Rosh Hashanah 19

ותיפוק ליה דהוה ליה יום שנהרג בו גדליה בן אחיקם אמר רב לא נצרכה אלא לאסור את שלפניו

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But if this was at the time that the Temple was standing, derive the prohibition against fasting on the third of Tishrei from the fact that it is the day that Gedaliah, son of Ahikam, was killed. During the time of the Temple the biblical fast days were celebrated as days of joy. Rav said: It was only necessary to include the third of Tishrei in Megillat Ta’anit in order to prohibit fasting on the preceding day as well. Fasting was forbidden not only on the actual days listed in Megillat Ta’anit, but also on the preceding day and the following day.

שלפניו נמי תיפוק ליה דהוה ליה יום שלאחר ראש חדש ראש חדש דאורייתא ודאורייתא לא בעי חיזוק

The Gemara raises another difficulty: With regard to the prohibition against fasting on the preceding day, the second of Tishrei, also derive it because it is the day after the New Moon, and fasting is forbidden not only on festive days, but also on the preceding day and the following day. The Gemara rejects this argument: The New Moon is by Torah law, and festive days that are by Torah law do not require reinforcement. Therefore no decree was ever enacted prohibiting fasting on the days before and after.

דתניא הימים האלה הכתובין במגילת תענית אסורין בין לפניהם בין לאחריהם שבתות וימים טובים הם אסורים לפניהן ולאחריהן מותרין מה הפרש בין זה לזה הללו דברי תורה ואין דברי תורה צריכין חיזוק הללו דברי סופרים ודברי סופרים צריכין חיזוק

As it is taught in a baraita: These days that are written in Megillat Ta’anit are days on which fasting is prohibited, as are both the day before them and the day after them. With regard to Shabbatot and Festivals, fasting on them is forbidden, but on the day before them and the day after them fasting is permitted. What is the difference between this class of days and that class of days? These days, Shabbatot and Festivals, are by Torah law, and Torah laws do not need reinforcement, and therefore even if a fast day were decreed on the day before or after them, the Festival itself would not be nullified; whereas those days mentioned in Megillat Ta’anit are by rabbinic law, and rabbinic laws need reinforcement, and therefore fasting is prohibited even on the day before and the day after.

ותיפוק ליה דהוה ליה יום שלפני יום שנהרג בו גדליה בן אחיקם אמר רב אשי גדליה בן אחיקם דברי קבלה הוא ודברי קבלה כדברי תורה דמו

The Gemara raises yet another difficulty: The prohibition against fasting on the second of Tishrei, derive it from the fact that it is the day before the day that Gedaliah, son of Ahikam, was killed, and since in Temple times the fast of Gedaliah was celebrated as a festive day, fasting should also be prohibited on the preceding day. Rav Ashi said: The fast of Gedaliah, son of Ahikam, is derived from the texts of the tradition, i.e., Prophets and Writings, and as the texts of the tradition are treated like Torah statements for this purpose, they too do not need reinforcement.

מתיב רב טובי בר מתנה בעשרים ותמניא ביה אתת בשורתא טבתא ליהודאי דלא יעידון מאורייתא שגזרה מלכות הרשעה גזרה שלא יעסקו בתורה ושלא ימולו את בניהם ושיחללו שבתות מה עשה יהודה בן שמוע וחביריו הלכו ונטלו עצה ממטרוניתא אחת שכל גדולי רומי מצויין אצלה

Rav Tovi bar Mattana raised an objection against the opinion that Megillat Ta’anit was nullified, from that which is written in it: On the twenty-eighth of Adar the good tidings came to the Jews that they should not turn away from the Torah, and on that day fasting is forbidden. And this is explained: For the wicked kingdom issued a decree against Israel that they should not occupy themselves with Torah study, and that they should not circumcise their sons, and that they should desecrate Shabbat. What did Yehuda ben Shammua and his colleagues do? They went and took advice from a certain matron [matronita] whom all the prominent men of Rome would visit regularly, thinking that she would know how to annul the decree.

אמרה להם בואו והפגינו בלילה הלכו והפגינו בלילה אמרו אי שמים לא אחיכם אנחנו ולא בני אב אחד אנחנו ולא בני אם אחת אנחנו מה נשתנינו מכל אומה ולשון שאתם גוזרין עלינו גזירות קשות וביטלום ואותו היום עשאוהו יום טוב ואי סלקא דעתך בטלה מגילת תענית קמייתא בטול אחרנייתא מוסיפין

She said to them as follows: Come and cry out [hafgginu] at night in the streets and markets. They went and cried out at night, saying: O Heavens! Are we Jews not your brothers; are we not children of one father; are we not children of one mother? How are we different from every other nation and tongue that you issue such harsh decrees against us? And indeed the decrees were annulled, and the Sages made that day a festive day. And if it enters your mind to say that Megillat Ta’anit has been nullified, can you say that the first prohibitions against fasting they annulled, and then later ones were added?

