Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

October 19, 2021 | 讬状讙 讘诪专讞砖讜讜谉 转砖驻状讘

Masechet Rosh Hashanah is dedicated anonymously in honor of Rabbanit Michelle Farber whose dedication to learning and teaching the daf continues to inspire so many people around the world.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Rosh Hashanah 10

Today’s daf is sponsored by Heather (Hadar) Stone in honor of her daughter, Hila bat Hadar ve鈥橸ehezkel on her commission as a second lieutenant in the IDF Education command. “So proud of you and your accomplishments. Can鈥檛 wait to see where you lead next.” And by Jordana Hyman “to our amazing daughter, Prielle Hyman Borowski, on her giyus today. We are bursting with pride and excitement as you begin your service. May Hashem protect you and bless you always, with your fellow soldiers. With love, Mum and Dad.”

A braita explains that if a tree was planted 30 thirty days before Rosh Hashanah, it will be counted as its second year on the first of Tishrei. However, the fruits are still considered orla after the third year until the 15th of Shvat (of the fourth year) if they budded before then. And the same holds true for laws of neta revai on the fifth year. Does the braita not work with Rabbi Meir’s opinion that even a day counts as a year when determining that an animal is a 3-year old bull (required for sacrifices that are to be brought with a bull), because the braita required thirty days? Perhaps one could distinguish between the end of a count (when the bull begins his third year – where one day counts) and the beginning of the count (planted before Rosh Hashanah – where one day would not count). The Gemara rejects this distinction based on a woman who is a Niddah who on the last day requires a complete day but on the first day, even a part of the day counts as a whole day. If the braita does not like Rabbi Meir, by default, it must hold like Rabbi Elazar who holds that the bull needs one month into its third year to be considered a bull. However, that is also difficult as then the braita should require 60 days – 30 for the tree to take root and 30 for it to be considered its own year. A braita is brought with different opinions regarding how much time is needed to take root – 30 days, 3 days or two weeks. None of the opinions match the original braita which seems to require no time for taking root, if in fact the thirty days are based on Rabbi Elazar. The braita is then explained according to Rabbi Meir who requires only one day for the year and thirty for it to take root. Why, then, does the braita not say 31? The thirtieth day counts for both. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar both derive their opinions from the same verse from Breishit 8:13 about when the waters of the flood dried – in the 601st year on the first day of the first month. Each one uses it to prove his opinion. A braita is brought with a debate about whether the world was created on the first of Nissan or Tishrei. Various other events are given a date as well.

 

讜驻讬专讜转 谞讟讬注讛 讝讜 讗住讜专讬谉 注讚 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 讗诐 诇注专诇讛 注专诇讛 讜讗诐 诇专讘注讬 专讘注讬

And if the planting, layering, or grafting took place more than thirty days before Rosh HaShana, the fruit of this planting is prohibited until the fifteenth of Shevatof the fourth year since the tree鈥檚 planting, even though the three years were already completed the previous Rosh HaShana. This principle applies both for orla during the year of orla, when it is prohibited to eat the fruit, and for fourth-year produce during the year of fourth-year produce, which must be eaten in Jerusalem or redeemed before it is eaten outside Jerusalem.

诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜诪讟讜 讘讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讘砖谞讛 讛专讘讬注讬转 讜讘砖谞讛 讛讞诪讬砖讬转

The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived, that the prohibitions of orla and fourth-year produce extend past Tishrei until the fifteenth of Shevat? Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said, and some determined that it was stated in the name of Rabbi Yannai: The verse states: 鈥淭hree years shall it be as prohibited to you; it shall not be eaten. And in the fourth year all its fruit shall be sacred for praise-giving to the Lord. And in the fifth year shall you eat of its fruit, that it may yield to you its increase; I am the Lord your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:23鈥25).

