GOD said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt: This month shall mark for you the beginning of the months; it shall be the first of the months of the year for you. Speak to the whole community of Israel^awhole community of Israel Or the leadership, on everyone’s behalf; cf. v. 21. and say that on the tenth of this month each family shall take for itself a lamb,^blamb Or “kid.” Heb. seh means either “sheep” or “goat”; cf. v. 5. a lamb to a household.

The commandment of sanctifying the new month: To sanctify months and intercalate [months into] years in the court [whose members are] great in wisdom and ordained in the Land of Israel, and to establish the year’s holidays according to that sanctification; as it is stated (Exodus 12:2), “This month shall be to you the first of months.” This means, when you see the renewal of the moon, establish for yourselves the new month — or even if you do not see it, since it is appropriate for [the moon] to appear according to the accepted calculation. Likewise, this commandment includes the commandment of intercalation, since the basis of the commandment to sanctify the month is for Israel to observe God’s holidays at their appointed times. And the commandment of intercalation has the same basis. However, beyond this verse are more Torah passages concerning the commandment of intercalation, and that is what is written (Exodus 13:10), “You shall observe this commandment in its proper time”; and likewise, “Observe the month of Spring” (Deuteronomy 16:1). The content of the commandment is that two Jews fit to testify come before the court and testify before them that they saw the renewed moon. [The judges then] establish the new month on the basis of their [testimony] and say, “Today has been sanctified.” The reason why this commandment applies only with ordained judges is because it came with the explanation [of the verse], “This month shall be for you” — great [in Torah] and ordained, like you (Rosh Hashanah 22a), since it was said to Moshe and Aharon. This matter was further expounded, as it is juxtaposed to “speak to the entire congregation of the children of Israel,” meaning that they who sanctify the month must have the assent of all Israel, meaning the wisest men of Israel, such as the Great Court (the Sanhedrin). And so [too] any great sage in Israel who was ordained in the Land of Israel. And since ordination is no longer practiced, as is known, [the sage] has permission to perform this commandment even outside the Land of Israel, so long as there is no one of his stature in the Land of Israel. And so we find that Chananiah son of the brother of Rabbi Yehoshua, and Akiva ben Yosef did so in this regard (Berakhot 23a). But without these conditions, no one of Israel is permitted to establish the months or intercalate. And perhaps you will ask, “If so, how do we conduct ourselves today, when we lack ordained sages?” Know that so have we received it; since Rabbi Hillel the Prince, son of Rabbi Yehudah the Prince, who was the greatest of his generation and ordained in the Land of Israel — he was the sage who fixed for us the calculation of intercalation, sanctified future months, and intercalated future [months into] years until the coming of Eliyahu, and it is upon this that we rely today. That which we have said all follows the opinion of Rambam. However, Ramban (in the Sefer HaMitzvot, Positive Commandments 153), considers the sanctification of the month as one commandment and intercalation a separate commandment. His proofs (for dividing these into two separate commandments are) in his Book of Commandments. And so [too] the Baal Halakhot (considers these separate commandments). And the verse that teaches about the commandment of intercalation, that is, that we calculate the seasons in order to make the holidays in their (proper,) established times, is “You shall observe this commandment in its proper time” (Exodus 13:10), and so, “Observe the month of Spring” (Deuteronomy 16:1), as we have written. It is from the roots of this commandment [that it is] so that Israel shall make God’s holidays in their (proper) times, as God commanded that we make Pesach in the time that the produce is in [bloom], as it is written (Deuteronomy 16:1), “Observe the month of Spring, and you shall offer the Pesach sacrifice.” And the holiday of Sukkot is [to fall] at the time of the harvest, as is written, “And the holiday of the harvest at the turn of the year” (Exodus 34:22). And were it not for intercalation, the holidays would come not at these times, since Israel calculates their months and festivals according to the lunar year, which has three hundred and fifty-four days, eight hours, and eight hundred and seventy-six parts, which is less than the solar year by ten days, twenty-one hours and two hundred and four parts — its mnemonic is ten, twenty-one, two hundred and four. Due to the ripening of the produce and fruit from the power of the sun, it turns out that but for intercalation — by which we align the lunar and solar years — Pesach would not come in the Spring, nor Sukkot at the time of the harvest. And this matter is to be fixed by the greatest [sages] of the generation, since it is a matter requiring great wisdom. And since it is also said that from this [calculation, one comes to know] the agricultural happenings of the year, it is appropriate to give [this task] only to great and pious men. The laws of the commandment — for example, interrogating [those who offer] testimony concerning the new month; instilling fear in the witnesses on occasion; the law concerning circumstances under which the Shabbat may be desecrated for this testimony; for what [considerations] we do or do not intercalate; which month they would intercalate, i.e. Adar, as they, may their memory be blessed, expounded, “‘You shall observe this commandment in its proper time’ (Exodus 13:10), this teaches that we only intercalate at the time near the holiday”; and they, may their memory be blessed, further expounded on this verse, “From where do we know that we only intercalate the month during daytime? [We learn this from the] verse, [which] states, ‘from year to year’ (yamim yemimah, literally ‘from day to day’)” (Sanhedrin 10b); and they, may their memory be blessed, further expounded, “‘For the months of the year’ (Exodus 12:2) — it is months you calculate towards the year, not days” (Megillah 5a); furthermore did they say on this matter, “‘A month of days’ (Numbers 11:20), it is days you calculate towards the month, not hours” (Megillah 5a); and the rest of its details —- are [all] elucidated in Tractate Rosh Hashanah, and in the first chapter of Sanhedrin, and similarly in Berakhot. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sanctification of the New Month 1.) And [it] is practiced in every place and at all times when we have ordained sages, according to the aforementioned conditions. One who transgresses it and does not [sanctify the new month or intercalate the month] — if he be a sage for whom it is appropriate — has violated a positive commandment; and his punishment is very great since he causes the ruining of the holidays. And now that — due to our iniquities — we do not intercalate by ordained [sages], our calculation relies on the accepted calculation from Rabbi Hillel, as we have said.

In everything, God always requires you, as a Jewish father, to instill in your children whom God has graced you with, while they are still with their father, that which God asks from you and your offspring. While they are still young, bring them close to God and encourage the desire in their hearts to be connected, embraced, and clinging to the Jewish people's life and fate. But on the evening of that day when you, yourself, celebrate the birthday of the Jewish people, God's creation of this amazing nation amid mankind, the beginning of your mission as a Jew — God dedicated this evening to sanctifying your offspring, to bringing your children into the covenant with you, your young children upon whose closeness to God or, God forbid, their profaning His name, the eternity of the Jewish people and the future of our nation depend upon. Through these children, you may nurture the planting of renown (alluding to Ezekiel 34:29), which God planted for eternity through the exodus from Egypt. So that they may grow and become worthy of being the fruit of holiness for jubilation — when you pass around the pieces of the bread of affliction [the matzah] to yourself and to them, while you are connecting to the mission of your people and the dedication of the Jewish people to the God of their fathers and His Torah — do not minimize the words that come out of the purity of your heart. Speak to them, to your children, and let them hear about the supernal nature of this sublime mission, to be a father to Jewish children and to be children of the living God. Teach them the concept of the bread of affliction; acquaint them with the spirit of the Passover holiday, which ascends upon high. Make them understand the supernal nature of God's deeds and wonders in Egypt and of the name of Israel, which He bequeathed to His people when He took them out from darkness to light and from slavery to freedom. Circumcision (Milah) When Avraham was 99 years old, Hashem appeared to him and said: "I am the Almighty God; walk before Me and be complete! I establish My covenant between Me and you, and I will multiply you exceedingly." Then Avraham fell on his face, and God spoke to him, saying: "Behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall become the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Avram; rather, your name shall be Avraham, for I have made you the father of many nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will establish you as nations, and kings will descend from you. I will uphold My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you. I give to you and your descendants after you the land of your sojournings, the entire land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession, and I will be their God." God then said to Avraham: "But you must also observe My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. This is My covenant, which you shall observe between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and this shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you. At eight days old, every male among you shall be circumcised throughout your generations, whether born in your house or purchased with silver from a foreigner who is not of your descendants. Those born in your household and those bought with your silver must be circumcised, so that My covenant shall be in your flesh as an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who does not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant." (Genesis 17:1-14) Hashem also commanded Mosheh: "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman gives birth to a male child, on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised." (Leviticus 12:2-3) "Walk before Me and be complete!" Let