וכי תימא הכא נמי בזמן שבית המקדש קיים והא יהודה בן שמוע תלמידו של רבי מאיר ורבי מאיר בתר הכי הוה דתנן כלי זכוכית שניקבו והטיף לתוכן אבר אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל יהודה בן שמוע מטמא משום רבי מאיר

And if you say that here too it is referring to the time when the Temple was standing, there is a difficulty, as Yehuda ben Shammua was a student of Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Meir was after the destruction of the Temple. And proof that Rabbi Yehuda ben Shammua was a student of Rabbi Meir may be brought, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to glass vessels that had holes in them, which afterward were filled in with lead, the Sages dispute whether the utensil is considered a whole utensil, which can become ritually impure, or whether it is considered a broken utensil, which does not. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Yehuda ben Shammua declares that it becomes impure, in the name of Rabbi Meir;

וחכמים מטהרין

whereas the Sages declare it pure. According to them, it is still considered a broken utensil. Rabbi Meir himself lived after the destruction of the Second Temple. The festive day commemorating the annulling of the decree of Rome was instituted as a result of an incident involving his student, Rabbi Yehuda ben Shammua. From this, it is clear that Megillat Ta’anit had not yet been nullified.

תנאי היא דתניא הימים האלו הכתובין במגילת תענית בין בזמן שבית המקדש קיים בין בזמן שאין בית המקדש קיים אסורין דברי רבי מאיר רבי יוסי אומר בזמן שבית המקדש קיים אסורין מפני ששמחה היא להם אין בית המקדש קיים מותרין מפני שאבל הוא להם

The Gemara answers: The question whether or not Megillat Ta’anit has been nullified is the subject of a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: These days, which are written in Megillat Ta’anit, both when the Temple is standing and when the Temple is not standing, are days on which fasting is prohibited; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: When the Temple is standing, these days are prohibited for fasting because these days are a source of joy for Israel. But when the Temple is not standing, these days are permitted for fasting because these days are a source of mourning for them.

והלכתא בטלו והלכתא לא בטלו קשיא הלכתא אהלכתא לא קשיא כאן בחנוכה ופורים כאן בשאר יומי

The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that these days were nullified, and the halakha is that they were not nullified. The Gemara asks: This is difficult, as one halakha contradicts the other halakha. The Gemara answers: It is not difficult. Here, it is referring to Hanukkah and Purim. These Festival days were never nullified, and Hanukkah is listed among the Festivals of Megillat Ta’anit. There, the halakha is referring to the rest of the days listed in Megillat Ta’anit, all of which were nullified.

על אלול מפני ראש השנה ועל תשרי מפני תקנת המועדות כיון דנפקי להו אאלול אתשרי למה להו

§ The mishna taught: Messengers go out to inform about the sanctification of the New Moon in Elul, due to Rosh HaShana, and in Tishrei, due to the need to establish the correct dates on which to celebrate the Festivals of Tishrei. The Gemara asks: Once the messengers have gone out in the month of Elul to inform the people when the New Moon was declared, why do they need to go out again in Tishrei, as the New Moon of Tishrei always falls on the thirtieth day after the New Moon of Elul?

וכי תימא דלמא עברוה לאלול והאמר רבי חיננא בר כהנא אמר רב מימות עזרא ואילך לא מצינו אלול מעובר

And if you say that messengers must go out for Tishrei as well, as perhaps the court added another day to the month of Elul, so that Rosh HaShana occurs on the thirty-first day after the New Moon of Elul, there is a difficulty. Didn’t Rabbi Ḥinnana bar Kahana say that Rav said: From the days of Ezra and onward, we have never found that the month of Elul had an additional day. Consequently, it is simple to calculate the days on which the Festivals of Tishrei occur, and there should be no need to send out messengers in Tishrei.

לא מצינו דלא איצטריך הא איצטריך מעברינן ליה

The Gemara answers: When we say: We have not found that the month of Elul ever had an additional day, this does not mean that Elul cannot have an additional day, but only that it never happened because it was not necessary to add a day. But if it had been necessary, they would have added an additional day. Since it is possible that the month of Elul could have had another day added, there is reason to send out messengers for the month of Tishrei, so that all will know when to celebrate the Festivals.

הא מיקלקל ראש השנה מוטב תיקלקל ראש השנה ולא יתקלקלו כולהו מועדות

The Gemara asks: But if Elul has an additional day Rosh HaShana will be ruined, because people will celebrate it thirty days after the New Moon of Elul, when its real date is on the thirty-first day. The Gemara answers: Better that Rosh HaShana be ruined, and all the Festivals, i.e., Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and the Eighth Day of Assembly, not be ruined.

דיקא נמי דקתני על תשרי מפני תקנת המועדות שמע מינה

The language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Messengers go out in the month of Tishrei due to the need to establish the correct dates on which to celebrate the Festivals of Tishrei. The Gemara summarizes: Indeed, conclude from here that this is the correct understanding.

ועל כסליו מפני חנוכה ועל אדר מפני הפורים ואילו נתעברה השנה יוצאין אף על אדר שני מפני הפורים לא קתני מתניתין דלא כרבי דתניא רבי אומר אם נתעברה השנה יוצאין אף על אדר השני מפני הפורים

§ The mishna taught: Messengers go out in Kislev, due to Hanukkah, and in Adar, due to Purim. Whereas, it is not taught: If the year was a leap year, with an additional month of Adar, the messengers go out also in the second Adar due to Purim, which is celebrated in the second Adar. This indicates that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: If the year was a leap year, the messengers go out also in the second Adar, due to Purim.

לימא בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר כל מצות הנוהגות בשני נוהגות בראשון ומר סבר כל מצות הנוהגות בשני אין נוהגות בראשון

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that they disagree about this. One Sage, the author of this mishna, holds that all the mitzvot observed in the second Adar, i.e., the special Torah readings and the mitzvot of Purim, are also observed in the first Adar. If they were observed in the first Adar and not in the second, the people have fulfilled their obligation. Therefore, there is no need to send messengers in the second Adar. And one Sage, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, holds that all the mitzvot observed in the second Adar are not observed in the first. It is therefore necessary to send messengers in the second Adar, so that people will know when to keep the mitzvot of Adar.

לא דכולי עלמא מצות הנוהגות בשני אין נוהגות בראשון והכא בעיבור שנה קמיפלגי דתניא כמה עיבור שנה שלשים יום רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר חדש

The Gemara rejects this argument: No, everyone agrees that the mitzvot observed in the second Adar are not observed on the first, and here they disagree about the length of the additional month in the leap year, as it is taught in a baraita: How long is the additional month in a leap year? Thirty days. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A month. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and since the additional month does not have a fixed number of days, it is necessary to send messengers also for the second Adar, so that people will know when to celebrate Purim. However, according to the first tanna, since the first Adar is always a fixed length, there is no need to send messengers.

מאי שנא שלשים דידעי חדש נמי ידעי אמר רב פפא מאן דאמר חדש רצה חדש רצה שלשים

The Gemara asks: What is different about thirty days? It is different because people can count thirty days and know when the month ends and when Purim occurs. A month also, people know the length of it. The term month implies that it is a month of twenty-nine days, and based on that they know when to celebrate Purim. Rav Pappa said: The one who said that a month is added does not mean necessarily a month of twenty-nine days. Rather, if the judges of the court wish, they add a month of twenty-nine days; and if it wishes, they add thirty days. Therefore, it is necessary to send messengers also for the second Adar.

העיד רבי יהושע בן לוי משום קהלא קדישא דירושלים על שני אדרים שמקדשין אותם ביום עיבוריהן

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi testified in the name of the holy community of Jerusalem about the two months of Adar, that they are sanctified on the day that could have been added to make them a full month, i.e., the thirtieth day after the previous New Moon. That is to say, the thirtieth day after the New Moon of the first Adar is always the New Moon of the second Adar, and thirty days after the New Moon of the second Adar is always the New Moon of Nisan.

למימרא דחסרין עבדינן מלאין לא עבדינן לאפוקי מדדרש רב נחמן בר חסדא העיד רבי סימאי משום חגי זכריה ומלאכי על שני אדרים שאם רצו לעשותן שניהן מלאין עושין שניהן חסרין עושין אחד מלא ואחד חסר עושין וכך היו נוהגין בגולה ומשום רבינו אמרו לעולם אחד מלא ואחד חסר עד שיוודע לך שהוקבע ראש חדש בזמנו

The Gemara comments: That is to say that they make the two months of Adar short months, of twenty-nine days, but they do not make them full months, of thirty days. This is to the exclusion of what Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda taught, as Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda taught: Rabbi Simai testified in the name of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi about two months of Adar in a leap year, that if the members of the court wish to make them both full, they may do so; and if they wish to make them both short, they may do so; and if they wish to make one full and one short, they may do so. And this is what they would do in the Diaspora, when they did not know which day was established as the New Moon. And in the name of our teacher, Rav, they said: The two months of Adar are always observed, one full and one short, unless it is known to you that the New Moon was fixed in its proper time, i.e., the first Adar is also short.

שלחו ליה למר עוקבא אדר הסמוך לניסן לעולם חסר

A ruling was sent from Eretz Yisrael to Mar Ukva, the Exilarch in Babylonia: The Adar that immediately precedes Nisan is always short, both in a regular year and in a leap year. But the first Adar in a leap year, which does not immediately precede Nisan, is sometimes full.

מתיב רב נחמן על שני חדשים מחללין את השבת על ניסן ועל תשרי אי אמרת בשלמא זמנין מלא זמנין חסר משום הכי מחללינן

Rav Naḥman raised an objection from what was taught in a mishna: Witnesses who saw the new moon may desecrate Shabbat for the fixing of the New Moon of two months, for the month of Nisan and for the month of Tishrei, due to the important Festivals that occur in them. Granted, if you say that the Adar immediately preceding Nisan is sometimes full and sometimes short, due to that reason the witnesses may desecrate Shabbat, as if the witnesses come on the thirtieth, the month will be made short and that day will be declared the New Moon; otherwise, the month will be made full and the next day will be declared the New Moon.