驻注诪讬诐 砖讘专讘讬注讬转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讗住讜专讛 诪砖讜诐 注专诇讛 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讘讞诪讬砖讬转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讗住讜专讛 诪砖讜诐 专讘注讬

The baraita explains: The repetition of the word 鈥渁nd,鈥 indicated by the conjunctive vav that joins these verses, teaches that there are times that the tree is already in its fourth year and yet the fruit is forbidden as orla, from the verses 鈥渢hree years鈥nd in the fourth year鈥; and there are times that the tree is already in its fifth year and yet the fruit is forbidden as fourth-year produce, from the verses 鈥渋n the fourth year鈥nd in the fifth year.鈥

诇讬诪讗 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讗 讗诪专 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛 讚转谞讬讗 驻专 讛讗诪讜专 讘转讜专讛 住转诐 讘谉 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讞讚砖 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this baraita is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, as, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, didn鈥檛 Rabbi Meir say that even one day in a year is considered a year? As it is taught in a baraita: The term bullock [par] mentioned in the Torah without specification is referring to a bullock that is twenty-four months and one day old, as although it is known by tradition that a bullock is three years old, once it is one day into its third year, it is already considered three years old; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘谉 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讞讚砖 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 砖讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 注讙诇 讘转讜专讛 住转诐 讘谉 砖谞讛 讘谉 讘拽专 讘谉 砖转讬诐 驻专 讘谉 砖诇砖

The baraita continues: Rabbi Elazar says: The term bullock is referring to an animal that is twenty-four months and thirty days old. As Rabbi Meir would say: Wherever a calf [egel] is stated in the Torah without specification, the reference is to a calf that is one year old; a young ox [ben bakar] is referring to a cow that is two years old; and a bullock is referring to a cow that is three years old. Since the baraita dealing with planting requires that the tree be planted thirty days before Rosh HaShana, rather than one day, it would seem that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.

讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛 讘住讜祝 砖谞讛 讗讘诇 讘转讞诇转 砖谞讛 诇讗

The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, it can be explained as follows. When Rabbi Meir said that one day in a year is considered a full year, this is only when the day is at the end of the year; since the count of a new year is about to begin, the day is considered like a whole year. But if the day is at the beginning of the year, that one day is not considered like a whole year.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜诇讗讜 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讛讜讗 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讗讬谉 转讞讬诇转 讛讬讜诐 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘住讜驻讛 住讜祝 讛讬讜诐 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘转讞诇转讛 砖谞讛 砖讬讜诐 讗讞讚 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘住讜驻讛

Against this claim Rava said: But can we not invoke an a fortiori argument to prove just the opposite? Whereas in the case of a menstruating woman, where the beginning of the day is not counted as a full day at the end of her seven-day period of ritual impurity and instead she must wait until the end of the seventh day and immerse in a ritual bath only in the evening, yet nevertheless the end of the day is counted as a full day at the beginning of her ritually impure period, since if she experienced bleeding shortly before sunset that day is considered as the first day of her seven-day period of impurity; if so, in the case of a year, where one day is counted as a full year at the end of the year,

讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖讬讜诐 讗讞讚 注讜诇讛 讘转讞诇转讛

is it not right that one day should count as a full year at the beginning of the year?

讜讗诇讗 诪讗讬 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讘注讬 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 谞讜讟注讬谉 讜讗讬谉 诪讘专讬讻讬谉 讜讗讬谉 诪专讻讬讘讬谉 注专讘 砖讘讬注讬转 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 诇驻谞讬 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讜讗诐 谞讟注 讜讛讘专讬讱 讜讛专讻讬讘 讬注拽讜专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛专讻讘讛 砖讗讬谞讛 拽讜诇讟转 讘砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 拽讜诇讟转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转

Rather, what opinion does it follow? If the baraita was not taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, does it follow the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who holds that only thirty days are considered like a year? If so, then thirty days and another thirty days are required: Thirty days for the planting to take root, and another thirty days to count as a year. As we learned in a mishna: One may not plant, layer, or graft trees on the eve of the Sabbatical Year less than thirty days before Rosh HaShana, and if one planted, layered, or grafted, he must be uproot it, as the planting will take root only in the seventh year; this is the statement of Rabbi Elazar. Rabbi Yehuda says: Any grafting that does not take root within three days will never take root. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Two weeks are needed for the planting to take root.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖诇砖讬诐 爪专讬讱 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讬诐 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖诇砖讛 爪专讬讱 砖诇砖讛 讜砖诇砖讬诐 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 爪专讬讱 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 砖诇砖讛 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讘注讬

And on this topic Rav Na岣an said that Rabba bar Avuh said: According to the statement of the one who says thirty days, this means that it requires thirty days for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And according to the statement of the one who says three days, this means that it requires thirty-three days. And according to the statement of the one who says two weeks, this means that it requires two weeks for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And if the tanna of the mishna holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that only three days are needed for the planting to take root, it still requires three days for the planting to take root and thirty days to count as a year. If so, the baraita cannot be understood even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar.