your entire life be lived before My all-encompassing presence. In every moment of your existence, direct your gaze toward Me and dedicate every part of your life to My service! And thus, be whole! Do not divide your being—thinking that your spirit belongs to Heaven while your body belongs to the earth, that you serve God with your soul while indulging the desires of the flesh. Be whole! See even your body as an instrument of divine service, and recognize that every power, even those of the body, has been entrusted to you for a sacred purpose. Dedicate your body to Me just as you dedicate your soul, and thus be whole and unified—your entire being moved by a single thought, consecrated to the One and Only God. Thus, God spoke to Avraham when He commanded him to place His seal on the most physical part of his body, thereby sanctifying and consecrating the body for divine purpose. You must keep the forces of your body sacred. Do not squander them in base sensual indulgence. Do not use them against the will of your God, but rather for the purpose for which He has given them to you. Be a complete human, a complete servant of God! Even in the most physical of acts, see only a sacred duty meant for the holy purpose of building the world. Keep your physical strength sacred for this divine purpose and restrain the demands of the flesh within these sacred bounds. Know that God will hold you accountable for every ounce of energy you waste outside His service or use against His will. Let the seal of Avraham remind you of this! Let it restrain your actions when desire tempts you to stray. Be wise and understand! Do not deceive yourself by thinking: "There is nothing in the world as much under my control as my own body. Whom would I harm if I use my body according to my desires?" But know that in doing so, you sin against God, your Creator, who owns both you and your body, with all its desires and inclinations. He is your Father, the One who placed upon your flesh the holy covenantal seal. This is a sign that you must rule over your body and its desires, sanctifying them for God's purpose. The eternal survival of your people is also founded upon the preservation of the holiness and purity of the covenantal seal. It was designed in such a way that, among Israel, base physical desire cannot dominate entirely, leading to the corruption of the entire generation and its annihilation from among the nations—as happened to other peoples, whose indulgence in bodily lusts weakened them and drained the strength of their vitality, causing their destruction. But in Israel, even among sinful ancestors, pure children are born, ready to grow like strong seedlings. This ensures that from generation to generation, the Garden of God will flourish anew, and the spirit and glory of God will walk among it. When the spirit of a past generation has fallen due to its corruption, a new generation will arise in Israel, untouched by its predecessor’s impurity. But the desecration of the covenantal seal leads to human degradation, reducing one to the level of an animal, causing moral corruption, and bringing impurity into future generations. It defiles the dignity of family life, bringing upon them terrible and lasting afflictions that become an inheritance of disease from weakened ancestors to their descendants. Only a body that is strong and steadfast in holiness and purity can house a strong and sacred spirit. Thus says the Lord: "I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you, for their generations, as an everlasting covenant—to be God to you and your descendants after you… And you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you, for their generations. This is My covenant that you shall keep between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised… And an uncircumcised male who does not circumcise the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.” One who rejects this covenant severs his connection to God and uproots the very foundations of his existence. Thus, God spoke to Avraham, and thus He speaks to every descendant of Avraham. And you, young men reading these words, do not carry the seal of Avraham in vain! Do not let yourselves be swept away by the degeneracy of the times! If you are truly the children of Avraham, you must uphold a high standard. Let this seal protect you from moral corruption! Let it strengthen you in times of struggle—it will surely help you achieve victory. When youth everywhere withers like a decayed flower, when society rushes toward spiritual decline, let your pride be in remaining strong, in standing firm in the holy calling that you bear as a son of Israel. "Walk before Me always and be pure, unblemished, and whole!" This is what God calls upon you to do through the seal of the covenant at every moment when temptation arises. Will you mock this call? Will you throw away the honor of Israel for the sake of fleeting animal pleasure? It is the duty of the father not only to physically nurture his child but also to raise him in mind and heart as a true human being and a Jew. Therefore, the father bears the responsibility to bring his son into the covenant of Avraham on the eighth day. If he neglects this duty, the communal authorities must ensure it is carried out. If they too fail, then every male descendant of Avraham, upon reaching religious maturity, is obligated to undergo circumcision himself. If he refuses, the Torah states: "That person shall be cut off from his people." Since circumcision is not merely a physical alteration but a spiritual elevation—raising the human being from animalistic indulgence to moral responsibility—it must be performed in the daytime, the time of action and purpose. A healthy child must be circumcised on the eighth day. If the child is sick or physically weak, circumcision is postponed until full recovery. If the illness affected the entire body, the procedure must be delayed for seven full days after recovery. If the condition affected only one limb, it is performed as soon as the child has regained strength. Since circumcision is an irreversible act, it is delayed in cases of doubt to protect the child's life. If two previous brothers died due to circumcision, a third son is circumcised only after he has grown stronger. If there is uncertainty about the exact birth time—whether it occurred before or after nightfall—the eighth day is counted from the following day. If the eighth day falls on Shabbat or a festival, circumcision is postponed to the ninth day unless it is known with certainty that the child was born during the day. All additional laws regarding circumcision can be found in sections 260-266. This is the “sin” through which a private individual falls and is humbled from his exalted position; this very sin is the one through which nations have strayed and have been wiped away from under the heavens of the Lord, and generations of human beings have been brought low to the dust. And it is none other than the sin and the iniquity through which Israel also fell and was humbled, because, due to this sin, “idolatry and the lusts of the senses” will always accompany him—yet such a thing must not be, for Israel must not descend to such a low level without the possibility of rising again, heaven forbid. For the Torah has acted countless times because of this and has always concerned itself to prevent Israel from being swallowed up and from being destroyed from the land. Therefore, let us not forget that the Lord placed us in the world of the Lord, for this world is the “property of the Lord,” and its gifts are given to us only for a specific purpose. To us have been entrusted many testimonies, commandments, and laws, some of which we have already come to know intellectually, and upon these depend also the commandments concerning the acquisition of the land—“new produce” and “orlah.” But just as the Lord gave the land to man to “serve and guard it,” so the Lord, for a second time in His world, bequeathed the “Land of Israel” to His people to be “the portion of their inheritance” according to their special actions. Israel, which is a people even without land and kingdom, is still called a “people” even before it attains “the land of its possession,” for the bond of nationality is not connected merely to the physical area of a place; rather, Israel is a “people” according to the great and enlightened idea inherent in the spirit of its essence. Israel bears this idea and the testimony of life, which it is called to fulfill, and this is in particular its divinely allotted portion. Nevertheless, because the Lord wished for Israel to be a “people” even in its external state among the nations, He gave it also a “special land” according to the special actions of His people. But in order that this land—which is intended to serve as the means to bring into effect the “name and testimony of Israel” in its fullness—does not become a source of stumbling or of corruption through the sin of property acquisition, the Lord commanded His people to observe these commandments in the land: “Shemittah” (the Sabbatical year), “Yovel” (the Jubilee), “Bikkurim” (first fruits), “Terumah” (offering), “Ma’aser” (tithes), “Challah” (dough offering). Especially concerning the acquisition of the land of Israel, Shemittah and Yovel, on the one hand, testify in themselves as a judgment of justice, since the Lord is the Master of all this property; and on the other hand, by prohibiting the labor of the land in its acquisition, they testify according to the understanding of “Sabbath” with regard to property acquisition in general. We must consider, on the one hand, “new produce” and “orlah” with regard to the acquisition of land in general, and on the other hand, “Bikkurim,” “Terumah,” “Ma’aser,” and “Challah,” since they are intended specifically for the acquisition of the “Land of Israel.” Of these latter, we will only mention “Challah,” which, according to the Kabbalah, remains incumbent upon us even now. Behold, if you have given your word and promise to give over ownership and money has been given in accordance with the decree, however, the sale has not been finalized by one of the methods of acquisition — we may not say that the matter was completed and they are allowed to go back on it. Nevertheless, if either the buyer or the seller goes back on it after money was received or after the buyer placed a sign on the merchandise, the curse of, "He who exacted payment," is given to him in court. That is, "He Who exacted payment from the people of the generation of the flood, and from the people of the generation of the dispersion, and from the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, and from the Egyptians at the Sea, He will exact payment from whoever does not stand by his word" (Bava Metzia 48a). And even one who only does business orally is obligated by his word, even though he has not performed an action. Yet even though a buyer or seller who only goes back on his word does not receive the curse of "He who exacted payment," he is called one lacking in faith. Anyone