Sanhedrin 10b — the Talmud in English

And if so, it is difficult:

to strike him twenty-one times,

so that he will receive the full twenty blows that they assessed him to receive,

and if he dies with this one blow,

with the twenty-first blow,

let him die

with this blow,

for when you strike him,

when they flog him,

you are striking upon the living,

he is still alive.

And Rav Ashi answers:

He said to him: The verse says: “And your brother will be degraded before your eyes,”

the verse teaches that

“after he has been flogged,

‘your brother’ is required.

It is necessary that the person be alive also at the completion of the flogging, and not only in the middle of the blows.

We learned in our Mishna:

The intercalation of the month is [performed] by three.

A. In the lunar month there are twenty-nine days and another half-day, and 793 parts [29 days, 12 hours, and 793/1080 of an hour].

B. If we know the time of the molad of the previous month, we can calculate the time of the next molad, if we add this amount.

C. A “month,” for the purpose of calculating the times of the Torah, must be composed of complete days, and not of half-days.

And since we always have an addition of half a day between one molad and the next, we must attach that additional half-day to one month, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, deduct half a day from the following month. And thus the order of the months is obtained: one “full” month of thirty days, which is called an “intercalated” month, to which a half-day was attached, and after it one “deficient” month of twenty-nine days.

When they would sanctify [the month] on the basis of sighting, when witnesses would come to testify before the Sanhedrin that they had seen the new moon, the court would sit and await the witnesses.

If witnesses came on the thirtieth day and testified that they had seen the new moon on the night between the twenty-ninth day and the thirtieth day, the court would sanctify the thirtieth day as the New Moon, and it would be the first day of the following month. And it then emerged that the previous month had been a deficient month.

But if witnesses did not come on the thirtieth day, the previous month was a full month, and only on the following day, the thirty-first day, was the New Moon of the following month.

Our Mishna can be interpreted in three ways:

A. Calculation of the month: the three judges mentioned in our Mishna are assigned to calculate calculations [as will be explained] whether to intercalate or to make deficient.

And if we interpret it in this manner, only for the calculation are three required, and not for anything else.

B. Sanctification of the month: the three judges are assigned to receive the testimony from the witnesses on the thirtieth day and to sanctify it; that is, the head of the court says “Sanctified,” and all the people answer after him, “Sanctified, sanctified.” For the sanctity of the month and the festivals comes through the proclamation of a court of three.

C. Intercalation of the month: as we explained regarding the sanctification of the month, except that the proclamation is made only if they did not sanctify it on the thirtieth day and they intercalate the month; then the court needs to sanctify it through a proclamation.

Calculation of the month means that even if witnesses came on the thirtieth day, nevertheless, sometimes they delay accepting their testimony and intercalate the month. [And conversely—even if there are no witnesses, sometimes they sanctify on the thirtieth day on the basis of false witnesses [see Rosh Hashana 20a], because of various calculations.

And they are: “because of vegetables and because of the dead”; that is, so that Yom Kippur should not fall neither on the eve of Shabbat nor on the day after Shabbat. For if there are two consecutive days of cessation, all the vegetables will wither on the hot days, and a person who dies on Yom Kippur cannot be buried on the Shabbat that follows it. And likewise, one who dies on Shabbat cannot be buried on Yom Kippur that follows it, and the dead person will decompose. Therefore, it is proper to advance them to Thursday, in which manner they make the previous month deficient, or to postpone them to Monday, in which manner they intercalate the previous month.

And there is another calculation: although it is proper to make all the months one full and one deficient, so that the New Moon will truly be on the day of the molad, and to make six full months and six deficient months, nevertheless, sometimes, because the witnesses did not see [the moon] on the thirtieth day, or did not come to testify for whatever reason, or because of vegetables and the dead, and they made more intercalated months than was proper, it emerges that the new moon will be seen on the twenty-eighth day of the previous month or on the twenty-ninth day, and the matter will appear false, for the people had already seen the new moon while the court had still not sanctified it. Therefore, they need to calculate so as not to make too many intercalated months; they do not make more than seven intercalated months [and at most eight if in the previous year they made too many deficient months]. These calculations, and others like them, are called calculation of the month.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

Calculation

of the month

it does not teach,

it is not written in the Mishna, and likewise

sanctification

of the month

it does not teach; rather, [it teaches] intercalation.