讗诇讗 诇注讜诇诐 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讻讬 拽讗诪专 砖诇砖讬诐 诇拽诇讬讟讛

Rather, it must be understood as follows: The baraita was actually taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, and when it says thirty days, it is referring to the time needed for the planting to take root.

讗讬 讛讻讬 砖诇砖讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讘注讬 拽讗 住讘专 讬讜诐 砖诇砖讬诐 注讜诇讛 诇讻讗谉 讜诇讻讗谉

The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, it requires thirty-one days; thirty days for the planting to take root and one more day to count as a year. The Gemara answers: This is theoretically correct, but he holds that the thirtieth day is counted for here and for there, i.e., it counts as both the thirtieth day for taking root and as a day that is counted as a year.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜砖谞讬讛谉 诪拽专讗 讗讞讚 讚专砖讜 讜讬讛讬 讘讗讞转 讜砖砖 诪讗讜转 砖谞讛 讘专讗砖讜谉 讘讗讞讚 诇讞讚砖 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 住讘专 诪讚讗讻转讬 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讛讜讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘砖谞讛 讜拽讗 拽专讬 诇讛 砖谞讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: And both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, who disagree about how much time must pass to count as a year, expounded the same verse. As the verse states: 鈥淎nd it came to pass in the one and six hundredth year, in the first month on the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from off the earth鈥 (Genesis 8:13). Rabbi Meir holds: From the fact that it was only one day into the year, as it was still the first day of the first month, and yet it is called the six hundred and first year, learn from here that one day in a year is already considered a year.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗讬 讻转讬讘 讘砖砖 诪讗讜转 讜讗讞转 砖谞讛 讻讚拽讗诪专转 讛砖转讗 讚讻转讬讘 讘讗讞转 讜砖砖 诪讗讜转 砖谞讛 砖谞讛 讗砖砖 诪讗讜转 拽讗讬 讜诪讗讬 讗讞转 讗转讞诇转讗 讚讗讞转 拽讗诪专

And the other tanna, Rabbi Elazar, expounds the verse as follows. If it had written: In the six hundred and first year, it would be as you said. However, now that it is written: 鈥淚n the one and six hundredth year,” I can say that the word 鈥測ear鈥 relates to 鈥渟ix hundredth,鈥 thereby teaching that it is still considered the six hundredth year. And what is meant by 鈥渙ne鈥? That it is the beginning of one year, but not that the first day counts as a year.

讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讻转讬讘 讘专讗砖讜谉 讘讗讞讚 诇讞讚砖 诪讚讗讻转讬 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讛讜讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘讞讚砖 讜拽讗 拽专讬 诇讬讛 讞讚砖 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘讞讚砖 讞砖讜讘 讞讚砖 讜诪讚讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘讞讚砖 讞砖讜讘 讞讚砖 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘讬谉 砖谞讛 讜讞讚砖 诇诪谞讜讬讬讜 讜砖谞讛 诇诪谞讜讬讬讛

The Gemara asks: And with regard to Rabbi Elazar, what is the rationale for his opinion? From where does he learn that thirty days are counted as a year? As it is written: 鈥淚n the first month on the first day of the month.鈥 Since it was only one day into the month, and yet it is called a month, learn from here that one day in a month is already considered a month. And since one day in a month is already considered a month, likewise thirty days in a year are already considered a year, as a month is calculated according to its unit, and a year is calculated according to its unit. If one unit by which a month is calculated, i.e., a day, counts as a full month, so too, one unit by which a year is calculated, i.e., a month, counts as a full year.

