is on one of the units by which it is counted, namely, the unit of time by which it is counted.

The Festival of Assembly is counted by counting units of time consisting of weeks, as it is stated [Leviticus 23:15]: “You shall count for yourselves seven complete weeks.”

From here it follows that the offerings of the Festival of Assembly have a make-up period throughout all seven days.

They raise an objection: And

perhaps

the sanctification of the Festival of

Assembly

through its offerings is only for

one day,

since the Festival of Assembly is counted by units of time consisting of days, as it is stated [in the following verse]: “You shall count fifty days”!

He said

and answered

Rava: Is it so

that the counting of the seven weeks of

the Festival of Assembly

is made only according to units of time consisting of

days,

whereas according to units of time consisting of

weeks, we do not count them?

But the Master said

[Abaye, in tractate Menahot 66a]:

The mitzva

of counting the Omer is

to count the days,

to count forty-nine days from the day the Omer was brought until the Festival of Weeks.

And there is a mitzva to count the weeks.

There is also a mitzva to count seven weeks from the day the Omer was brought until the Festival of Weeks.

Since the Omer count includes units of time consisting of weeks as well, the sanctification of the Festival of Weeks through its offerings lasts for a unit of time consisting of one week.

Furthermore,

with regard to the Festival of Assembly

— “the Festival of Weeks” is written

[Deuteronomy 16:16]. From here it follows that the primary counting counted toward the Festival of Assembly is the counting of weeks.

We learned in a beraita: Those liable for monetary valuations, a firstborn animal, the animal tithe, and the Passover offering—once three pilgrimage Festivals have passed, one violates the prohibition against delaying.

We considered this matter

:

And the offering of

Passover —

is it fit to be offered on the pilgrimage Festivals?!

Is the Passover offering fit to be sacrificed on all three pilgrimage Festivals, so that you would make one liable for the prohibition against delaying once three pilgrimage Festivals have passed without bringing it?!

After all, for the offering of

Passover —

a fixed time was set for it.

The Torah set its time as the fourteenth of Nisan alone.

Therefore,

if he sacrificed it

on the fourteenth of Nisan, at its appointed time

, he sacrificed it,

and it is obvious that the prohibition against delaying does not apply here.

But if he did not sacrifice it —

it was immediately disqualified!

If he did not sacrifice it at its appointed time, it is immediately excluded from being sacrificed at any later time. Therefore, he violates the prohibition against delaying immediately!

Rav Hisda said: “Passover” —

was included needlessly!

Indeed, the tanna mentioned the Passover offering unnecessarily, because in truth, for delaying the sacrifice of the Passover offering one violates the prohibition against delaying immediately once the fourteenth of Nisan has passed without sacrificing it.

Rav Sheshet said: What does “Passover

mean, in the beraita

— the Passover peace-offering

is meant.

This refers to a person who had a Passover offering that was lost, sacrificed another animal in its place, and afterward found the first animal; the first animal is then sacrificed as a peace-offering.

And if three pilgrimage Festivals pass without sacrificing it as a peace-offering, he violates the prohibition against delaying.

They raise an objection:

If so,

if the beraita is referring to delaying the sacrifice of the Passover peace-offering, then

it is the same as peace-offerings

themselves!

After all, it is sacrificed as a peace-offering, and we already learned “peace-offerings” in the beraita. Why, then, did the tanna need to mention the Passover peace-offerings separately?

They answer:

The tanna

taught the law concerning delay of

peace-offerings that come because of a Passover offering,

such as a Passover offering that was lost and another was sacrificed in its place, after which the first was found and is sacrificed as a peace-offering.

And the tanna

also taught the law concerning delay of

peace-offerings that come on their own,

such as an animal that one designated as a peace-offering from the outset.

The tanna needed to teach us the law of peace-offerings that come because of a Passover offering as well.

Because

it might have entered your mind to say

that

since they came because of

the sanctity of

a Passover offering,

these peace-offerings came.

these peace-offerings,