It is written in the Mishna, and it is difficult: for what reason does the court need to proclaim intercalation?

Let it not sanctify it

on the thirtieth day ,

and automatically

the previous month

will be intercalated.

And the Gemara answers:

Abaye said: Teach

the Mishna differently;

the sanctification of the month.

And according to this version, three judges are required to sanctify all the months of the year, whether the previous month was full or whether it was deficient.

It was taught likewise

according to the version proposed by Abaye:

The sanctification of the new month and the intercalation of the year are [performed] by three;

these are

the words of Rabbi Meir.

And Rava raises an objection: Although this is taught in the beraita, in our Mishna it is difficult to say sanctification—

Rava said

to Abaye:

But it teaches intercalation,

Although it is sometimes the way of the tan­nay to forget one word, it is not his way to replace a version, as you said—that he confused sanctification with intercalation.

Rather, Rava said:

The explanation of the Mishna is:

Sanctification on the day, intercalation,

if the court wishes to sanctify the following month on the thirtieth day, which is the day that is sometimes intercalated into the previous month, then they require

three,

but if they did not sanctify on the day of intercalation, and the New Moon of the following month will be on the thirty-first day, which is

after intercalation,

they do not require three, because

there is no sanctification at all;

they do not need to proclaim concerning it, “Sanctified, sanctified.”

And according to this explanation, the tan­nay of our Mishna does not hold like Rabbi Meir of the beraita, for Rabbi Meir

holds that even the New Moons that follow full months require the court to sanctify them, whereas the tan­nay of the Mishna holds that they need to sanctify only when they sanctify on the thirtieth day.

And whose [opinion is it,]

and whose tan­nay’s Mishna is it?

It is that of Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Tzadok.

For we learned

that we learned in a Mishna [Rosh Hashana 20a]:

Rabbi Eliezer bar Rabbi Tzadok says: If [the month] was not seen

the month

at its proper time

on the thirtieth day,

they do not sanctify it

on the thirty-first day,

for it has already been sanctified in Heaven

the court above sanctified it yesterday [interpretation: When the court above sees that the court of the Sanhedrin is not sanctifying it on the thirtieth day, they sanctify it on the thirty-first day, for surely they will not postpone it to another day].

Rav Naḥman interprets the Mishna: The tan­nay of our Mishna holds, on the contrary, that on the thirtieth day it is not necessary for the court to sanctify and proclaim “Sanctified,” whereas on the thirty-first day it is necessary.

Rav Naḥman said: Sanctification after intercalation,

after the thirtieth day, which is the day of intercalation—

[is performed] by three.

And

but

on the day of intercalation,

on the thirtieth day itself,

there is no sanctification,

they do not need to sanctify it.

And whose [opinion is it,]

and whose tan­nay’s Mishna is it?

It is that of Palimo. For it was taught: Palimo says: At its proper time,

in a deficient month, which they sanctify on the thirtieth day,

they do not sanctify it;

there is no need for court sanctification, for there is no need for a proclamation to establish that today is the New Moon, since it is its proper time. But

not at its proper time,

if they postpone it to the thirty-first day,

they sanctify it,

in order to establish the matter that today is the New Moon.

Rav Ashi said: It is indeed calculation that it teaches,

for the intention of our Mishna is that the court needs to calculate calculations,

and what is

the meaning of

intercalation?

The calculation of intercalation,

to calculate the calculations whether to intercalate—it is given to a court of three.

And why did the Mishna not write “the calculation of intercalation”?

And since it was necessary for it to teach the intercalation of the year,

since it was taught together with the intercalation of the year, therefore

it also taught

in a similar formulation

the intercalation of the month.

For regarding the intercalation of the year, it is not sufficient for the court to decide that the year needs to be intercalated; rather, they need to intercalate it through a proclamation that the following month is the second Adar, for if they do not proclaim it, it will automatically be Nisan. Therefore, we learned “intercalation,” meaning that after they have made all the calculations, they need to intercalate it through a proclamation. And it emerges that “the intercalation of the year” essentially means calculation; therefore, also regarding the intercalation of the month, the intention is calculation.