诪讻诇诇 讚转专讜讬讬讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 讘谞讬住谉 谞讘专讗 讛注讜诇诐

搂 The Gemara comments: By inference, both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, hold that the world was created in Nisan and that the years are counted from that month, as, if the world were created in Tishrei and the count started then, the first day of the first month of the six hundred and first year would already have been six months into the year for the purpose of counting years.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘转砖专讬 谞讘专讗 讛注讜诇诐 讘转砖专讬 谞讜诇讚讜 讗讘讜转 讘转砖专讬 诪转讜 讗讘讜转 讘驻住讞 谞讜诇讚 讬爪讞拽 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 谞驻拽讚讛 砖专讛 专讞诇 讜讞谞讛 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讬爪讗 讬讜住祝 诪讘讬转 讛讗住讜专讬谉

It is taught in a baraita that the tanna鈥檌m disagreed about this point: Rabbi Eliezer says: In Tishrei the world was created; in Tishrei the Patriarchs were born; in Tishrei the Patriarchs died; on Passover Isaac was born; on Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered by God and conceived; on Rosh HaShana Joseph came out from prison;

Masechet Rosh Hashana 聽is dedicated anonymously in honor of聽Rabbanit Michelle Farber whose dedication to learning and teaching the daf continues to inspire so many people around the world.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Rosh Hashanah: 4-10 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we are going to learn the significance to the first of Nissan being the New Year for the...
talking talmud_square

Rosh Hashanah 10: Six Hundred Years and One Day

If one plants or grafts in the time right before a shmitah year can affect the timing of orlah. 30...
intro rh GITTA

Intro to Masechet Rosh Hashanah

Introduction to Masechet Rosh Hashanah by Gitta Jaroslawicz-Neufeld In honorof Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran learners, who are paradigms of...

Rosh Hashanah 10

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Rosh Hashanah 10

讜驻讬专讜转 谞讟讬注讛 讝讜 讗住讜专讬谉 注讚 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讘砖讘讟 讗诐 诇注专诇讛 注专诇讛 讜讗诐 诇专讘注讬 专讘注讬

And if the planting, layering, or grafting took place more than thirty days before Rosh HaShana, the fruit of this planting is prohibited until the fifteenth of Shevatof the fourth year since the tree鈥檚 planting, even though the three years were already completed the previous Rosh HaShana. This principle applies both for orla during the year of orla, when it is prohibited to eat the fruit, and for fourth-year produce during the year of fourth-year produce, which must be eaten in Jerusalem or redeemed before it is eaten outside Jerusalem.

诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜诪讟讜 讘讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讘砖谞讛 讛专讘讬注讬转 讜讘砖谞讛 讛讞诪讬砖讬转

The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived, that the prohibitions of orla and fourth-year produce extend past Tishrei until the fifteenth of Shevat? Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said, and some determined that it was stated in the name of Rabbi Yannai: The verse states: 鈥淭hree years shall it be as prohibited to you; it shall not be eaten. And in the fourth year all its fruit shall be sacred for praise-giving to the Lord. And in the fifth year shall you eat of its fruit, that it may yield to you its increase; I am the Lord your God鈥 (Leviticus 19:23鈥25).

驻注诪讬诐 砖讘专讘讬注讬转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讗住讜专讛 诪砖讜诐 注专诇讛 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讘讞诪讬砖讬转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讗住讜专讛 诪砖讜诐 专讘注讬

The baraita explains: The repetition of the word 鈥渁nd,鈥 indicated by the conjunctive vav that joins these verses, teaches that there are times that the tree is already in its fourth year and yet the fruit is forbidden as orla, from the verses 鈥渢hree years鈥nd in the fourth year鈥; and there are times that the tree is already in its fifth year and yet the fruit is forbidden as fourth-year produce, from the verses 鈥渋n the fourth year鈥nd in the fifth year.鈥

诇讬诪讗 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讗 讗诪专 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛 讚转谞讬讗 驻专 讛讗诪讜专 讘转讜专讛 住转诐 讘谉 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讞讚砖 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this baraita is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, as, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, didn鈥檛 Rabbi Meir say that even one day in a year is considered a year? As it is taught in a baraita: The term bullock [par] mentioned in the Torah without specification is referring to a bullock that is twenty-four months and one day old, as although it is known by tradition that a bullock is three years old, once it is one day into its third year, it is already considered three years old; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘谉 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讞讚砖 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 砖讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 注讙诇 讘转讜专讛 住转诐 讘谉 砖谞讛 讘谉 讘拽专 讘谉 砖转讬诐 驻专 讘谉 砖诇砖

The baraita continues: Rabbi Elazar says: The term bullock is referring to an animal that is twenty-four months and thirty days old. As Rabbi Meir would say: Wherever a calf [egel] is stated in the Torah without specification, the reference is to a calf that is one year old; a young ox [ben bakar] is referring to a cow that is two years old; and a bullock is referring to a cow that is three years old. Since the baraita dealing with planting requires that the tree be planted thirty days before Rosh HaShana, rather than one day, it would seem that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.

讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛 讘住讜祝 砖谞讛 讗讘诇 讘转讞诇转 砖谞讛 诇讗

The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, it can be explained as follows. When Rabbi Meir said that one day in a year is considered a full year, this is only when the day is at the end of the year; since the count of a new year is about to begin, the day is considered like a whole year. But if the day is at the beginning of the year, that one day is not considered like a whole year.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜诇讗讜 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讛讜讗 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讗讬谉 转讞讬诇转 讛讬讜诐 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘住讜驻讛 住讜祝 讛讬讜诐 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘转讞诇转讛 砖谞讛 砖讬讜诐 讗讞讚 注讜诇讛 诇讛 讘住讜驻讛

Against this claim Rava said: But can we not invoke an a fortiori argument to prove just the opposite? Whereas in the case of a menstruating woman, where the beginning of the day is not counted as a full day at the end of her seven-day period of ritual impurity and instead she must wait until the end of the seventh day and immerse in a ritual bath only in the evening, yet nevertheless the end of the day is counted as a full day at the beginning of her ritually impure period, since if she experienced bleeding shortly before sunset that day is considered as the first day of her seven-day period of impurity; if so, in the case of a year, where one day is counted as a full year at the end of the year,

讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖讬讜诐 讗讞讚 注讜诇讛 讘转讞诇转讛

is it not right that one day should count as a full year at the beginning of the year?

讜讗诇讗 诪讗讬 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讘注讬 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 谞讜讟注讬谉 讜讗讬谉 诪讘专讬讻讬谉 讜讗讬谉 诪专讻讬讘讬谉 注专讘 砖讘讬注讬转 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 诇驻谞讬 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讜讗诐 谞讟注 讜讛讘专讬讱 讜讛专讻讬讘 讬注拽讜专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛专讻讘讛 砖讗讬谞讛 拽讜诇讟转 讘砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 拽讜诇讟转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转

Rather, what opinion does it follow? If the baraita was not taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, does it follow the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, who holds that only thirty days are considered like a year? If so, then thirty days and another thirty days are required: Thirty days for the planting to take root, and another thirty days to count as a year. As we learned in a mishna: One may not plant, layer, or graft trees on the eve of the Sabbatical Year less than thirty days before Rosh HaShana, and if one planted, layered, or grafted, he must be uproot it, as the planting will take root only in the seventh year; this is the statement of Rabbi Elazar. Rabbi Yehuda says: Any grafting that does not take root within three days will never take root. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Two weeks are needed for the planting to take root.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖诇砖讬诐 爪专讬讱 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讬诐 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖诇砖讛 爪专讬讱 砖诇砖讛 讜砖诇砖讬诐 诇讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 爪专讬讱 砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 砖诇砖讛 讜砖诇砖讬诐 讘注讬

And on this topic Rav Na岣an said that Rabba bar Avuh said: According to the statement of the one who says thirty days, this means that it requires thirty days for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And according to the statement of the one who says three days, this means that it requires thirty-three days. And according to the statement of the one who says two weeks, this means that it requires two weeks for the planting to take root and another thirty days to count as a year. And if the tanna of the mishna holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that only three days are needed for the planting to take root, it still requires three days for the planting to take root and thirty days to count as a year. If so, the baraita cannot be understood even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar.

讗诇讗 诇注讜诇诐 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讻讬 拽讗诪专 砖诇砖讬诐 诇拽诇讬讟讛

Rather, it must be understood as follows: The baraita was actually taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, and when it says thirty days, it is referring to the time needed for the planting to take root.

