Sanhedrin 11a (יא.) — the Talmud in English

The Gemara cites beraitot and traditions concerning the laws and procedures of intercalating the year.

The Sages taught: A year may be intercalated only with

those who were appointed for it,

meaning that the Nasi of the Sanhedrin had invited the judges the previous day for this purpose.

An incident involving Rabban Gamliel

the Nasi,

who said

to the members of the Sanhedrin:

“Have seven

judges

rise early for me

the next day

to the upper chamber!”

the place designated for the session of the court.

He rose early and found eight.

Rabban Gamliel said

Rabban Gamliel:

“Who is the one who came up without permission—

let him leave!”

Shmuel HaKatan stood

on his feet

and said: “I am the one who came up without permission, but I did not come up to intercalate the year,

to join you in this deliberation,

rather, I needed to study the practical halakha,

in order to learn how you would conclude the intercalation.

Rabban Gamliel said to him

Rabban Gamliel:

“Sit, my son, sit. All the years would be worthy of being intercalated through you,

and you are worthy of joining us because of your wisdom,

but the Sages said: A year may be intercalated only with those who were appointed for it.”

The Gemara explains the incident related in the beraita:

And

in truth,

it was not Shmuel HaKatan

who was the man who had not been invited,

but another person

who had come up without having been invited,

and he did this because of embarrassment.

Shmuel HaKatan did this so that they would not identify which of them had come without permission and embarrass him.

The Gemara relates another similar incident.

It was like this incident

that occurred with Rabbi,

when Rabbi was sitting—

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi—and

teaching

and lecturing,

and he smelled the scent

of

garlic. He said: “Whoever ate garlic—

let him leave.” Rabbi Chiyya stood

from his place

and left.

And following him,

everyone stood

all the students

and left.

The next day,

at dawn, Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi’s son, found

the son of Rabbi

Rabbi Chiyya and said to him: “

Were

you the one who distressed my father

by eating garlic, so that the smell spread?”

Rabbi Chiyya said to him

Rabbi Chiyya said to Rabbi Shimon: “

Heaven forbid,

God forbid!

‘Such a thing shall not occur among Israel.’”

I would not eat garlic when coming to Rabbi’s house of study. Rather, so as not to embarrass the one who had eaten the garlic, I left, so that everyone would leave and they would not understand who it was.

The Gemara explains:

From where did Rabbi Chiyya derive this practice

from where did he learn this conduct ?

The Gemara states that Rabbi Chiyya learned this principle

from Rabbi Meir. As it is taught in a beraita

that we learned in a beraita:

“There was an incident involving a certain woman who came to Rabbi Meir’s house of study. She said to him: ‘Rabbi! One of you betrothed me through intercourse’ ,

meaning, he betrothed me through betrothal by intercourse, which is one of the means by which a woman can be acquired.

Rabbi Meir stood

on his feet

and wrote her a bill of divorce

a get,

and gave it to her,

although he himself knew that he had not done so; he acted this way so that all of them would divorce her, thereby making her divorced, and suspicion would not fall upon any one of the students. And that is indeed what happened:

they all stood, wrote one, and gave it to her.

And from where did Rabbi Meir derive this practice

from where did he learn this conduct?

From Shmuel HaKatan

he learned this, from the fact that he said to Rabban Gamliel that he was the one who had come up without permission.

And from where did Shmuel HaKatan derive it?

From Shecaniah ben Jehiel

he learned this conduct,

as it is written [Ezra 10].

It is related there that they told Ezra that the Israelites in their exile had married foreign women. Ezra prayed to God, and a very large assembly of Israelites gathered around him, and it is stated:

“And Shecaniah ben Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said to Ezra: ‘We have trespassed against our God and have taken foreign women from the peoples of the land; yet now there is hope for Israel concerning this matter.’”

He advised making a covenant with our God to send away all the women, and although he himself had not married a foreign woman , he said in the language of “we have trespassed.”

And from where did Shecaniah ben Jehiel derive it,

from whom did he learn this conduct?

From Joshua,

from the incident involving Joshua, when Achan had violated the ban, and the Holy One, blessed be He, did not wish to reveal to him who the sinner was. Instead, He spoke to him in general terms, “Israel has sinned.”

As it is written [Joshua 7]:

Joshua 7:

“And the Lord said to Joshua: Arise, why are you fallen upon your face? Israel has sinned!”

Joshua said

Joshua

before Him

before the Holy One, blessed be He:

“Master of the Universe! Who

among the Israelites

has sinned?” He said to him

the Holy One, blessed be He:

“Am I an informer

a talebearer

to you?

Rather,

cast lots

among them, and the one upon whom the lot falls is the sinner.” He did not explicitly reveal who the sinner was, so that he would not be embarrassed.

