Rosh Hashanah 7a — the Talmud in English

This:

Abaye, who said that they count for it from the time it was born, spoke

of

a firstborn that was born

blemished,

which is destined to be slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard as an ordinary animal, and from the day it was born it is fit for this.

And we raise an objection:

a blemished animal—

is he able to eat it!?

Is it possible to eat a blemished animal on the day it was born!? For it is possible that it is a stillborn animal, which is forbidden to eat; and slaughtering does not permit one to eat an animal except from the eighth day onward, when the animal leaves the status of possible stillborn.

And we answer: Abaye spoke in a case

where it is clear to him concerning it,

that the owners know

that its months were completed,

that the animal’s months of gestation had been completed before it was born, and in such a case it is possible to eat it immediately.

The Sages taught in a beraita: On the first of Nisan

it is

the new year for—

the counting of the

months [

Nisan is called the first month, Iyar the second, and so on].

And for intercalations.

And the Gemara assumes that this refers to convening a court and considering whether the coming year needs to be intercalated, to add a second Adar to it.

And the year begins for this purpose on the first of Nisan. From then onward the court may deliberate on the matter. The Gemara below will discuss this.

And for the collection of shekels,

to begin offering offerings purchased from the contributions of the collection boxes of the new year’s shekels.

And some say, also for the rental of houses.

One who says to his fellow: I am renting you a house for this year—the year ends on the first of Nisan, even if he lived in it for only one month.

And the Gemara explains the words of the beraita:

And we inquire about it:

For the months—

from where do we know it?

From where do we know that the first of Nisan is the new year for the months?

And we answer:

As it is written [

Exodus 12]:

“This month shall be for you the beginning of months; it is the first for you of the months of the year.”

And from where do we know that the verse is speaking of Nisan, and not of another month?

As is stated following this verse:

“Speak to the entire assembly of Israel, saying: On the tenth of this month, they shall take for themselves, each man, a lamb for the father’s house, a lamb for a household. And it shall be for you

the lamb

for safekeeping until the fourteenth day of this month, and they shall slaughter it

the entire congregation of the assembly of Israel between the evenings.”

From here it follows that in the first month they offered the Paschal offering. But I still do not know which month is “the first month.”

And it is written [

Deuteronomy 16:1]:

“Observe the month of the spring,

and perform the Passover for the Lord your God.” From here it follows that the first month, in which they offered the Passover, is called “the month of the spring.”

“Spring” is the first produce of the grain. That is, the barley, which ripens first, finishes ripening in this month.

Which month is one in which there is “spring”

which is the ripening of the grain?

You must say: This is Nisan!

And the verse calls it

the month of Nisan

“first.”

And from here it follows that Nisan is the first month.

And we object:

Perhaps,

the first month is

Iyar,

in which there is also still grain that ripens!

And we answer:

We require

that in the first month the grain be

“spring,”

that it be the first produce of the ripening grain.

And

this

is not found

in Iyar. Since the grain that ripens in Iyar is not the first produce of the grain; rather, it is late grain.

And we object:

Perhaps

the first month is

Adar,

in which the first barley ripens!

And we answer:

We require

that in the first month there be

most of the spring,

that most of the grain ripen first in it,

and it is not found.

For most of the grain does not ripen first until Nisan.

And we reject the answer:

Is it something [

as though

“most of the spring” is written?!

After all, only “spring” was stated. And it is possible that the intention is Adar!

Rather, Rav Hisda said:

From where is it known that Nisan is the first month?—

from here,

from this verse [Leviticus 23]:

“But on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you gather in the produce of the land,

you shall celebrate the festival of the Lord [Sukkot] for seven days.”

Which month is one in which there is gathering?

In which they gather the fruits that are lying in the fields in order to dry.

You must say: This is Tishrei!

For then they ordinarily bring the fruits into the houses so that rain will not fall upon them and make them wet.

And it calls it,

and the verse calls it

“seventh”!

And since Tishrei is the seventh month, it necessarily follows that they begin counting the months from Nisan.

And we object:

Perhaps

the seventh month is

Marheshvan.

And what is “seventh”,

for which month is it seventh—

seventh from Iyar!

And let it be said that Iyar is the first month!

And we answer:

We require

that in the seventh month there be

“gathering,”

and it is not found!

For there is no gathering in the month of Heshvan.

And from here it follows that it is not the seventh month.

And we object:

Perhaps

the seventh month is

Elul,

in which there are people who hasten to gather their grain in Elul

! And what is “seventh,”

for which month is it seventh—

seventh from Adar!

And let it be said that Adar is the first month!

And we answer:

We require

that in the seventh month there be

most of the “gathering,”

and it is not found!

Most people do not gather the grain in Elul, but in Tishrei!