讗讬 讛讻讬 砖诇砖讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讘注讬 拽讗 住讘专 讬讜诐 砖诇砖讬诐 注讜诇讛 诇讻讗谉 讜诇讻讗谉

The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, it requires thirty-one days; thirty days for the planting to take root and one more day to count as a year. The Gemara answers: This is theoretically correct, but he holds that the thirtieth day is counted for here and for there, i.e., it counts as both the thirtieth day for taking root and as a day that is counted as a year.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜砖谞讬讛谉 诪拽专讗 讗讞讚 讚专砖讜 讜讬讛讬 讘讗讞转 讜砖砖 诪讗讜转 砖谞讛 讘专讗砖讜谉 讘讗讞讚 诇讞讚砖 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 住讘专 诪讚讗讻转讬 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讛讜讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘砖谞讛 讜拽讗 拽专讬 诇讛 砖谞讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘 砖谞讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: And both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, who disagree about how much time must pass to count as a year, expounded the same verse. As the verse states: 鈥淎nd it came to pass in the one and six hundredth year, in the first month on the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from off the earth鈥 (Genesis 8:13). Rabbi Meir holds: From the fact that it was only one day into the year, as it was still the first day of the first month, and yet it is called the six hundred and first year, learn from here that one day in a year is already considered a year.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗讬 讻转讬讘 讘砖砖 诪讗讜转 讜讗讞转 砖谞讛 讻讚拽讗诪专转 讛砖转讗 讚讻转讬讘 讘讗讞转 讜砖砖 诪讗讜转 砖谞讛 砖谞讛 讗砖砖 诪讗讜转 拽讗讬 讜诪讗讬 讗讞转 讗转讞诇转讗 讚讗讞转 拽讗诪专

And the other tanna, Rabbi Elazar, expounds the verse as follows. If it had written: In the six hundred and first year, it would be as you said. However, now that it is written: 鈥淚n the one and six hundredth year,” I can say that the word 鈥測ear鈥 relates to 鈥渟ix hundredth,鈥 thereby teaching that it is still considered the six hundredth year. And what is meant by 鈥渙ne鈥? That it is the beginning of one year, but not that the first day counts as a year.

讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讻转讬讘 讘专讗砖讜谉 讘讗讞讚 诇讞讚砖 诪讚讗讻转讬 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讛讜讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘讞讚砖 讜拽讗 拽专讬 诇讬讛 讞讚砖 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘讞讚砖 讞砖讜讘 讞讚砖 讜诪讚讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘讞讚砖 讞砖讜讘 讞讚砖 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讘砖谞讛 讞砖讜讘讬谉 砖谞讛 讜讞讚砖 诇诪谞讜讬讬讜 讜砖谞讛 诇诪谞讜讬讬讛

The Gemara asks: And with regard to Rabbi Elazar, what is the rationale for his opinion? From where does he learn that thirty days are counted as a year? As it is written: 鈥淚n the first month on the first day of the month.鈥 Since it was only one day into the month, and yet it is called a month, learn from here that one day in a month is already considered a month. And since one day in a month is already considered a month, likewise thirty days in a year are already considered a year, as a month is calculated according to its unit, and a year is calculated according to its unit. If one unit by which a month is calculated, i.e., a day, counts as a full month, so too, one unit by which a year is calculated, i.e., a month, counts as a full year.

诪讻诇诇 讚转专讜讬讬讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 讘谞讬住谉 谞讘专讗 讛注讜诇诐

搂 The Gemara comments: By inference, both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, hold that the world was created in Nisan and that the years are counted from that month, as, if the world were created in Tishrei and the count started then, the first day of the first month of the six hundred and first year would already have been six months into the year for the purpose of counting years.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘转砖专讬 谞讘专讗 讛注讜诇诐 讘转砖专讬 谞讜诇讚讜 讗讘讜转 讘转砖专讬 诪转讜 讗讘讜转 讘驻住讞 谞讜诇讚 讬爪讞拽 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 谞驻拽讚讛 砖专讛 专讞诇 讜讞谞讛 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讬爪讗 讬讜住祝 诪讘讬转 讛讗住讜专讬谉

It is taught in a baraita that the tanna鈥檌m disagreed about this point: Rabbi Eliezer says: In Tishrei the world was created; in Tishrei the Patriarchs were born; in Tishrei the Patriarchs died; on Passover Isaac was born; on Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered by God and conceived; on Rosh HaShana Joseph came out from prison;

Scroll To Top