Sanhedrin 13a (יג.) — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Yosei says: Twenty-one days.

When the court sits in the month of Adar and, according to its calculation, it emerges that the beginning of the coming tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the seventeenth day of Tishrei, which is the second day of Chol HaMoed Sukkot, the first day of Chol HaMoed Sukkot will still be in the tekufa of Tammuz. Therefore, the court intercalates the year and adds the month of Adar, so that the first day of Chol HaMoed will also fall in the tekufa of Tishrei. This is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. According to Rabbi Yosei, however, only if the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twenty-second day of Tishrei, in which case all the days of Chol HaMoed will be in the tekufa of Tammuz, does the court intercalate the year.

But if the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the sixteenth of Tishrei, and all the days of Chol HaMoed will be in the new tekufa, which is the tekufa of Tishrei, then according to Rabbi Yehuda the court does not intercalate the year. Likewise, if the new tekufa will fall on the twenty-first of Tishrei, so that at least one day of Chol HaMoed Sukkot will be in the tekufa of Tishrei, according to Rabbi Yosei the court does not intercalate the year. "

A deficient tekufa" means that the tekufa of Tammuz is short by several days of ending at its proper time; for example, instead of the tekufa of Tammuz ending at the end of the month of Elul, it extends into the month of Tishrei, and thereby the tekufa is delayed.

And how many days make it called "a delayed tekufa"? For Rabbi Yehuda, when it is delayed by sixteen days; and for Rabbi Yosei, when it is delayed by twenty-one days.

Introduction to the explanation of the dispute between Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda:

The festival of Sukkot is called in the Torah "the Festival of Ingathering," which is "at the tekufa of the year," because that is the season when the produce is gathered from the fields, where it dried during the summer, before the rains arrive.

The Torah's intention in calling the festival by this name refers to the days of Chol HaMoed, on which it is permitted to gather produce from the fields, in accordance with the law of Chol HaMoed, during which it is permitted to perform work involving a loss that cannot otherwise be prevented. But on the first day of the festival and on Shemini Atzeret, it is forbidden to gather produce.

The Sages expounded that the days of Chol HaMoed must be, as the verse states, "at the tekufa of the year"; that is, in the tekufa of Tishrei, which begins at the beginning of the year. However, Rabbi Yehuda holds that the verse requires all the days of Chol HaMoed to be in the tekufa of Tishrei, whereas Rabbi Yosei holds that it is sufficient for one day of the days of Chol HaMoed to be in the tekufa of Tishrei.

And both of them,

Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei,

expounded one verse.

They derived their opinions from the same verse, as it is stated:

"The Festival of Ingathering, at the tekufa of the year."

The verse teaches that Chol HaMoed must be in the tekufa of Tishrei.

One Master,

Rabbi Yehuda,

holds: We require the entire festival,

all the days of Chol HaMoed,

we require,

the Torah requires all the days of the festival to be in the tekufa of Tishrei. Therefore, he holds that if the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the first day of Chol HaMoed, namely, on the sixteenth of Tishrei, the court does not intercalate the year, since in this case all the days of Chol HaMoed will be in the tekufa of Tishrei. But if the tekufa falls on the seventeenth of Tishrei, so that the sixteenth of Tishrei, which is the first day of Chol HaMoed, is in the tekufa of Tammuz, the court intercalates the year.

And one Master,

Rabbi Yosei,

holds

that only

part of the festival,

even one day of Chol HaMoed,

we require,

must be in the tekufa of Tishrei. Therefore, he holds that even if the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei, the court does not intercalate the year, since one day of Chol HaMoed remains in the tekufa of Tishrei. Only if it falls on the following day, the twenty-second, so that not even one day of the days of Chol HaMoed remains in the tekufa of Tishrei, does the court intercalate the year.

The Gemara discusses:

What do they hold,

what do Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei hold, and what is the basis of their dispute?

If they hold that

"the day of the tekufa,"

the day of the tekufa,

the day on which the tekufa falls during the course of the day,

completes,

is the final day of the previous tekufa, and the new tekufa does not begin on that day but only on the following day,

in any event, too, it is not so!

Even if the tekufa is deficient by only fifteen days, according to Rabbi Yehuda, and the tekufa falls on the first day of Chol HaMoed, that day belongs to the tekufa of Tammuz, and thus not all the days of Chol HaMoed are in the tekufa of Tishrei. Likewise, according to Rabbi Yosei, even if it is deficient by only twenty days and the tekufa falls on the twenty-first, that day belongs to the tekufa of Tammuz, with the result that not even one day of Chol HaMoed is in the tekufa of Tishrei.

And the conclusion of Shmuel's statement is:

Rather, they hold

Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei that

the day of the tekufa,

the day in the middle of which the tekufa falls, is the day

that begins

the new tekufa. Therefore, according to Rabbi Yehuda, if the tekufa falls on the sixteenth, the new tekufa begins on the sixteenth, and all the days of Chol HaMoed will be in the tekufa of Tishrei. According to Rabbi Yosei, if the tekufa falls on the twenty-first, that day is the first day of the tekufa of Tishrei, and part of the festival will be in the tekufa of Tishrei. How did they do this? Even when they sanctified the month based on the sighting of the moon, they were careful about this and arranged the months so that the first day of Rosh HaShana would not fall on Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday. During the summer months they took care that one month be full and one deficient; together they total 177 days. They arranged from the winter that Pesaḥ would not fall on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday, because if Pesaḥ fell on one of those days, Rosh HaShana would fall on Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday, according to the calculation of the 177 days between Pesaḥ and Rosh HaShana. Therefore, during the winter months they advanced or delayed one month, so that Pesaḥ would not fall on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday. How did they do this? Concerning this the law states: "You—even if you are intentional sinners." If the court saw a need, for the reason stated above, to delay and intercalate one of the winter months, it did not accept witnesses on the thirtieth day, and the month was consequently intercalated [according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Tzadok; or it accepted the witnesses on the thirty-first day, according to Palaimo; see page 10b]. Alternatively, if it saw a need to sanctify the month on the thirtieth day for the reason stated above, it hired false witnesses to come and testify that they had seen the moon on the thirtieth day. In general, they tried to ensure that even during the winter one month would be full and one deficient, so that there would be six full months and six deficient months. However, because of the calculation described above, they sometimes added or subtracted from the six full and six deficient months during the year. The law is [Arakhin 8b]: "They do not make fewer than four intercalated months in a year, nor were more than eight ever seen." That is to say, it is possible to have fewer than six intercalated months, but not fewer than four; and it is possible to have more than six, but not more than eight. Thus the court had many possibilities for arranging the winter months so that Pesaḥ would not fall on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday, and therefore Rosh HaShana would not fall on Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday. This calculation was practiced in the court from the time of Ezra the Scribe, at the beginning of the Second Temple period. From this comes the source for what the Sages say [Rosh HaShana, there]: "From the time of Ezra onward, we do not find an intercalated Elul." That is, they did not intercalate the month of Elul [even when witnesses did not come on the thirtieth day, as stated above], because the months were already properly arranged from the beginning of the summer. As relevant to our sugya: Rashi asked: If the day of the tekufa falls on the seventeenth of Tishrei according to Rabbi Yehuda, or on the twenty-second of Tishrei according to Rabbi Yosei, why is it necessary to intercalate the year for this reason? It would be sufficient to intercalate the month of Elul [or one of the other summer months] by one day, so that the day of the tekufa would fall on the fifteenth of Tishrei according to Rabbi Yehuda, and on the twenty-first of Tishrei according to Rabbi Yosei. Rashi answers that if this were done, the entire arrangement would be disrupted. Everything had been planned during the winter so that Rosh HaShana would fall on Shabbat rather than Sunday, on Tuesday rather than Wednesday, or on Thursday rather than Friday, as explained above. If the date were postponed by one day, Rosh HaShana would fall on Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday. Although, if Rosh HaShana would fall on Monday, it would be possible to postpone it to Tuesday, nevertheless, since in most years postponement is impossible, it is not postponed even in this year. Rashi continues to explain that it cannot be suggested that two months be intercalated and the date postponed by two days [so that if Rosh HaShana was supposed to fall on Shabbat it would be postponed to Monday; if on Tuesday, to Thursday; and if on Thursday, to Shabbat], because then there would be too many intercalated months, and one may not add beyond [seven or] eight intercalated months. [Although the Mishna states eight, it is explained there in the Gemara that it refers to seven, and only in special circumstances is eight permitted, as explained on page 10b.] Rashi raised this question because the Gemara [on page 14b] raises a similar question concerning the tekufa of spring during the winter, as will be explained there. Therefore, Rashi wished to say that the same question should also be raised concerning the tekufa of Tishrei: Why not intercalate one of the months? He explains the distinction: If, at the end of the winter, they postpone the date by one day and thereby add another month to the number of intercalated months, this arrangement will not be disrupted, because they can "repay" that day by making one of the summer months deficient, and the arrangement will return to its proper order. But at the end of the summer, or in the middle of the summer, it is impossible to intercalate and postpone the date, thereby disrupting the arrangement. See Tosafot, s.v. "And Rabbi Yosei." The Baal HaMaor challenges Rashi's interpretation and demonstrates that in the time of the tannaim they were not particular about the rule that the first day of Rosh HaShana not fall on Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday [see there for his proofs]. Rather, only in the later generations of the amoraim did they begin to observe this rule strictly. The Ran answers that Rashi wished to interpret the sugya in a manner consistent with the enactment of the later amoraim. The Yad Ramah explains that according to the other tannaim who discuss "intercalation because of the tekufa," it is certain that one of the other two signs—spring or the fruits—is also not occurring at its proper time. Therefore, in any event, the year must be intercalated, and intercalating by one day would not help. But according to the others, who hold that the year is intercalated only because of the tekufa of Nisan [and this is the opinion of Tosafot according to Rashi's method, at the end of s.v. "Guard"], the Gemara asks according to their view: "Let us intercalate it by adding Adar." The Ran likewise cites this explanation in the name of Ramban.

Now the Gemara challenges Shmuel's statement from two baraitot in which it is stated contrary to his words.

Meytivi

from what we learned in a baraita:

"The day of the tekufa completes; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: The day of the tekufa begins."

The challenge is from the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, for he holds that the day of the tekufa completes. If so, why, when the tekufa falls on the sixteenth, do they not intercalate the year? Surely Chol HaMoed does not all fall in the tekufa of Tishrei!

And it was further taught:

We learned in another baraita:

"The year is not intercalated—

unless the tekufa was deficient by most of a month. And how many

days constitute

most of a month? Sixteen days."

These are the words of the first tanna.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

If the tekufa is deficient by

two portions

two-thirds

of a month,

they intercalate the year.

And how many

days constitute

two portions of a month?

Twenty days.

Therefore, if the tekufa falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei, they intercalate the year, because the day of the tekufa completes. Not even one day of the new tekufa is in Chol HaMoed. But if the tekufa falls on the twentieth, then the twenty-first, which is the minority of the days of Chol HaMoed, is in the new tekufa.

Already from this part of the baraita two challenges to Shmuel arise. First, in this baraita we learned that Rabbi Yehuda holds that it is sufficient for part of the festival to be in the new tekufa. Second, in this baraita, as well as in the earlier baraita, we learned that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the day of the tekufa completes.

The continuation of the baraita is:

"Rabbi Yosei says: They calculate."

They calculate that if the tekufa of Tevet is deficient by

sixteen

days from its proper time, which is until the month of Nisan,

before Pesaḥ,

so that the tekufa of Nisan falls on the seventeenth of Nisan,

they intercalate

the year, because without the intercalation the tekufa of Tishrei would certainly fall on the twenty-fourth of Tishrei, and not even part of the festival of Sukkot would be in the tekufa of Tishrei.

How so? Each tekufa is ninety-one days [Rashi does not calculate the additional seven and a half hours; see Tosafot].

Two tekufot are 182 days.

From the seventeenth of Nisan to the seventeenth of Tishrei there are 177 days [as we explained in the note]. Add five days to them in order to reach the total of 182 days for the two tekufot, at which point the tekufa of Tishrei will fall; it follows that the tekufa falls on the twenty-second of Tishrei. Although Rabbi Yosei holds that the day of the tekufa begins, the twenty-first of Tishrei is the final day of the tekufa of Tammuz, and not even part of Chol HaMoed is in the new tekufa. Therefore, they intercalate the year. But if the tekufa of Nisan falls on the sixteenth of Nisan, then [this is possible; see Tosafot] the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twenty-first of Tishrei. That day is the beginning of the tekufa of Tishrei, and it follows that part of Chol HaMoed will be in the tekufa of Tishrei.

But if the tekufa of Tammuz is deficient by

sixteen

days

before the festival,

Sukkot, so that the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the seventeenth of Tishrei,

they do not intercalate the year.

These statements appear contradictory, for the first clause implies that he holds that it is sufficient for part of the festival—the twenty-first of Tishrei—to be in the tekufa of Tishrei, whereas the latter clause implies that if the new tekufa will fall after the seventeenth [on the eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, or twenty-first], they intercalate the year. The Gemara will explain this.

The baraita continues and says:

Rabbi Shimon says: Even

if the tekufa of Tammuz is deficient by

sixteen

days

before the festival,

and the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the seventeenth, they

intercalate the year.

The Gemara will now explain his position, and also how his opinion differs from that of the first tanna.

Others say:

If the tekufa is deficient by

the minority

of a month, they intercalate the year.

And how many

days constitute

the minority?

Fourteen days.

The Gemara will explain his position.

This concludes the baraita. And it was taught in it contrary to Shmuel, as explained above concerning Rabbi Yehuda.

The difficulty stands.

The difficulty remains, because Shmuel, or his students, did not resolve it.

The Gemara now explains the opinions of the tannaim in the baraita and the difference between them, both in their reasoning and in their halakhic ruling.

The Master said,

we learned in the baraita,

Rabbi Yehuda says:

If it is deficient by

two portions of a month,

which are twenty days, they intercalate the year, since it is sufficient for part of Chol HaMoed Sukkot to be in the tekufa of Tishrei.

And we also learned:

Rabbi Yosei says: They calculate

if

sixteen days before Pesaḥ, they intercalate the year,

for it is sufficient for part of Chol HaMoed Sukkot to be in the tekufa of Tishrei. And the Gemara asks:

This is Rabbi Yehuda.

This is apparently the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda; in what do Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei disagree?

The Gemara answers that they disagree concerning the following issue:

The day of the tekufa completes, and the day of the tekufa begins—

that is the difference between them.

This is their dispute. Rabbi Yehuda holds that the day of the tekufa completes. Therefore, if the tekufa falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei, they intercalate the year, because that day belongs to the tekufa of Tammuz, and not even part of Chol HaMoed is in the tekufa of Tishrei. Rabbi Yosei, however, holds that the day of the tekufa begins. If the tekufa falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei, that day is part of the tekufa of Tishrei, and it is not necessary to intercalate the year. Therefore, he says that if the tekufa of Nisan falls on the sixteenth of Nisan, in which case, according to the calculation, the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twenty-first, they do not intercalate the year.

In brief: If the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei, according to Rabbi Yehuda they intercalate the year, whereas according to Rabbi Yosei

they do not intercalate the year.

The Gemara now continues to explain the baraita: [As already explained above, there is apparently a contradiction in Rabbi Yosei's statements.]

The Master said,

we learned in the baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: If the tekufa is deficient by

sixteen

days before the festival, and the tekufa falls on the seventeenth of Tishrei, they

do not intercalate the year.

The Gemara asks:

Rather,

if he said:

sixteen

days

before the festival—

it is only then that they do not

intercalate the year. And let us infer:

but if seventeen,

if the tekufa of Tammuz ends seventeen days into Tishrei and the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the eighteenth,

and eighteen,

if the tekufa of Tammuz ends eighteen days into Tishrei and the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the nineteenth [and likewise, if it ends on the nineteenth and the tekufa falls on the twentieth, or if it ends on the twentieth and the tekufa falls on the twenty-first], Rabbi Yosei holds

that they intercalate the year.

But why should we intercalate the year?

Yet did he not say

that Rabbi Yosei himself said in the first clause:

"Sixteen before Pesaḥ"—

yes,

then they indeed intercalate the year, because in that case the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twenty-second of Tishrei, and then not even part of Chol HaMoed is in the tekufa of Tishrei. But

less,

less than that—that is, if the tekufa of Nisan falls on the fifteenth of Nisan—

no,

they do not intercalate the year. In that case the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twenty-first of Tishrei, according to the calculation, and that is sufficient, because he holds that it is enough for part of Chol HaMoed to be in the tekufa of Tishrei. All the more so if the tekufa of Nisan falls on the fourteenth of Nisan, the thirteenth, or the twelfth, in which cases the tekufa of Tishrei will fall on the twentieth, nineteenth, or eighteenth, they do not intercalate the year. Why, then, does he say in the latter clause that they intercalate the year?

And the Gemara resolves:

No!

The interpretation of the baraita is not as the questioner understood, but

both this and that,

both in the first clause and in the latter clause, Rabbi Yosei holds:

the year is not intercalated.

Indeed, even if the tekufa of Tammuz is deficient by twenty days, and the tekufa of Tishrei begins on the twenty-first of Tishrei, the year is not intercalated. And why did he say in the latter clause “sixteen,”

since he taught in the first clause “sixteen before Passover,”

where the precise meaning is sixteen, and not later, as we explained, therefore

he also taught,

he likewise stated in the latter clause

“sixteen before the festival,”

so that the wording would be parallel; but this is not precise, because the same law applies even if the tekufa of Tishrei is deficient by twenty days, and the tekufa falls on the twenty-first of Tishrei.

The Gemara continues to interpret the baraita:

We learned in a baraita:

Rabbi Shimon says: Even

if the tekufa is deficient by

sixteen

days

before the festival,

meaning that the tekufa of Tishrei falls on the seventeenth of Tishrei, \-

the year is intercalated.

The Gemara raises an objection:

This is the same as the first tanna!

This is the opinion of the first tanna; in what way does Rabbi Shimon disagree with him!?

And the Gemara answers: