Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 4, scan section 35

Joseph, " Pumbeditha." And how was it that the whole coun- try looked like a blazing fire ? We learn that each Israelite took a torch in his hand and ascended to the roof of his house. MISHNA: There was a large court in Jerusalem called Beth * The thirtieth day from the last New Moon was always New Moon, but in intercalary months the thirty-first day was also New Moon (second day). In the latter case the thirtieth day (first day of New Moon) belonged to the passing month, and the second day of New Moon was the first day of the new month. Bonfires were always lighted on the night of the thirtieth day, i.e., on the night after New Moon ; and if no bonfires were lighted then there were two days New Moon. In the case of the month of Elul they would, after twenty-nine days, observe New Year's Day. Now, if that month happened to be intercalary {i.e., have thirty days) and bonfires would have been lighted, the next day would have had to be observed as New Year's Day again, and the people would consequently have lost a second day. — Rasht. 44 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. Ya'azeq, where all the witnesses met, and where they were ex- amined by the Beth Din. Great feasts were made there for (the witnesses) in order to induce them to come frequently. At first they did not stir from there all day (on the Sabbath),"* till R. Gamaliel, the elder, ordained that they might go two thousand ells on every side; and not only these (witnesses) but also a midwife, going to perform her professional duties, and those who go to assist others in case of conflagration, or against an attack of robbers, or in case of flood, or (of rescuing people) from the ruins (of a fallen building) are considered (for the time being) as inhabitants of that place, and may go (thence on the Sabbath) two thousand ells on every side. How were the wit- nesses examined ? The first pair were examined first. The elder was introduced first, and they said to him : Tell us in what form thou sawest the moon ; was it before or behind the sun ? Was it to the north or the south (of the sun) ? What was its elevation on the horizon ? Towards which side was its inclina- tion ? What was the width of its disk ? If he answered before the sun, his evidence was worthless. After this they introduced the younger (witness) and he was examined ; if their testimony was found to agree, it was accepted as valid ; the remaining pairs (of witnesses) were asked leading questions, not because their testimony was necessary, but only to prevent them depart- ing, disappointed, and to induce them to come again often. GEMARA: Do not the questions (asked by the Mishna), " was it before or behind the sun ? " and " was it to the north or to the south?" mean the same thing? Answered Abayi : (The Mishna asks) whether the concave of the crescent was before or behind the sun, and if (the witness said) it was before the sun, his evidence was worthless, for R. Johanan says: What is the meaning of the passage [Job, xxv. 2] : " Dominion and fear are with him ; he maketh peace in his high places ? " It means that the sun never faces the concave of the crescent or the con- cave of a rainbow. What was its elevatio?t on the horizon ? Towards which side was its inclination ? " In one Boraitha we have learned : If (the witness) said " towards the north," his evidence was valid, but if he said, " towards the south," it was worthless ; in another Boraitha we have learned the reverse. It presents no difficulty; • For if they had already traveled two thousand ells, they were prohibited from journeying more than four cubits more. ''NEW YEAR." 45 in the latter case it speaks of the summer, while in the former it refers to the winter. The rabbis taught: If one (witness) said its elevation ap- peared about as high as two ox-goads and another said about as high as three, their testimony was invalid, but either might be taken in conjunction with a subsequent witness (who offered similar testimony). The rabbis taught (If the witnesses say): " We have seen the reflection (of the moon) in the water, or through a metal mirror, or in the clouds," their testimony is not to be accepted; or (if they say we have seen) " half of it in the water, and half of it in the heavens, or half of it in the clouds," their evidence carries no weight. Must they then see the new moon again (before their testimony can be accepted) ? Said Abayi: " By this is meant that if the witnesses testify that they saw the moon accidentally, and they then returned pur- posely and looked for it, but they saw it not, their evidence is worthless." Why so ? Because one might say they saw a patch of white clouds (and they thought it was the moon). MISHNA: The chief of the Beth Din then said: " It (the new moon) is consecrated," and all the people repeated after him: " It is consecrated; it is consecrated." Whether the new moon was seen at its proper time (after twenty-nine days) or not, they used to consecrate it. R. Elazar b. Zadok said : If it had not been seen at its proper time it was not consecrated, because it had already been consecrated in heaven {i. e., of itself). GEMARA: Whence do we deduce this ? Said R. Hyya b. Gamda quoting Rabbi, in the name of R. Jose b. Saul : It is written [Lev. xxiii. 44] : " Moses declared unto the children of Israel the feasts of the Lord," from which we deduce that (as Moses, who was the chief in Israel, declared the feasts to Israel, so also) the chief of the Beth Din should announce the words, " It is consecrated." " All the people repeated after him: It is consecrated ; it is conse- crated." Whence do we deduce this? Said R. Papa: It is written [Lev. xxiii. 2] : " Shall proclaim." " Othom " (them). Do not read " Othom," but Athem (ye) — i. e., which ye, all the people, shall proclaim. R. Na'hman b. Itz'hak, however, said: We know it from the words [ibid.]: " These are my feasts," i. e., {these people) shall announce my feasts. Why are the words "It is consecrated" repeated? Because in the scrip- tural verse just quoted we find it written " holy convocations " 46 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. {literally, announcements, and the minimum of the plural expression is two). " R. Elazar b. Zadok said: If it had not been seen at its proper time it was not consecrated,'' etc. We have learned in a Boraitha, Pelimo* said: If the new moon appear at its proper time it was not customary to consecrate it, but if it appeared out of its proper time they used to consecrate it. R. Eliezer, however, said: In neither case would they consecrate it, for it is written [Lev. xxv. lo]: "And ye shall consecrate the fiftieth y^'as;'' years should be consecrated, but not months. Said R. Jehudah in the name of Samuel: " The halakha prevails according to R. Elazer b. Zadok. Said Abayi: There can be a