Alternatively,

if you wish,

say

that Shecaniah learned this

from Moses

when several Israelites went out on Shabbat, contrary to the prohibition, to gather manna and found none,

as it is written

that Moses said to the entire people:

“How long will you refuse”

in general terms, although only some of them had acted this way.

The Gemara adds to its account of the virtues of Shmuel HaKatan , and first relates an account concerning Hillel the Elder.

The Sages taught

our Sages taught:

“When the last prophets died,

namely,

Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Divine Spirit departed

the spirit of prophecy

from Israel,

and nevertheless they would make use of a divine voice,

which came to them from Heaven.

Once, the Sages were

sitting

in the upper chamber of the house

belonging to a man named

Gurya ben

the city of

Jericho, and a divine voice was issued concerning them from Heaven,

saying:

“There is here

a sage

one who

is

worthy for the Divine Presence to rest upon him [

like Moses our teacher ],

but

the Divine Presence does not rest upon him because

his generation is not worthy of this.

Although the divine voice did not say who the sage was,

the Sages focused their attention on Hillel the Elder,

for it was clear to them that the divine voice referred to him.

And when

Hillel

died, they said about him

the eulogies of his generation’s Sages: “

Woe, pious one,

woe to us, for the pious one has departed from us;

woe, humble one,

woe to us, for the humble one has departed from us;

the disciple of Ezra.”

Again, on another occasion, the Sages were

of the later generation

sitting in an upper chamber in

the city of

Yavne. And a divine voice was issued concerning them from Heaven

saying:

“There is here

a sage

one who

is

worthy for the Divine Presence to rest upon him,

but his generation is not worthy of this.” The Sages focused their attention on Shmuel HaKatan, and when he died, they said about him: “Woe, pious one; woe, humble one; disciple of Hillel.”

And he too,

although the Divine Presence did not rest upon him because his generation was not worthy, nevertheless, toward the end of his life the Divine Presence rested upon him, and he prophesied

and said at the time of his death: “Shimon and Yishmael to the sword,

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel the Nasi and Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha the High Priest would be killed by the sword,

and their colleagues to other deaths,

their colleagues would die other deaths, such as Rabbi Akiva, who was killed with iron combs, and Rabbi Chanina ben Teradyon, who was killed by burning,

and the rest of the people

the remainder of the people

to plunder;

the Romans would plunder them,

and great troubles

great calamities

are destined to come

to arrive

upon the world.”

All his prophecies were fulfilled, demonstrating that the Divine Presence ultimately rested upon him.

And

likewise

concerning [

Rabbi ]

Yehuda ben Bava, the eulogizers sought

the eulogizers

to say the same:

“Woe, pious one; woe, humble one,” and so on.

But

why did they not eulogize him in this manner? Because

the moment was disrupted

and they had no time for this,

for one does not eulogize those executed by the government

the wicked government, because of the concern that the king might not permit him to be buried, and they therefore hasten to bury him.

Introduction to the discussion of intercalating the year.

In the lunar year there are twelve lunar months, comprising approximately 354 days.

The solar year comprises approximately 365 days. It follows that the solar year exceeds the lunar year by approximately eleven days.

The solar year is divided into the four “seasons” of the year. Each season is approximately 91 days. They are: the season of Nisan, which is the time of spring, when the grain is full in its husk; the season of Tammuz; the season of Tishrei; and the season of Tevet.

The Torah commanded that the lunar year be aligned with the solar year, by commanding that the festival of Pesaḥ always fall during the season of spring. Since the date of Pesaḥ is determined according to the lunar months, the calendar must be established so that Pesaḥ falls during the season of spring. This is accomplished by aligning the months of the year with the solar months, because the seasons of the year are determined only according to the solar months, and not according to the lunar months.

The Torah likewise commanded that the festival of Sukkot occur at the time of the “gathering” of the grain from the fields, which is before the rainy season. This time depends on the solar system, and for this reason as well we are commanded to align the lunar year with the solar year.

Since the months of the year are counted only as complete months, it is impossible to add eleven days to each lunar year, beyond the twelve months. Rather, an entire month must be added from time to time. This addition is called “intercalation.”

When the months of the year were sanctified on the basis of sighting the moon by the court, the year was intercalated by the Sanhedrin, as explained in our Mishna. That is, each year they deliberated whether that year was appropriate for intercalation.

And what did they deliberate about?

A. The “fundamental basis of intercalation”: aligning the lunar year with the solar year so that Pesaḥ would fall during the season of spring.

B. “A need.” Even if Pesaḥ would fall during the season of “spring” according to the calculation [when the sun enters the sign of Aries], nevertheless, if the rains were delayed, or it was difficult to make the pilgrimage, or there were insufficient animals for the Pesaḥ offering, or there were other similar “needs” explained in our discussion, they would intercalate the year. [

Intercalating the year to align the solar year with the lunar year is certainly a Torah obligation. However, the early authorities disagree as to whether intercalation for a need is a Torah obligation or rabbinic. Rashi’s commentary on the Torah indicates that it is a Torah law, for he interprets the verse [Leviticus 23:2], “Speak to the children of Israel: The appointed times of the Lord, which you shall proclaim,” and explains in the name of the Sifra: “Establish the festivals so that Israel will be accustomed to them”; this teaches that the year is intercalated for the exiles of Israel who uprooted themselves from their places to make the pilgrimage and have not yet reached Jerusalem. The Yad Ramah and other early authorities likewise wrote this. But Rabbeinu Yona holds that it is rabbinic. ]]

The Gemara now cites beraitot concerning the laws of intercalating the year.

The Sages taught: A year may be intercalated only if the Nasi wishes

of the Sanhedrin .

And if the Nasi was not with them—for example, if he was in a distant place—it is possible to intercalate the year on the condition that the Nasi will approve it when he returns.

And there was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel the Nasi, who went to obtain

permission

to speak about communal matters

from a certain ruler in Syria, and was delayed in returning

he did not return by the time of the intercalation

, and they intercalated the year on the condition that Rabban Gamliel would approve it. When Rabban Gamliel arrived and said, “I approve,” it emerged that the year was intercalated

retroactively.

The Sages taught: The year may be intercalated only if the

year

requires it

to be intercalated,

because of the roads and because of the bridges

which were damaged by the winter rains, and they did not have enough time to repair them, so the pilgrims would not be able to reach Jerusalem to celebrate Pesaḥ.

and because of the ovens

for the offerings

of Pesaḥ

in which the Pesaḥ offering is roasted, which melted in the rains and need to be rebuilt and dried in the sun,

and because of the exiles of Israel

who live in the distant Diaspora, and the court heard

that

already

they had departed from their places

and begun their pilgrimage to offer the Pesaḥ offering

but had still not arrived.

For all these matters, the year is intercalated, since if they do not intercalate the year, the pilgrims will not come to celebrate the festival of Pesaḥ in Jerusalem.

But they do not

intercalate the year

because of snow or because of cold,

since these do not completely prevent the pilgrims from ascending ,

nor because of the exiles of Israel who

still

have not departed from their places.

The Sages taught

our Sages taught:

The year is not intercalated because of the kids or because of the lambs

goats and sheep one year old for the Pesaḥ offering that have not fully matured, and they wish to intercalate the year so that they will mature; the year is not intercalated, since this is not such a great need, as it is possible to offer them as they are ,

nor

because of the fledglings

turtledoves that those requiring atonement—women who had given birth and men and women who had experienced a flux—would bring when they went on pilgrimage to celebrate Pesaḥ

that had not yet flown

because they were still young, since small pigeons may be offered.

However,

although they do not intercalate the year solely because of them, nevertheless

they make them a supporting consideration

as an additional, supporting reason—that is, an adjunct

to

intercalate the

year,

for if they wish to intercalate the year because of the fruit, and we will learn in the following beraita that this is not a sufficient reason for which they may intercalate the year, it is possible to add to it the reason of the kids and lambs, or the reason of the fledglings, so that they will intercalate the year on account of these two matters.

How

do they make them a support for the year:

Rabbi Yannai says: In the name of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who was the Nasi and head of the Sanhedrin, did, and he sent letters to distant places to inform them that the year was intercalated, and he wrote in those letters: “

We hereby inform you

we are informing you

that the fledglings are tender

that the fledglings are tender

and the lambs are thin [

and some versions read:

that they are thin]

the lambs are thin,

and the time of spring has not yet arrived

the time of spring has not yet arrived, [which is one of the three reasons, of which two are required for intercalation]],

and

therefore

the matter appears proper to me

the matter appears proper to me [it seems so to me]]

and I have added to this year

and I have added to this year a month of

thirty days

thirty days.

Thus, only one of the “reasons”—the spring—had not arrived, and this alone was insufficient grounds for intercalating the year. Rather, together with the lambs and fledglings, he intercalated the year.

It is implied by the words of Rabbi Yannai that he added a month of thirty days, and concerning this the Gemara raises a difficulty:

The following objection was raised:

we learned in a beraita:

How long is the intercalation of the year—

thirty days

so maintain the Sages, whereas

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A month

which is twenty-nine days.

There is therefore a contradiction between the statements of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

And the Gemara answers:

Rav Pappa said:

When Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said “a month,” he did not intend to exclude a full month of thirty days. Rather,

if they wished

the Sanhedrin added

a month

of twenty-nine days, and if

they wished

they added

thirty days.

The Gemara finds a difference between this wording of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said, “The matter appears proper to me,” meaning that it is proper in his view to intercalate the year, whereas Rabban Gamliel in his generation wrote: “And the matter appears proper to me and to my colleagues”—in my view and in the view of my colleagues.