And according to this opinion:

the calculation of the month—

not

yes, the court is required, whereas

the sanctification of the month, not

is the court required, whether they make it deficient or intercalate it.

Whose [opinion is it,]

whose tan­nay’s Mishna is it?—

It is that of Rabbi Eliezer.

For it was taught, Rabbi Eliezer says: Whether

they calculate to make the New Moon

at its proper time

on the thirtieth day,

or not at its proper time

on the thirty-first day,

they do not sanctify it;

they do not need the court to sanctify it, and the function of the court is only to calculate and decide whether to make it deficient or to intercalate it,

as it is stated

in the passage concerning the Jubilee:

“And you shall sanctify the fiftieth

year.”

And Rabbi Eliezer expounds: Only

years,

the Jubilee year,

you sanctify

through the sounding of the blast of the shofar.

But you do not sanctify months,

and there is no need to sanctify months, whether full or deficient.

It emerges that there are three interpretations of the Mishna: A. Sanctification of the month. B. Intercalation of the month. C. Calculation of the month.

We learned in our Mishna:

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: With three they begin, with five they discuss and deliberate, and with seven they conclude; and if they concluded with three, it is intercalated .

The Gemara explains the order of the deliberation.

It was taught: How did Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say, “With three they begin, with five they discuss and deliberate, and with seven they conclude”?

At first, three judges, members of the Sanhedrin, sit and deliberate [a preliminary deliberation] whether there are reasons to consider whether to intercalate, and they discuss the matter among themselves. And if they disagree among themselves,

one says to sit,

that there are reasons to sit and deliberate about intercalating,

and two say not to sit,

that there is no doubt here, and certainly there is no reason to intercalate, the law is:

the individual is nullified among his minority,

and they do not sit to examine and deliberate.

But if

two say to sit, and one says not to sit,

the individual is nullified,

and two more are added to them

from among the judges,

and they discuss and deliberate about the matter,

because discussion and deliberation concerning the intercalation of the year must be with five.

If their opinions are divided,

two say it is necessary

for this year to be intercalated,

and three say it is not necessary—

the two are nullified among their minority,

and they do not intercalate, and they stand and go away. But if

three say it is necessary

to intercalate,

and two say it is not necessary—

they follow the majority, and their decision to intercalate is a final decision. Rather, they

add two more to them,

because

the number

for intercalation is

not fewer than seven.

And the Gemara explains:

These three, five, and seven correspond to what?

According to what order are these numbers?

The amoraim disagree about it: Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani and one who was with him,

and another amora with him,

and who was he?

And who was he?

Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi.

And

other students

said it to him

and transmitted the teaching in this formulation:

Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi and one who was with him,

and another amora with him,

and who was he?

And who was he?

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani:

One

of the two amoraim

said: They correspond to the Priestly Blessing.

For it contains three verses: the first has three words, “May the Lord bless you and safeguard you”; the second has five words, “May the Lord illuminate His countenance toward you and be gracious to you”; and the third has seven words, “May the Lord lift His countenance toward you and grant you peace.” And corresponding to them is arranged the order of the judges for the intercalation of the year.

And one

of these two amoraim

said

that they correspond to the protocols of royalty, for we find ranks and ranks in their proximity to the king, and the intercalation of the year is among the protocols of the heavenly kingdom, to arrange the years in their proper order. And they are:

three—

corresponding to the gatekeepers,

as it is written concerning King Zedekiah [II Kings 25];

five—

corresponding to the five who see the face of the king,

as it is also written there;

seven—

corresponding to

those who see the face of the king,

as it is stated [Esther 1]: the seven ministers of Persia and Media.

Rav Yosef taught: These three, five, and seven: three corresponding to the guards of the threshold, five corresponding to those who behold the king’s face, seven [corresponding to] those who behold the king’s face.

Abaye said to him

to Rav Yosef:

Until now, what is the reason that my master did not explain it to us—

Rabbi! Until now, why did you not explain this matter to us.

He said to them

Rav Yosef answered his students:

I did not know that you needed it

I did not know that you needed this matter,

Did you ever ask me for a matter and I did not tell you?

Did such a thing happen, that you asked me and I did not answer?!

The time of the Nasi requires a kid goat as a sign

[They are signs for the reports that follow, except ... [unclear: the wording of the gloss is corrupt].]