And we reject the answer:

Is it something,

as though

“most of the gathering” is written?!

After all, only “gathering” was stated. And it is possible that this is Elul, which is seventh from Adar! And the question returns: from where is it known that the first month is Nisan?

Rather, Ravina said:

Indeed,

we did not learn this matter from the Torah of Moses our Teacher.

Rather, only

from the words of the received tradition [

the tradition of the prophets

did we learn:

As it is stated [Zechariah 1]:

“On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month,

the eleventh month, which

is the month of Shevat.”

And from here it follows that the first month is Nisan, for Shevat is the eleventh month from it.

Rabba bar Ulla said: From here,

from this verse we learn that Nisan is the first [Esther 2]:

“And Esther was taken to King Ahasuerus, to his royal house, in the tenth month, which is the month of Tevet.”

And from here it follows that the first is Nisan.

Rav Kahana said: From here [

Zechariah 7]:

“On the fourth of the ninth month, in Kislev.”

Rav Aha bar Yaakov said: From here [

Esther 8]:

“And the king’s scribes were summoned at that time, in the third month, which is the month of Sivan.”

Rav Ashi said: From here [

Esther 3:7]:

“He cast

a lot, that is the pur, before Haman, from day to day and from month to month, to the twelfth month, which is the month of Adar.”

And if you wish, say:

if you wish, you can learn that Nisan is the first month

from here,

from what is stated [at the beginning of the verse]:

“In the first month, which is the month of Nisan,

he cast a lot, that is the pur, before Haman.”

Here it is explicitly explained that Nisan is the first month!

And we object:

And all of them,

all the amoraim who proved from the counting of the other months that Nisan is the first month—

why did they not say it from this one!?

Why did they not learn from this verse, which explicitly speaks of Nisan itself as the first month?

And we answer: they hold that one cannot prove from here that Nisan is the first month everywhere, because it can be rejected:

perhaps

what is

“first”

what is mentioned here—

first for its matter!

For the event

of Haman’s decree!

And one cannot learn from here that throughout the Torah the first month is Nisan.

And now the Gemara explains why our Mishna did not mention that the first of Nisan is also the new year for the months:

And our tan­ the tan­ nai,

the tan­ nai who taught our Mishna—

was speaking about years,

he spoke only with regard to new years. But

with

regard to the matter of

months he was not speaking,

he did not speak about them.

And the Gemara continues to explain the beraita:

We learned in a beraita: On the first of Nisan is the new year for the months

and for intercalations.

The Gemara understood that the intention of the beraita is to say that from the first of Nisan the year begins with regard to intercalation; from then onward the court may deliberate concerning the needs of the community and determine whether it is appropriate to intercalate this year.

And we inquire about it: Is it so that

for intercalations—

do we count from Nisan!?

Do we count the year from Nisan, and from then it is possible to intercalate it?!

But it was taught in a beraita: One does not intercalate the year before the new year,

because if they inform the people of the diaspora before the new year that they intercalated the year, there is concern that the matter may be forgotten by the following Adar, and they will celebrate the festival of Passover in Adar.

And if they intercalated it

before the new year—

it is not intercalated,

and they do not intercalate it until Adar arrives.

But in a pressing circumstance,

such as when the court fears that the gentiles will prevent them from sitting and deliberating on the matter —

they intercalate it immediately after the new year.

And nevertheless,

even though it is possible to intercalate the year from Tishrei in a pressing circumstance,

they intercalate only

the

Adar,

to add another month, a second Adar, after the first Adar. And they do not intercalate another month, even though it is already clear now that they need to intercalate the year with an additional month.

In any event, we learned in this beraita that it is impossible to intercalate the year before the new year. If so, what is the intention of the beraita above, which said that the first of Nisan is the new year for intercalations?

Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak said: What is “intercalations”—

the cessation of intercalations!

For from the first of Nisan onward a new year has already begun with regard to intercalation, and therefore the court cannot intercalate Nisan, saying that this Nisan is the second Adar.

As we learned,

so we learned this law in a Mishna [Eduyot 7:7]:

They,

Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Pappai,

testified

that they had received from their teachers

that they intercalate

the

year

throughout

all

the days of the month of

Adar.

For even if the court saw after Purim that it was appropriate to intercalate the year, they may intercalate it then.

And why did they need [Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Pappai] to testify about this?

Because

there were

Sages

saying

that they do not intercalate the year except

until Purim.

Therefore Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Pappai testified that they had received from their teachers that they intercalate throughout the entire month of Adar.

And we inquire about it:

What is the reason,

what is the reason for the words of

the one who says

that they intercalate

until Purim

only?

And we explain:

Since the master said

in a beraita:

The preachers

ask,

presenting and discussing before the public

the laws of Passover thirty days before Passover,

and the congregation hears from the preachers that they must observe Passover in another thirty days.

And if the court intercalates the year and postpones Pesach, there is concern lest the public doubt the words of the messengers of the court and observe Pesach at its appointed time, as they heard from the preachers. And

it will come to belittle

and they will come to belittle

the

prohibition of

leaven

at the time of its prohibition.

That is, at the time established for it after they intercalated the year.

But the other

the tannaim who hold that they intercalate the year until the first of Nisan—why do they not fear lest they belittle the prohibition of leaven?

Because

it is immediately known that the year is intercalated—

the matter depends on the calculation!

Everyone knows that the intercalation of the year depends on the calculation of the court.

And they reason

and they hold that

the calculation is what the Sages have not completed until now.

The calculation was not completed for the Sages until now, and therefore the preachers expounded the laws of Pesach. But in the end the Sages completed their calculation and intercalated the year.

And now the Gemara explains why our Mishna did not mention that the first of Nisan is also the New Year for intercalations:

And we say:

And the tanna of our Mishna,

who taught our Mishna only

dealt with the beginning,

spoke only about laws that begin to apply on the New Year. But

he did not deal with the cessation.

He did not speak about laws that cease at the beginning of the year, from which point onward it is impossible to intercalate the year.

And the Gemara explains the continuation of the words of the beraita:

We learned in a beraita: On the first of Nisan is the New Year for months and for intercalations,

and for the collection of shekels,

to begin offering offerings purchased from the contributions of the collection boxes of the new year's shekels.

And we raised it:

From where do we know it?

From where do we know that on the first of Nisan they begin offering offerings from the shekels of the new year?

Rabbi Yoshiah said: The verse says [

Numbers 28 ]:

“This is the burnt offering of the month in its month, for the months of the year.”

The verse repeated the word “month” three times, for superfluity—

the Torah said: Make a new [calculation] and bring an offering—

from a new contribution.

And they learn,

and the Sages learn the year mentioned here, by a

“year, year” from

the month of

Nisan.

As it is written [

Exodus 12:2 ] concerning the new month of Nisan:

“It is the first for you among the months of ‘the year.’”

Just as this year begins in Nisan, so too the year of the offerings begins in Nisan.

And we challenge:

And let us learn

let us learn by a gzera shava

“year, year” from Tishrei.

As it is written [

Deuteronomy 12 ]:

“From the beginning of the year,”

and the Gemara below [8a] proves that this refers to Tishrei, which is the beginning of the year with regard to judgment, when the Holy One, blessed be He, judges all the inhabitants of the world. It would therefore follow from here that the year of the sacrifices begins in Tishrei and not in Nisan!

And we answer:

They learn,

they learn

year

in the matter of the offerings,

which has months with it,

which were mentioned together with it, “for the months of the year,”

from the year

that begins in Nisan,

which has

also

months with it, “It is the first for you among the months of the year.”

And they do not derive

And they do not learn

the

year

in the matter of the offerings,

which has months with it, “for the months of the year,”

“for the months of the year,”

from the year

that begins in Tishrei,

which does not

have mentioned

with it months [

as it is written there only, “from the beginning of the year”].

And the Gemara explains the matter of the collection of the shekels:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: Public offerings that come on the first of Nisan—

it is a mitzva to bring

them

from the new

from the contribution of the shekels of the new year.

And if he brought from the old,

from the shekels of the previous year—

he has fulfilled

the obligation,

but he has lacked a mitzva

of bringing the offerings from the shekels of the new year.

It was also taught so,

we likewise learned in a beraita:

Public offerings that come on the first of Nisan—

it is a mitzva to bring from the new.

And if he brought from the old—

he has fulfilled the obligation, but he has lacked a mitzva.

And the beraita continues:

And an individual who voluntarily offered

animals

from his own,

and dedicated them for the sake of public offerings—

they are fit

these offerings to be offered as public offerings.

And

only,

on condition

that he transfers them to the public

at the time that he dedicates them as public offerings!

And we challenge:

It is obvious,

it is obvious that an individual who dedicated his animals as a public offering, so that they should belong to the public, they are fit! And why did the tanna trouble himself to inform us of something so obvious!?

And seemingly there is a very great novelty in this: that an individual can dedicate a public offering, for this offering was not purchased from the shekels contributed by all Israel at all; and how can it be considered a public offering when it was dedicated by a single person, from his private property!?

And the explanation of the matter [according to the Chazon Ish, Orach Chayim 126:33] is that this individual dedicates the offering as though he grants it to the public, and dedicates it on behalf of the public.

That is, the designation of the offering as a public offering refers to the public, as though the public had dedicated it; therefore it is not necessary to purchase it from the shekels of the public, and this is obvious.

And we answer:

What might you have said,

that I might have said,

let us be concerned,

that there is reason for concern

lest: