ראש השנה 20:2 — Soncino English Talmud

— The latter statement would be seen to be false, the former statement is not seen to be false. Samuel said: I am quite able to make a calendar for the whole of the Diaspora. Said Abba the father of R. Simlai to Samuel: Does the Master know [the meaning] of this remark which occurs in [the Baraitha known as] the secret of the Calendar? ‘If the new moon is born before midday or after midday’? — He replied: I do not. He then said to him: Since the Master does not know this, there must also be other things which the Master does not know. When R. Zera went up [to Palestine], he sent back word to them [in Babylon]: It is necessary that there should be [on New Moon] a night and a day of the new moon. This is what Abba the father of R. Simlai meant: ‘We calculate [according to] the new moon's birth. If it is born before midday, then certainly it will have been seen shortly before sunset. If it was not born before midday, certainly it will not have been seen shortly before sunset’. What is the practical value of this remark? — R. Ashi said: To [help us in] confuting the witnesses. R. Zera said in the name of R. Nahman: The moon is invisible for twenty-four hours [round about new moon]. For us [in Babylon] six of these belong to the old moon and eighteen to the new; for them [in Palestine] six to the new and eighteen to the old. What is the practical value of this remark? — R. Ashi said: To confute the witnesses. The Master has just said: It is necessary that there should be [on New Moon] a night and a day of the new moon. Whence is this rule derived? — R. Johanan said: [From the text]. From evening to evening; Resh Lakish said: [From the text], Until the twenty-first day of the month in the evening. What practical difference is there between them? — Abaye said: The difference between them is only one of exegesis. Raba said: They differ in regard to [the hours up to] midnight. R. Zera said in the name of R. Nahman: Wherever [an extra day is kept] out of doubt, we make it the succeeding day. This means to say that we keep [Passover and Tabernacles] on the fifteenth and sixteenth but not on the fourteenth. But should not the fourteenth also be kept, in case both Ab and Elul have been declared short?16^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ

^ᵃnote:Because other people might have seen the new moon.
^ᵇnote:Because it could not be proved that they had not seen it (Rashi). R. Hananel: Provided they had seen a semblance of the new moon].
^ᶜnote:Heb. rucg lit., ‘taking across’: the word used for the prolonging of the year and the month.
^ᵈnote:This was a Baraitha made up of enigmatic sentences like the one which follows.
^ᵉnote:I.e., that there should be no appearance of the old moon in this period, viz., after the closing of the twenty-ninth day; otherwise New Moon cannot be proclaimed on the thirtieth.
^ᶠnote:Because if the conjunction is calculated to have been after midday and they claim to have seen the new moon before nightfall, they are not telling the truth.
^ᵍnote:Which would imply that in Babylon the new moon is not visible till eighteen hours after its birth (Rashi).
^ʰnote:Which would imply that in Palestine the new moon is visible six hours after its birth (Rashi).
^ⁱnote:Lev. XXIII, 32, in connection with fasting on the Day of Atonement. This shows that the day follows the night in reference to the festivals.
^ʲnote:Ex. XII, 18, in connection with eating unleavened bread on Passover. This shows that the festivals end at even.
^ᵏnote:Lit., ‘the interpretation of exegeses’.
^ˡnote:According to R. Johanan,the ‘night’ referred to is on the same footing as the night of the Day of Atonement which commences at nightfall. But according to Resh Lakish, it is on a par with the first night of Passover, which, in relation to the Paschal lamb, was a continuation of the afternoon before. Hence Resh Lakish holds that even if the old moon was seen in the early part of the evening, the next day may still be declared New Moon.
^ᵐnote:Lit., ‘wherever there is a doubt, we cast it forward’.
^ⁿnote:I.e., that we reckon fifteen days from the thirtieth day, and also from the thirty-first day of the previous Adar or Elul, out of doubt, but in no case from the twenty-ninth. This dictum would seem to be superfluous, as in no circumstances was New Moon proclaimed on the twenty-ninth day after the previous New Moon.
^ᵒnote:Rashi reads ‘Shebat’.
^ᵖnote:And in this case, what we suppose to have been the twenty-ninth day of Adar or of Elul would really have been the first of Nisan or of Tishri.