who promises something to his fellow in a way that his fellow should be able to rely upon it and goes back on it is considered someone lacking in faith (Choshen Mishpat 204). Indeed it is so — do not destroy [bal taschit]! That is God's first great general call to you, man. That is when you see yourself as the ruler and governor over the face of His earth. Behold, you see dirt, plants, and animals around you; and they already carry the seal of your human projects, to study and appraise them, through human effort and ingenuity, to serve your human purposes, to have them become your shelter, clothing, sustenance, and tools. So you have acquired them, that they should be in your possession, such that you stand amid your rulership over the face of the earth and all that exists are your servants to do your will and bidding. Yet you suddenly raise your hand to amuse yourself or to pour out your anger and swallow up and destroy something that can [otherwise] be used for your purposes. But you want to pound and break and obliterate that thing that you can make helpful and use properly. You surely desire this since, when you see creations below your level as things disconnected from justice and righteousness, you do not fear the Lord. Yet He is indeed their Shield and Protector, taking up their case with justice. So instead of thinking about them as means for the thoughtful acts of man, you see them haughtily, to have your power and the might of your will rule over them and to pour out your furious rage over them. Then the voice of God's great call thunders over you, "Do not destroy! Get away from it; act like a human being!" For it is truly only by using that which exists around you for the thoughtful and reasonable use of man as My Torah guides and designates that you are a man. Then you have power and possession over them. For I have given you, man, power and possession over them by way of a divine mandate. However, if you destroy, if you ruin, if you obliterate, you are no longer man, but rather a wild animal or a predatory beast, so that you no longer have possession over what exists around you. For I have lent them to you only for wise human use. So don't ever forget that I am the One who lent them to you! However, if you act perversely, if you act without intelligence and good sense towards anything, small or big, behold you are acting wickedly, rebelling and stealing from God's earth! Behold, you then turn into a murderer and robber of God's possessions. You are a sinner, and you have violated the holiness of the possession. Then God will make this call to you and protect everything, small or big, with this call. With the utterance of this word, He will grant righteous justice to the small or big against the plots of your heart and the violence of your hand! It is not for the sake of the prevention of bodily sickness that God arranged these laws about your food. Rather the Torah itself explains their reason: Just like the Temple of God, which symbolizes the ideal of the holy and sanctifies you for His sake, becomes defiled by impurity - that is, anything that is foreign to, or below the human realm (see the section on Service, Chapter 21) - so too are the forbidden foods "impure" for the holy sanctuary that you yourself constitute. Your body, your soul and your spirit form the essential playing field of your existence, which is designated for holiness. If you eat these foods, your body may well be nourished and become fatter. However, your animal impulse will be greatly aroused; or your body will only become a tool for your spirit. Instead of your soul becoming sanctified - meaning raising itself above any trace of animalism - it will descend to this low level, or become apathetic and lethargic. And your spirit can expect to encounter a greater struggle for which it is less equipped. It calls out to you again and again: It is impure to you! Do not defile yourselves with them! You will become impure from them! The meaning of becoming impure is to compromise preparedness for the designation of holiness. And behold you have been designated to be holy people, the children of a great holy congregation; and you have been chosen to attach yourselves to God and to walk in His ways. God said to you to be holy, "since I, your God, am holy." So then, you must guard your bodies like the holy sanctuary for your divine souls. As behold, the body is also for God. And that which is generally referred to as impure (tumah) is also referred to as something repulsive (sheketz), a disgusting thing. Something repulsive and disgusting is something that you reject on your own as a foreign body that is unfit for your constitution. And so just like your body naturally rejects anything that the sense of taste finds to be a foreign substance or unfit; so too must you reject these foods because they are repulsive, foreign and unfit for your spiritual constitution. Lest your spiritual constitution itself become repulsive, and you become distanced and turn away from your holy designation which you are meant to carry as a Jew. Likewise, abomination (toevah) - your spiritual constitution should abominate these foods, since they are antithetical to your spiritual designation and only nourish your animal impulse. These are the words of God's Torah. The main things about a mikveh (ritual bath) are: That the water should not be gathered by a person's possession, meaning a vessel; and also not arrive through any object that is susceptible to becoming impure. And [the water] must be gathered in one place. It can be flowing water or rain water that has not flown through or over anything that is susceptible to becoming impure. When rain water, it must be standing and not running. And the mikveh needs to have the necessary amount of water, and the like. Regarding the immersion, there may not be anything that separates between the thing that is being immersed and the water; and it must be completely placed within the water of the mikveh and fully immersed. (See Yoreh Deah 120, 201, 202.) Be fruitful and multiply! From now on, plant the planting of your species in the world. From now on, grow the thread of life at every instance and every time. Raise your offspring for all time so that they will continue to build and establish what you have left still unfinished and not yet sturdy. Plant your vine in the garden of the Lord, your species on the earth, so that it will grow to be a faithful planting in the vineyard of the House of Israel. And do everything in your power for your offspring, to raise them and educate them for God. And all the good things that you have acquired, fear of God, love of God, trust in God, living with faith in God — bequeath all these things to the next generation. With such an inheritance, you will continue through your offspring and their actions; and you, too, will live on and be remembered eternally. Let your house not be closed and sealed only for yourself and your household, to be a place of rest and peace only for yourselves. Rather let it be open for the benefit of the desolate poor people, for the hungry, the thirsty and for all who seek shelter and refuge for themselves. You should happily and lovingly bring in any guest who has no other letter of introduction that would recommend him except for that which comes from his being a creation of the Omnipotent, a son of our Father in Heaven. Hence receive him joyfully, bring him into your house, supply his needs and even accompany him [when he leaves] so that he will be secure on his journey. On these days that are memorial days of joy, they should not say such things that mention something sad relating to the fleetingness of life or sad thoughts about distressing matters - like veHu rachum (and He is merciful), rachum vechanun (merciful and compassionate), El erekh apayim (God full of patience) and yaankha (He should answer you). Likewise [is this the case] on other days primarily marked by joy besides Channukah and Purim: The fifteenth of Av; the fifteenth of Shevat; Rosh Chodesh (the first day of the month); Purim Katan; the thirty-third day of the omer; the eves of Yom Kippur and Rosh HaShanah; all of the month of Nissan; the days between Yom Kippur and Sukkot; from Rosh Chodesh Sivan until the day after Shavuot. Also [is this true] on private days of joy that have a national character, like a house of nuptials and a milah (circumcision). (They say yaankha at a milah with regard to the child for his healing.) Also [do we omit these] at the house of a mourner and on Tisha B'Av, for other reasons. 2) Festivals First we acknowledge that the creation of both the body and the spirit of the Jewish people was from God ("You have chosen us... And you have brought us close"); and that the maintenance of the body and the spirit of the nation is also an act of God ("and Your great name"). We then make note of the special import of this holiday ("and gave"). Then we speak about the special character of the day - whether it is about the creation of the Jewish people or its maintenance, the request from God concerning the creation or maintenance of the Jewish people is in, "May it come and may it ascend," and in, "And raise up for us." This is like, "God and God of our Forefathers, accept," on Shabbat. This is to bring down the blessing of the holiday: Life, peace and joy - may they come to fruition in our lives. And after the standing prayer (amidah), we recite the Hallel. On the first days of Pesach and on all the days of Sukkot, it is 'full Hallel,' like Chanukkah. But on the later days of Pesach, it is like Rosh Chodesh (the first day of the month): We skip [some sections] and recite 'half Hallel.' (The reason is explained nicely: It is because the latter days of Pesach do not only remind us of the salvation of the Jewish people, but rather also of the downfall of the Egyptians and their drowning in the sea. So it is like the Sages, may their memory be blessed, say [Yalkut Shimoni on Nakh 1085], that it is not good to say and prolong verse and praise about the destruction of the creations of God. That is why Hallel is not full [on those days]. Tisha B'Av at night: The scroll of Lamentations. It is the emotions of the prophet Jeremiah's soul and his dirge that he took up about the destruction of the holy city of Jerusalem and the Temple. And it is especially about the sin that Jerusalem and his people sinned, which is what caused that awful destruction to happen. And while glancing with eyes full of tears, he instructs and shows the path that leads to repentance and towards the revival of Israel, to renew our days as of old (alluding to Lamentations 5:21). Sukkot: They recite Ecclesiastes in the morning service of Shabbat of the intermediate days of the festival (Chol HaMoed) of Sukkot. As it shows that the maintenance of the body and the spirit of the nation is through God. This is in order to know that, without God, all human competition, all human actions and calculations, as well as the results of the toil of his efforts and his mighty hand - they are altogether empty.

that the sun is shooting arrows at those who deny its divinity, using the rainbow as its bow. The concave side of the rainbow always faces away from the sun, so that it does not look like a bow held by the sun. § The mishna taught that the examination of the witnesses included the following questions: How high was the moon over the horizon, and in which direction did it tilt? It was taught in one baraita: If the witness testifies that he saw the moon to the north of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says that he saw it to its south, he has not said anything of significance, as this is impossible. The Gemara asks: Isn’t the opposite taught in a different baraita: If he testifies that he saw the moon to the south of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says he saw it to its north, he has not said anything. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, in the second baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the summer, when the moon is to the south of the sun; there, in the first baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the rainy season, when the moon is to the north of the sun. The Sages taught in a baraita: If one witness says that he saw the moon two plow handles high above the horizon, and the other one says it was three plow handles high, their testimony is valid, as a small discrepancy of this kind is reasonable. However, if one says that he saw the moon three plow handles above the horizon, and the other one says it was five plow handles high, their testimony is void, as that discrepancy is unacceptable. However, this does not mean that the witnesses themselves are disqualified, as either of them may join with another testimony, i.e., he may combine his account with that of another witness who testifies likewise. The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: We did not actually see the moon, but we saw it reflected in the water, or we saw it reflected in a glass lantern, or we saw it through thin clouds, they may not testify about it, as only a direct sighting of the moon is acceptable. If they say: We saw half of the moon’s reflection in the water, or we saw half of it through the clouds, or we saw half of it in a lantern, they still may not testify about it. The Gemara analyzes this baraita: Now, if when one sees the entire moon in this manner, you said that this is not valid testimony, is it necessary to teach that one may not testify when he sees only half of it? Rather, this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses saw half of the moon’s reflection in water and half of it directly in the sky, or half of it through the clouds and half of it in the sky, or half of it in a lantern and half of it in the sky, although they saw half of the moon directly, they may not testify about it until they see the entire moon in the sky. The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: One moment we saw the new moon, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. The Gemara asks: Must they go on watching it to such an extent, i.e., why should they have to see it for a long period of time? Abaye said that this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses say: We saw the moon on our own accord, i.e., by chance, without looking for it, and then we returned to look for it on purpose, to deliver precise testimony about it, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. What is the reason? Because one can say that the first time it was merely a small round white cloud that they saw, which they mistook for the moon, and that is why when they looked for it again they could not find it. MISHNA: After the witnesses have been examined and their testimony accepted, the head of the court says: It is sanctified. And all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. Whether the moon was seen at its anticipated time, on the thirtieth day of the previous month, or whether it was not seen at its anticipated time, in which case witnesses are not necessary to establish the following day as the New Moon, the court sanctifies it and formally proclaims the day as the New Moon. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day, as the celestial court in Heaven has already sanctified it, precluding the need for the additional sanctification by the earthly court. GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the head of the court says: It is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that the court must sanctify the New Moon, derived? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said that the verse states: “And Moses declared to the children of Israel the appointed seasons of the Lord” (Leviticus 23:44). From here it is derived that the head of the court says: It is sanctified, as it is evident from the verse that Moses, whose status was equivalent to that of the head of the Great Sanhedrin, declared the appointed times of the Festivals and New Moons in a formal manner. § The mishna further teaches that after the head of the court says: It is sanctified, all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rav Pappa said that the verse states: “Which you shall proclaim them [otam] to be sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2). Instead of otam, read into the verse: You [atem], as though the verse stated: Which you shall proclaim, you. This superfluous word you teaches that the month must be proclaimed not only by the head of the court, but also by you, the people. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that it is derived from the phrase: “These are [hem] My appointed seasons” (Leviticus 23:2). The term hem can also mean: They, which indicates that they, the people, should likewise say and announce My appointed seasons. The Gemara further asks: Why do I need the people to declare: It is sanctified; it is sanctified, twice? The Gemara answers that the reason is that it is written: “Sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2) in the plural, which indicates that they must announce it twice. § The mishna taught that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day. The Gemara cites other opinions in this regard: It is taught in a baraita that the Sage Palaimo says: If the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon, as the new moon appeared as expected and there is no need for any special sanctification. However, if the new moon was seen not at its anticipated time, the court must sanctify the New Moon. The baraita continues: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: In either case, the court does not sanctify the New Moon formally, as it is stated: “And you shall sanctify the fiftieth year” (Leviticus 25:10), from which it is derived: You must formally sanctify years in court, but you do not have to formally sanctify months, as they are sanctified automatically by Heaven. Rather, it is enough merely to announce to the public that a certain day was established as the New Moon. Rabbi Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, that if the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court sanctifies the new month; however, if it was not seen at its anticipated time, they do not sanctify it. Abaye said: We, too, learn in a mishna: If the court and all of the Jewish people saw the new moon, and the witnesses were interrogated, but the court did not manage to say: Sanctified, before nightfall, the previous month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. This indicates that full, yes; i.e., in this case, it is necessary to extend the previous month. However, sanctified, no; there is no need to formally sanctify the month, as the New Moon does not occur on its anticipated date in this case. The Gemara rejects this argument: There is no proof from here, as it was necessary for the mishna to mention that the month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. The reason is that it might enter your mind to say that since the court and the entire Jewish people saw the new moon, it has become public knowledge and therefore there is no need to render the previous month a full, thirty-day month. Consequently, the mishna teaches us that even in this case the previous month must be extended. Nevertheless, it is still possible that the New Moon must be formally sanctified on the following day. MISHNA: Rabban Gamliel had a diagram of the different forms of the moon drawn on a tablet that hung on the wall of his attic, which he would show to the laymen who came to testify about the new moon but were unable to describe adequately what they had seen. And he would say to them: Did you see a form like this or like this? GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And is it permitted to create these types of forms? Isn’t it written: “You shall not make with Me gods of silver, or gods of gold” (Exodus 20:20), which is interpreted as teaching: You shall not make images of My attendants, i.e., those celestial bodies that were created to serve God, including the sun and the moon? § Abaye said: The Torah prohibited only the images of those attendants with regard to which it is possible to reproduce an item in their likeness. Since it is impossible for anyone to reproduce the sun and the moon, the prohibition does not apply to these objects. As it is taught in a baraita: A person may not construct a house in the exact form of the Sanctuary, nor a portico in the exact form of the Entrance Hall of the Sanctuary, nor a courtyard corresponding to the Temple courtyard, nor a table corresponding to the table in the Temple, nor a candelabrum corresponding to the candelabrum in the Temple. However, one may fashion

Just as judgment may be done only by day, so too here, the sota is given the bitter waters to drink only by day. And daytime is the time for breaking the neck of the heifer, as the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai said: Atonement is written with regard to the heifer, teaching that it is treated like sacred offerings, and it has already been established that all actions relating to offerings must be performed during the day. And for purifying the leper, it is derived as it is written: “This shall be the law of the leper on the day of his cleansing” (Leviticus 14:2). It was taught in the mishna: “The entire night is a valid time for reaping the omer,” as the Master said in tractate Menaḥot: The reaping of the omer and the counting of the omer must be performed at night, whereas bringing the omer offering to the Temple must be done during the day. And for burning the fats and limbs of the offerings, it is derived as it is written with regard to them: “Which shall be burning upon the altar all night until the morning” (Leviticus 6:2). § The mishna states: This is the principle: Something that it is a mitzva to perform during the day is valid if performed any time during the entire day. The Gemara asks: As the mishna has seemingly mentioned all daytime mitzvot explicitly, the words: This is the principle, are to add what? The Gemara answers: This principle comes to include the arranging of the vessels of frankincense alongside the shewbread in the Temple, and the removal of those vessels at the end of the week, as the verse does not specify the time when these procedures should be performed. And this mishna would consequently be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei said: If one removed the old shewbread and frankincense in the morning and arranged the new ones toward the evening, i.e., at the end of the day, there is nothing wrong with this, as it suffices if the changeover is made any time over the course of the same day. The Sages, however, maintain that the new ones must be set in place immediately after the old ones have been removed. And, according to Rabbi Yosei, how do I uphold that which is written with regard to the shewbread: “He shall set it in order before the Lord continually” (Leviticus 24:8), implying that the bread must be on the table at all times? It means only that the table should not be an entire day without the bread, but if there is bread on the table for even a part of the day, it is considered as being there “continually.” § The mishna concludes: Something that it is a mitzva to perform at night may be performed the entire night. The Gemara asks: What does this principle come to add that has not already been mentioned explicitly? The Gemara answers: It comes to include the eating of the Paschal offering, and consequently this mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, as it is taught in a baraita that it is written: “And they shall eat the meat on that night” (Exodus 12:8). Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: It is stated here: “On that night,” and it is stated further on: “And I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night” (Exodus 12:12). Just as there, when God passed through the land of Egypt, it was until midnight, so too here, the Paschal offering may be eaten only until midnight. The mishna, which asserts that the Paschal offering may be eaten all night, is not in accordance with Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. May we return to you “One who reads out of order.” MISHNA: One who reads the Megilla may position himself as he wishes, either standing or sitting. Whether one person reads the Megilla or two people read it together, they have fulfilled their obligation. In a place where the people are accustomed to recite a blessing over the reading, one should recite a blessing. And in a place where it is customary not to recite a blessing, one should not recite a blessing. The mishna records several laws governing public Torah readings. On Mondays and Thursdays during the morning service and on Shabbat during the afternoon service, three people read from the Torah; one may neither decrease the number of readers nor add to them. And one does not conclude with a reading from the Prophets [haftara] on these occasions. Both the one who begins the reading and the one who concludes the reading from the Torah recite a blessing; one recites before the beginning of the reading and one recites after its conclusion, but the middle reader does not recite a blessing. On the days of the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah; one may neither decrease the number of readers nor add to them. And one does not conclude with a reading from the Prophets. Both the one who begins the reading and the one who concludes the reading from the Torah recite a blessing. The first reader recites a blessing before the beginning of the reading, and the last reader recites a blessing after its conclusion, but the middle readers do not recite a blessing. The mishna formulates a general principle with regard to the number of people who read from the Torah on different occasions. This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and that is not a Festival, i.e., the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah; on a Festival, five people read; on Yom Kippur, six people read; and on Shabbat, seven people read. One may not decrease the number of readers, but one may add to them. And on these days one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. Both the one who begins the reading and the one who concludes the reading from the Torah recite a blessing; one recites before the beginning of the reading and one recites after its conclusion, but the middle readers do not recite a blessing. GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that one may read the Megilla while sitting. It was taught in a baraita: This is not the case with regard to reading the Torah, as one must stand when reading the Torah. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rabbi Abbahu said: It is as the verse states: “But as for you, stand here with Me, and I will speak to you all the commandments and the statutes” (Deuteronomy 5:28), which indicates that the Torah must be received while standing. And Rabbi Abbahu said: Were the verse not written in this manner, it would be impossible to utter it, in deference to God. The phrase “with Me” indicates that, as it were, even the Holy One, Blessed be He, was standing at the giving of the Torah. And Rabbi Abbahu also said: From where is it derived that the teacher should not sit on a couch and teach his disciple while he is sitting on the ground? It is as it is stated: “But as for you, stand here with Me,” which indicates that the teacher and his disciples should be in the same position. With regard to Torah study while standing, the Sages taught: From the days of Moses until the time of Rabban Gamliel, they would study Torah only while standing, as learning from one’s teacher is comparable to receiving the Torah at Sinai, during which the Jewish people stood. When Rabban Gamliel died, weakness descended to the world, and they would study Torah while sitting. And this is as we learned in a mishna (Sota 49a): When Rabban Gamliel died, honor for the Torah ceased, as standing while learning is an expression of honor for the Torah. The Gemara points out an apparent contradiction with regard to this very issue. One verse says: “And I sat [va’eshev] on the mount” (Deuteronomy 9:9), and another verse says: “And I stood on the mount” (Deuteronomy 10:10). The Gemara cites several possible resolutions. Rav said: Moses would stand and learn the Torah from God, and then sit and review what he had learned. Rabbi Ḥanina said: Moses was not standing or sitting, but rather bowing. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The term yeshiva is nothing more than an expression of remaining in one place, as it is stated: “And you dwelled [vateshvu] in Kadesh for many days” (Deuteronomy 1:46). Rava said: Moses studied easy material while standing and difficult material while sitting. We learned in the mishna: If one person reads the Megilla or two people read it together, they have fulfilled their obligation.

but they would not leave early, out of deference to Rav, and therefore it was not necessary for him to recite a blessing after he finished his portion. In any event, the incident with Rav does not provide conclusive proof as to the number of readers on a public fast day. The Gemara tries to adduce another proof: Come and hear the following baraita: This is the general principle: Any day on which labor is permitted and prolonging the prayer service would constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, a public fast day and the Ninth of Av, only three people read from the Torah, so as not to lengthen the prayer service unnecessarily. But any day on which prolonging the prayer service would not constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, the days of the New Moon, when it is customary for women to refrain from work, and on the intermediate days of a Festival, when one may not perform labor unless refraining from labor will cause him to lose money, four people read from the Torah. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here that on a public fast day three people read from the Torah. Rav Ashi said: Didn’t we learn in the mishna as follows: This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and it is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah? What is added by the formulation of this principle? Does it not come to add a public fast and the Ninth of Av, when there is an addition to the prayer service, and therefore four people read from the Torah? The Gemara asks: But according to Rav Ashi, who is the tanna of the mishna? It is not the first tanna of the following baraita and not Rabbi Yosei. As it is taught in a baraita: If the Ninth of Av occurs on a Monday or a Thursday, days on which there is always a Torah reading, three people read from the Torah. And the last one of them concludes with a reading from the Prophets [haftara]. If it falls on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, one person reads from the Torah, and the same one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei said: Three people always read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av, and the last one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. All agree that no more than three people read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av and other public fast days. The Gemara responds: However, if only three people read from the Torah on these days, the statement: This is the principle, is difficult, as the mishna has already specifically mentioned every case included in the principle. The Gemara explains: No, it is not difficult; it comes to add the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival. The Gemara challenges this explanation: Aren’t these days taught explicitly in the mishna: On the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah? The Gemara answers: The principle was not intended to add to what is stated explicitly in the mishna. The mishna merely gives a mnemonic by which to remember the number of readers on each day. It expresses the following: Do not say that a Festival and the intermediate days of the Festival are the same with regard to their sanctity, and therefore the same numbers of readers are called to the Torah on these days. Rather, hold this rule firmly in your hand: On any day when there is an additional element of the laws of the day, an extra person is added to the number of those who read from the Torah. Therefore, on the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four people read from the Torah. On a Festival, when it is prohibited to perform labor, five people read from the Torah. On Yom Kippur, when performance of prohibited labor is punishable by karet, six people read from the Torah. On Shabbat, when there is a prohibition to perform labor that is punishable by stoning, seven people read. The Gemara cited an incident involving Rav, and now it returns to examine the matter itself. Rav once happened to come to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from a Torah scroll. When he began to read, he recited a blessing, but when he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone else fell on their faces, i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the taḥanun supplication, as was the custom, but Rav did not fall on his face. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rav did not fall on his face? The Gemara answers: It was a stone floor, and it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “Nor shall you install any figured stone in your land, to bow down upon it” (Leviticus 26:1), that, upon it, i.e., any type of figured stone, you shall not bow down in your land, i.e., anywhere in your land other than in the Temple; but you shall bow down upon the stones of the Temple. This is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down only upon a stone floor. The Gemara asks: If so, why was it specifically Rav who did not bow down? All of the other people present were also prohibited from bowing down on the stone floor. The Gemara answers: The stone section of the floor was only in front of Rav, as the rest of the floor was not paved. The Gemara comments: If so, Rav should have gone to where the rest of the congregation was standing and fallen on his face there. The Gemara responds: He did not want to trouble the congregation to make room for him. And if you wish, say the following: Rav would stretch out his arms and legs and fully prostrate himself on the ground, whereas the others would merely bend their bodies as a symbolic gesture but would not prostrate themselves on the ground. And this is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down upon a stone floor only when it is done with outstretched arms and legs. The Gemara challenges this response: Rav should have fallen on his face without stretching out his arms and legs. The Gemara answers: He did not want to change his usual custom of full prostration, and where he was standing he could not fully prostrate himself in his usual manner because there the floor was of stone. And if you wish, say a different reason as to why Rav did not fall on his face: An important person is different, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is not permitted to fall on his face in public unless he knows that he will be answered like Joshua bin Nun in his time, as it is written: “And the Lord said to Joshua: Get up; why do you lie upon your face?” (Joshua 7:10). It is a disgrace for a distinguished person to fall on his face and have his prayers unanswered. Consequently, Rav did not prostrate himself in public. Apropos Rav’s practice of prostrating himself, the Gemara continues with a discussion of different forms of bowing. The Sages taught in a baraita: The term kidda indicates falling upon one’s face, with one’s face toward the ground, as it is stated: “Then Bathsheba bowed [vatikod] with her face to the ground” (I Kings 1:31). Keria means bowing upon one’s knees, as it is stated with regard to Solomon: He finished praying and “he rose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling [mikkeroa] upon his knees” (I Kings 8:54). Finally, hishtaḥava’a, that is bowing with one’s arms and legs spread in total submission, as it is stated that Jacob asked, in response to Joseph’s dream: “Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow down [lehishtaḥavot] to you to the ground?” (Genesis 37:10). The Gemara relates that Levi once demonstrated the form of kidda that was performed by the High Priest before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. This bowing was especially difficult, as it involved bending from the waist until his head reached the ground, supporting his body with his thumbs, and then rising at once. In the course of his demonstration, Levi dislocated his hip and became lame. The Gemara asks: Was it this that caused Levi to become lame? Didn’t Rabbi Elazar say: A person should never speak impertinently toward God on High, as a great man once spoke impertinently toward God on High and he became lame? And who was he? Levi. The reason Levi became lame was because of the way he spoke to God (see Ta’anit 25a), not due to having performed kidda. The Gemara answers: Both this and that caused Levi to become lame. Since he spoke impertinently toward God, he was worthy of punishment, and he therefore suffered an injury while exerting himself to perform kidda. On the topic of bowing, Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said: I saw Abaye

It is not permitted to write a scroll of the Torah¹The scroll of the Pentateuch used for the lections in public worship. on skins of ritually unclean cattle or on skins of ritually unclean wild animals, nor may they²The parchment sheets of which the scroll is made up. be sewn with [their] sinews or [the parchment rolls of tefillin] be wound with their hair. It is an oral prescription delivered to Moses at Sinai that [these] shall be written on the skins of ritually clean cattle, or on skins of ritually clean wild animals, that they shall be sewn together with ritually clean sinews, [that the tefillin rolls] shall be wound with ritually clean hair, and that the writing be done with ink, because [this latter requirement] has support in Scripture, And I wrote them with ink in the book.³Jer. 36, 18. It is permitted to write [sacred scrolls] on skins of nebeloth and on skins of ṭerefoth and there is no need to consider the possibility of their having been pierced at the animal’s heart.⁴It was a heathen practice to remove the heart from a live animal to offer it as a sacrifice, and this, in Rabbinic law (Mishnah ‘A.Z. 29b, Sonc. ed., p. 145) rendered the entire animal, including its skin, forbidden as an idolatrous offering. Skins⁵Before they were dressed; but dressed skins may be bought only from trustworthy persons who can testify that the dressing had been done in accordance with the law. for the [sacred] books, tefillin and mezuzoth may be bought anywhere, and one need not consider the possibility that they might be skins that were pierced at the animal’s heart. The writing on ḳelaf must be on the side of the flesh, and on gewil it must be on the side of the hair; and if one changed the one for the other [the scroll] may not be used for the lection [in the statutory services]. [Sacred texts]⁶Mentioned in Rule 1. may not be written on difthera, a tablet or erased paper;⁷Others ‘palimpsest’. GRA in Sof. I, 5 omits ‘erased’. nor with coal,⁸Or, ‘black pigment’. shoe-black, or ink containing gum or vitriol. Vitriol may not be added to the ink. R. Jacob said in the name of R. Meir: Vitriol may be added to the ink. R. Judah said: R. Meir’s statement about [writing with ink containing] vitriol applies to [the whole] Torah⁹Cf. ‘Erub. 13a [Sonc. ed., p. 82). except the section dealing with a suspected wife.¹⁰Num. 5, 11ff. R. Jacob retorted: [R. Meir] said, ‘Except the section dealing with a suspected wife’, [by which he meant that] only in the special scroll¹¹A small scroll on which were written the curses that would befall an unfaithful wife. which [was used] in the Temple [must the ink contain no vitriol] because [the writing] had to be blotted out.¹²Cf. Num. ibid. 23f. R. Simeon b. Laḳish said in the name of R. Meir, who had it from R. Ishmael, that vitriol may be added to the ink. [Sacred texts]¹³Mentioned in Rule 1. may not be written in [obsolete] Hebrew characters or in the Median, Elamitic or Greek languages.¹⁴According to Meg. 9a (Sonc. ed., p. 48) it is permitted to write the Torah in Greek, though this is not allowed in the case of tefillin and mezuzoth. Seventy Elders wrote the Torah for king Ptolemy¹⁵Assumed to be Ptolemy Philadelphus who reigned in Egypt, 285-247 B.C.E., and who arranged for the Greek Version, the Septuagint, to be made, as narrated in Sof. I, 8 (cf. the notes ad loc.). in Greek, and that day was as ominous for Israel as the day on which the Golden Calf was made, since the Torah could not be adequately translated. They [all] introduced [the same] thirteen alterations:¹⁶For a comparison of these variants with the Heb. text, cf. on Sof. I, 8. ‘God created in the beginning’; ‘I shall make a man in image and likeness’; ‘And He finished on the sixth [day] and rested on the seventh [day]’; ‘Male and female He created him’; ‘Come let Me go down’; ‘And Sarah laughed among her relatives, saying’; ‘For in their anger they slew oxen and in their self-will they digged up a stall’; ‘And Moses took his wife and his children and set them upon a carrier of men’; ‘Now the time that the children of Israel dwelt in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt was four hundred and thirty years’; ‘I have not taken one desirable thing from them’; ‘And the [beast] with small legs’; ‘Which the Lord thy God hath allotted unto all the peoples to give light under the whole heaven’; ‘And they offer sacrifices to the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven which I commanded should not be served’. [Sacred scrolls] must not be written in gold. It is related that, in an Alexandrian scroll¹⁷Cf. note to Sof. I, 9. of the Torah, the divine names were written in gold, and when the matter came before the Sages they decided that it should be stored away.¹⁸lit. ‘it shall be hidden’, i.e. not used for the lections. If Hebrew words were written in Aramaic or Aramaic words in Hebrew, if Ha’azinu was written in continuous lines,¹⁹Cf. Sof. I, 10, n. 44, for the correct arrangement. or if the breaking up [of the lines] was not done according to the rule, the scroll may not be used for the lections. If one finished [writing nearly] all the scroll [of the Torah] and less than a column of text remained, one need not hesitate to extend the writing so as to make of this a small column on its own.²⁰The extension of a short passage over a full column is done either by enlarging the characters or, according to others, by making each successive line shorter than the one preceding it. If an open section was written as a closed one or vice versa, the scroll must be stored away. What is an open section? One which commences at the beginning of a line. How much space must there be at the end of a line so that the section beginning at the next line may be called an open one? A space on which may be written a name of three letters.²¹The opinion of Maimonides, which has been adopted, is that space must be left for three words, each of three letters (cf. Y.D. CCLXXV, §2). Should an entire section be finished at the end of a column, if one [blank] line remained and [the next] section is a closed one, [the scribe] begins it in the middle of the line; but if it is an open section, he begins at the top [of the next column] and leaves that line [blank].²²Cf. Sof. I, 14. Sufficient space must be left between words¹lit. ‘between name and name’. so that they may be distinguished, and between letters so that they be not mixed. If the letters were mixed up or a break made in the middle of a word, the scroll must not be used for the lection in the statutory services. [It is permitted] to insert between columns two letters from a long word, but not from a short one. If, however, [the part of a longer word forms] a short word on its own,²e.g. in a word like yimlok (he will reign) the last two letters can form an independent short word lak (to thee). it is forbidden [to insert it between the columns]. In a Torah scroll the space of two finger-breadths must be left [between columns], but in scrolls of the Prophets and in those of Pentateuchs³Intended for ordinary reading or study, and not for the public lections. a space of one thumb-breadth [only]. In the lower margin of a Torah scroll the space of a handbreadth is left, and in the upper margin two-thirds of a handbreadth;⁴lit. ‘two parts of a handbreadth’. This is also the reading of V and M in Sof. II, 4. According to Men. 30a (Sonc. ed., p. 195) and H in Sof. loc. cit. the upper margin must be three finger-breadths wide. but in scrolls of the Prophets and Pentateuchs three finger-breadths in the lower margin and two finger-breadths in the upper. In all these cases⁵lit. ‘here and there’. if it is desired to extend [the margins] this may be done, provided they do not exceed [the space of] the written matter. Between the books in a Torah scroll a vacant space of four lines must be left, and in a scroll containing the Twelve Prophets three lines.
At the end of a scroll and at its beginning sufficient [parchment] must be left to wind⁶Reading with many authorities lehaḳḳif. V reads lehaḳim ‘to raise up’. [it round the scroll]. In a Torah scroll no limit has been prescribed, but a roller should be attached at the end of the scroll and there is no need to do this at its beginning.⁷This regulation does not agree with Sof. II, 5. A sheet of a Torah scroll must contain not less than three columns and not more than eight. In the case of ḳelaf parchments no limit was prescribed, [62b] and one may add [as many columns] as desired provided only there are not less than three columns [to the sheet]. If one finished [writing nearly] all the book⁸This refers either to one book of the Prophets or to several of them written in one scroll. and one column of text remained, one need not hesitate to make of it a separate small sheet. If a sheet [of a Torah scroll] is worn out, one may not remove two [columns only] and replace them by two new columns; but three columns should be removed and replaced by three new ones, and the new columns must be written in the same size as the original script. The width of a column [in a Torah scroll] must be such as to be recognizable at one glance,⁹Accordingly, not more than three Hebrew words, each of ten letters, may be written in a line. If the column is wider, the reader experiences difficulty in passing from line to line. and in a small scroll not less than a handbreadth. R. Jose b. Judah says: It must not be less than the width of three fingers. The height¹⁰lit. ‘length’. of [a scroll] must not be greater than its circumference,¹¹When rolled up, so according to B.B. 14a (Sonc. ed., p. 67); lit. ‘its width’. nor its circumference greater than its height, but they must be exactly alike,¹²lit. ‘takes the middle course’. and this is the most correct procedure. A Torah scroll may not consist half of gewil [and half of ḳelaf, but it may consist half of gewil]¹³The words of this Rule enclosed within square brackets are added from Sof. II, 10, q.v. If ‘although’ is altered to ‘because’, the text will make sense but will be contrary to the Rule in Sof. loc. cit. and half [of the ḳelaf] of deers, although this is not the best procedure. [A tear in a Torah parchment sheet] may not be joined with glue, nor is it permitted to write on a patch, nor may [the sheets] be sewn together on the written side. R. Simeon b. Eleazar said in the name of R. Meir: [A torn sheet] may be joined with glue and it is permitted to write on a patch, but it is forbidden to do the sewing¹⁴So according to GRA, H and M in Sof. II, 11. V reads here as in Sof. ‘the writing’. on the written side. If a scroll¹⁵Other than a Torah scroll. is torn, a patch may be placed on the outside. It is permissible to join the Torah and the Prophets in one scroll, according to R. Judah; but the Sages say: The Torah and the Prophets must be written in separate scrolls.¹According to GRA (in Sof. III, 1) who adopted the reading of B.B. 13b (Sonc. ed., p. 66): ‘it is permissible to fasten the Torah, the Prophets and the Hagiographa together (in one scroll)’. Between a book of the Prophets and another one should not leave the same [empty space] as between two books of the Torah; but in each case the space must be that which has been prescribed for it.²i.e. four lines between books of the Torah and three between the books of the Prophets. Furthermore [a book of the Prophets]³If the preceding book ended at the foot of a column. must begin at the top.⁴Of the next column, the reason being that, if the books of the Prophets were separated one from the other, the beginning of each book would commence at the top of a column. This does not apply to Torah scrolls, which may never be cut up into separate books. A Torah scroll⁵Which contains all the five books of Moses. may not be made into [separate] books of the Pentateuch, because it is forbidden to reduce a major sanctity⁶The Torah scroll in its entirety. to a minor sanctity.⁷A section of the Pentateuch. From scrolls containing sections of the Pentateuch, however, it is permitted to make up a Torah scroll. When may this be done? When the measurements⁸Of all the scrolls that are to be joined together. and the number of the lines⁹In each column. are alike.
It is not permissible to join together two sections of the Pentateuch or one and a half of them to form a single scroll.¹⁰Since it might be mistaken for a proper Torah scroll. But if it was intended¹¹When these were written. that additional scrolls be attached to them,¹²To complete a full Torah scroll. it is permissible. If a Torah scroll has spaces or stops [to mark] the beginning of verses, it may not be used for the lections.¹³Because all proper Torah scrolls must conform to the original without any deviations. [Similarly] if a letter has been engraved or joined to another, the scroll may not be used for the lections. A scroll [some of whose letters] are faded may not be used for the public lections.¹⁴So H and GRA in Sof. III, 8. V reads ‘one shall not rewrite [the letters] in it’. R. Simeon b. Eleazar says: If the outline [of the effaced letters] is distinguishable, it is permitted [to rewrite them]. A scroll of the Torah in which a whole line¹⁵This is the reading in Sof. III, 9. V reads here ‘one letter’. is faded may not be used. If the greater part of a line is faded and the smaller part intact, the use of the scroll is permitted. Not more than four¹⁶And not less than three (cf. Sof. III, 10). columns of the Torah scroll may be unrolled [at one time during the reading of the lection] but there is no objection to the reading of ten [columns] in one [lection]. A scribe may not put upon the written part [of a Torah scroll] a reed-pen with ink on it;¹⁷So according to Sof. III, 11. The text in V is meaningless. nor may he take hold of the sheets of parchment and thereby unroll [the scroll]; nor may he¹⁸This is the reading in Sof. III, 11. V reads ‘but he should’. grasp the parchments to extract the written sheets;¹⁹Which are rolled up; lit. ‘and bring forth the writing without’. nor may he remove a scroll from its [case] by shaking it out. All these [restrictions], however, are relaxed in the case of official revisers of Scriptural scrolls. It is not permissible to place a Torah scroll on a chair and to lean on it with one’s elbows while reading; so according to R. Nehemiah. It is not permissible to place it over a chair [with its sheets] hanging down while it is read in the manner of ordinary documents, because [sacred] books must not be treated with disrespect. A Torah scroll may not be placed on a bed and [certainly]²⁰Cf. N.Y. on Sof. III, 13. The insertion of ‘certainly’ avoids an anticlimax. not at its foot or under it; nor may one sit²¹lit. ‘that one may sit’. on a bed while a [Torah] scroll rests on it. It is related that R. Eliezer²²In Sof. III, 13, ‘R. Eleazar’. once sat [unknowingly] on a bed on which a [Torah] scroll lay, and [when he realized it] he jumped up as if a snake had bitten him. [Such respect is shown for the Torah] because Scripture declares, Ye shall keep My sabbaths, and reverence My sanctuary²³Lev. 19, 30.—it is not the Sabbaths that one reverences but Him Who commanded [to observe them], for Scripture declares, This is my God, and I will glorify Him²⁴Ex. 15, 2. [which means,]²⁵Connecting we’anwehu (I will glorify Him) homiletically with na’eh (beautiful) and understanding it as ‘I will serve Him in a beautiful manner’. I will perform the commandment in a beautiful way to His glory.²⁶lit. ‘before Him’. Such is the interpretation of R. Ishmael. R. ‘Aḳiba expounds it: I will expatiate on His excellencies.²⁷Heb. na’oth, lit. ‘beauties’, excellent attributes. Abba Saul explains it: I will be like Him,²⁸He explains we’anwehu as the equivalent of ’ani wahu (I and He). i.e. as He is gracious and merciful so be thou gracious and merciful. Foodstuffs may not be treated with disrespect. One may not sit on a basket containing dates or dried figs;²⁹Because they might be crushed and spoilt. but he may sit on a basket that contains pulse and also on a cake of pressed figs, because it is customary to do so in such cases.³⁰Pulse and dried figs are not spoilt by sitting on them. Foodstuffs may not be used as a covering. R. Meir says: Any fruit which has a husk may be [used as a covering]. R. Judah says: Any fruit which has a stem or a stalk³¹Whereby it can be lifted if it should happen to fall into the contents of the vessel it covered. may be [used as a covering].³²Since it would not be necessary to throw it away after use. Foodstuffs may not be eaten with the aid of foodstuffs³³Using them, e.g., in place of a spoon. unless they are consumed simultaneously.³⁴And would not be thrown away. The following divine names may not be erased, viz.¹lit. ‘he who writes’. Alef-lamed-he-yod-mem,²Meaning ‘God’. Alef-daleth-nun-yod,³Translated ‘Lord’. Yod-he-waw-he,⁴Composing the Tetragrammaton. Shaddai,⁵i.e. ‘Almighty’. Ẓeba’oth,⁶Meaning ‘[Lord of] hosts’. ‘Eheyeh-’asher-’eheyeh.⁷I am that I am (Ex. 3, 14). R. Jose says: Ẓeba’oth is generally treated as a secular noun.⁸Which may therefore be erased. If one writes ’El⁹It can mean ‘to’ or ‘God’ so far as the consonants are concerned. it may be erased;¹⁰It is presumed to be the preposition ‘to’. This Rule is omitted in Sof. IV, 2. if ’El of Alef-lamed-he-yod-mem or Yod-he of the four letters [of the Tetragrammaton],¹¹Which are Yod-he-waw-he. they may not be erased, because there are divine names corresponding to them. All prefixes or suffixes connected with a divine name may be erased. All ordinary words the letters of which are the same as those of a divine name may be erased.¹²Because they possess no sanctity. In For the Lord your God, He is God of gods,¹³Deut. 10, 17. the first [two]¹⁴i.e. your God He is God. are sacred and the last¹⁵Of gods, signifying ‘judges’ or ‘princes’. is secular. In Lord of lords,¹⁶ibid. the first is sacred and the second secular. In the God of Abraham¹⁷Gen. 31, 53. it is sacred; in the god of Nahor¹⁸ibid. Nahor did not worship the true God. it is secular, and in the god of their father¹⁹ibid. Terah (their father) was an idolater. it is secular. In Thou shalt not revile God,²⁰Ex. 22, 27. [the noun may bear] a sacred or a secular meaning.²¹It may refer to God or judges. R. Ishmael²²In Sof. IV, 5, ‘R. Simeon’. maintains that the noun is sacred. All nouns in the Torah [signifying God] that are mentioned in connection with Abraham are sacred except the first.²³The verse, And he said: My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight (Gen. 18, 3), because my lord was addressed to the leader of the three angels R. Ḥanina the son of R. Joshua’s brother holds that it is sacred.²⁴In his opinion my Lord was addressed to God. All names in the Torah mentioned in connection with Lot are secular²⁵There is only one secular name in the Lot passages, and the Tetragrammaton occurs twice. The word ‘all’ is not intended to be taken literally (cf. N.Y. on Sof. IV, 7). except the last.²⁶Viz. And Lot said unto them: ‘Oh, not so my Lord’ (Gen. 19, 18). Lot’s address to the angels is understood as ending at not so, and his petition to God then begins, My Lord, behold, etc. [So the Targum and Shebu. 35b, Sonc. ed., pp. 205f.] [All names] in the story of Micah²⁷Judg. 17f. are secular, even [when they begin with] Yod-he.²⁸The Tetragrammaton. In [the account of] Naboth²⁹1 Kings 21. they are sacred even [when they begin with] Alef-lamed.³⁰Meaning elsewhere ‘God’. In God standeth in the congregation of God, in the midst of the judges³¹The Heb. has the consonants of the divine name. He judges,³²Ps. 82, 1. [the divine name] is used as sacred³³In God standeth. and as secular.³⁴The name bearing the meaning of judges. In God delivereth me to³⁵Heb. ’el (to) which is the same consonants as the word for ‘God’. the ungodly,³⁶Job 16, 11. the first is sacred and the second³⁷’el in the sense of ‘to’. secular. In For hath any said unto God,³⁸ibid. XXXIV, 31. the first [’el] is secular and the second sacred. [In the verse] And let my cry have no³⁹Heb. על, the same consonants as those of the name of God. resting-place,⁴⁰ibid. XVI, 18. In Sof. IV, 9 the analysis is extended to the continuation of the verse. etc., [the words whose consonants are the same as those of a divine name] are secular. In God hath given command to speed me⁴¹2 Chron. 35, 21. [the name] is sacred. In Forbear thee from meddling with God, Who is with me,⁴²ibid. the name is sacred, according to the view of R. Jose b. Judah. In O God, the proud are risen up against me,⁴³Ps. 86, 14. the name is sacred but the reader must pause in his reading [after God].⁴⁴In the absence of the pause, the adjective proud might erroneously be taken as qualifying God. If [a scribe] wrote a sacred name twice,¹lit. ‘he who writes two sacred names’. he retains the first and erases the latter.²The first is retained because it was properly written; the second is erased because it was written in error. R. Judah says: If the latter occurred at the end of a column, he erases the first and retains the latter.³[In Sof. V, 1, the reading is: ‘R. Judah says: If the first occurs at the end of a column’. Here H reads: ‘If the latter occurs at the beginning of a column’. Either of these must be substituted for V because the idea is that] it spoils the appearance to leave a blank space at the beginning of the top line of a column. If [the scribe wrote] a secular noun twice,⁴lit. ‘two secular names’. he retains the first and wipes away the latter.⁵While the ink is still wet. R. Judah says: If the latter was at the top of a column,⁶[Cf. Sof. V, 2, n. 6.] he wipes away the first and retains the latter. If a scribe writes Yehudah and omits the daleth he inserts it above the line. If he intended to write the Tetragrammaton⁷The four-lettered name Yod-he-waw-he. Lit. ‘the name, he wrote the name’, apparently a misprint. and wrote Yehudah⁸Yod-he-waw-daleth-he. instead, he alters the daleth to he⁹This is done by adding a short vertical line to the daleth. and wipes away the final letter he. If it was required to write Yehudah but [the scribe] intended to write the Tetragrammaton, although he [inadvertently] inserted the daleth,¹⁰Thus writing the noun correctly but without intention. he erases it and writes another Yehudah.¹¹Because the writing must be both intentional and correct. If it was required to write the Tetragrammaton but [the scribe] intended to write Yehudah, although he inserted the daleth¹²So that Yehudah was not only intended but also written correctly, in the wrong place. [Cf. the variant reading in Sof. V, 3.] he wipes away the final he and alters [the preceding] daleth into he.¹³The letters being almost the same and the alteration so slight, the Tetragrammaton is deemed to have been written intentionally and correctly. R. Judah says: He should [also] go over the entire name with the reed-pen and so sanctify it. The Sages said to him: This is not the best procedure. If in writing the Tetragrammaton he made an error [by omitting] one letter he should suspend it above [the line]. If one erred [by omitting] all the name¹⁴The Tetragrammaton. he should suspend it between the lines. So R. Judah; R. Jose says: [The scribe] wipes away the letters preceding it, writes the Tetragrammaton [in their place] and suspends [above the line] the part which he had wiped away. R. Ḥananiah b. ‘Aḳashia says: All the sheet must be stored away. If one wrote Alef-lamed by mistake three¹⁵So GRA in Sof. V, 5. V reads ‘twice’. times in the clause God delivereth me to the ungodly,¹⁶Job 16, 11. The Biblical text has the word twice, the first being the name of God and the second the preposition, and inadvertently one wrote it three times, intending the first two to stand for ‘God’ (so sanctifying both) and the third for the preposition. one retains¹⁷This is the reading in Sof. V, 5. V has ‘wipes away’. the first and erases¹⁸So GRA in Sof. V, 5. V has ‘retains’. the latter.¹⁹The second ’el which, having been intended in error to stand for the divine name, is treated in accordance with Rule 1 above. By quoting an illustration from Job, the inference to be drawn is that the regulation with respect to a Torah scroll holds good also of the Prophets and the Hagiographa. When one is writing the Tetragrammaton, one may not respond even if the king greets him;²⁰All one’s attention must be concentrated on the writing of the divine name. but if one was about to write two or three divine names successively²¹e.g. The Lord, the Lord, God (Ex. 34, 6) or Deut. 6, 4. one may pause between them and respond. After dipping²²lit. ‘he who dips’. the reed-pen [in ink], one may not start with a letter²³The text has me’otho, lit. ‘from it’. A better reading, omitting the last waw would be me’oth, ‘from a letter of’. of the divine name²⁴Because a pen full of ink may cause a blot. but with a letter of²⁵Reading again me’oth. the preceding word. One who wipes away²⁶In Sof. V, 6, ‘erases’. a single letter of a divine name transgresses a negative commandment. R. Ishmael²⁷‘R. Simeon’ in Sof. loc. cit. says: On account of this it is stated, Ye shall destroy their name out of that place;²⁸Deut. 12, 3. and it is also stated, Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God.²⁹ibid. 4; i.e. the name of God must never be erased. It is permissible, however, to wipe away ink that dropped on the writing,³⁰Even of a divine name. since one’s intention is only to rectify it. It is not permissible to make a scroll [of the Shema‘]³¹So Sof. V, 9; lacking in V here. or of the Hallel for children.³²Extracts from the Scriptures may not be written on scrolls intended for children’s instruction. R. Judah permits [the writing of a scroll] from In the beginning³³Gen. 1, 1. to the story of the Flood,³⁴ibid. VI, 8. and from the beginning of Leviticus to And it came to pass on the eighth day;³⁵Lev. 9, 1. but [in the case of] all the other books [of Scripture the writing of extracts is] forbidden.³⁶Only in the case of the Pentateuch were the two extracts mentioned allowed to be written for the instruction of children. If, however, one intends to add to them,³⁷To complete all the book. it is permissible [to write extracts from the Scriptures in scrolls]. The following names are to be divided:³⁸Although each represents one name it is to be written as two words. Beth-’el,³⁹e.g. Gen. 12, 8. Beth-’awen,⁴⁰Hos. 4, 15; X, 5. Be’er-sheba‘,⁴¹e.g. Gen. 21, 31. Poṭifera‘,⁴²ibid. XXXV, 18. Ẓafenath-pa‘neaḥ,⁴³ibid. XLI, 45. E.V. Poti-phera and Zaphenath-paneah. [and the words] ḥarah ’af,⁴⁴lit. ‘the anger was kindled’ (cf. Num. 11, 10). ḥarah ’appi.⁴⁵lit. ‘My anger was kindled’ (cf. Ex. 22, 23). R. Jose says: These must not be divided. All agree that there must be no breaking up of ‘Ammiel,⁴⁶A name meaning ‘God is with me’ (e.g. Num. 13, 12). ‘Amminadab,⁴⁷Meaning ‘my kinsman is noble’ (e.g. ibid. 23). Ẓuri’el,⁴⁸The name means ‘my rock is God’ (cf. ibid. III, 35). Ẓurishaddai.⁴⁹A name meaning ‘my rock is Shaddai’ (e.g. ibid. I, 6). If a person writes a divine name on his body, he must neither bathe nor anoint himself.⁵⁰So that the name may not be washed off. R. Jose says: This is permitted provided only that he does not rub it off. [If he wrote it] on the horn of a cow or on the legs of a bed,⁵¹For magical purposes. he scrapes it off⁵²[Perhaps the reading should be godedo, ‘he chops it off’ (the horn or the leg) for goreron, ‘he scrapes them off’ and stores it away.⁵³Out of respect for the divine name. The text has ‘scrapes them … stores them’. [If he wrote it] on a stone, he detaches it and stores it away. Should one cut off a strip of a scroll,⁵⁴lit. ‘in scrolls’. it may [be used for ordinary purposes] if it is a new one,⁵⁵Being new, the scroll had not yet been consecrated. but if it is an old scroll⁵⁶Which has been consecrated for holy use. [the use of the strip] is forbidden. As regards worn-out scrolls, phylacteries and wraps of scrolls, these must be stored away.⁵⁷Having been once consecrated they may no longer be used for ordinary purposes. They should not be deposited [in an unclean place]⁵⁸The words in brackets are added in H. but in a deserted spot where they decay naturally.⁵⁹lit. ‘of their own accord’.

It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda. All of these oils with which the Sages said that one may not light on Shabbat, one may light with them on a Festival, with the exception of burnt oil, because one may not burn consecrated items on a Festival. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the ruling with regard to the obligation to mention Hanukkah in Grace after Meals? The dilemma is: Since it is merely an obligation by rabbinic law, do we not mention it? Or, perhaps due to publicity of the miracle, we mention it. Rava said that Rav Seḥora said that Rav Huna said: One does not mention it. And if, nevertheless, he comes to mention it, he mentions it in the blessing of thanksgiving. The Gemara relates that Rav Huna bar Yehuda happened by Rava’s house on Hanukkah. When, after eating, he came to recite Grace after Meals, he thought to mention Hanukkah in the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem. Rav Sheshet said to the yeshiva students: One mentions Hanukkah in Grace after Meals just as he does in the Amida prayer. Just as in the Amida prayer one mentions Hanukkah in the blessing of thanksgiving, so too, in Grace after Meals one mentions Hanukkah in the blessing of thanksgiving. Based on the previous dilemma, an additional dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the ruling with regard to the obligation to mention the New Moon in Grace after Meals? The dilemma is: If you say that on Hanukkah, since it is only by rabbinic law, one need not mention it in Grace after Meals; perhaps the New Moon, which is by Torah law, one is required to mention it. Or, perhaps since it is not a day on which it is prohibited to perform labor, one need not mention it. The Sages disputed this matter: Rav said: One mentions the New Moon in Grace after Meals. Rabbi Ḥanina said: One does not mention it. Rav Zerika said: Take the halakha of Rav in your hand as authoritative, since Rabbi Oshaya holds in accordance with his opinion. As Rabbi Oshaya taught in a Tosefta: Days on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple, i.e., the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival; in the evening, morning, and afternoon prayers, one recites the eighteen blessings of the Amida prayer and says a passage pertaining to the event of the day during the blessing of Temple service. And if he did not recite it, we require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. And on those days, there is no kiddush recited over the cup of wine at the start of the day, but there is mention of the day recited in Grace after Meals, in accordance with Rav’s opinion. Days on which there is no additional offering, i.e., Monday, and Thursday, and fast days, and non-priestly watches [ma’amadot], have a different legal status as detailed below. Before drawing a conclusion, the Gemara seeks to clarify: Monday and Thursday, what is their purpose in this discussion, i.e., why are Monday and Thursday mentioned here if no special prayers are recited on those days? The Gemara explains: Rather, certainly the reference is to Monday and Thursday and Monday that are fast days for rain and of ma’amadot. On those days, in the evening, morning, and afternoon prayers, one recites eighteen blessings and recites a passage pertaining to the event of the day, i.e., the fast, in the blessing: Who listens to prayer. However, if one did not mention it, we do not require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. And, on those days, there is no kiddush recited over a cup of wine, and there is no mention of the day recited in Grace after Meals. An additional dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the ruling with regard to the obligation to mention Hanukkah in the additional prayer on Shabbat during Hanukkah or on the New Moon of Tevet, which falls during Hanukkah? The sides of the dilemma are: Do we say that since Hanukkah has no additional prayer of its own, and the additional prayer has no connection to Hanukkah, we do not mention it? Or, perhaps it is the essence of the day that is obligated in the mention of Hanukkah, in which case there is no distinction between the various prayers, and it should be mentioned in all four prayers, including the additional prayer on Shabbat and the New Moon. There is a dispute: Rav Huna and Rav Yehuda both said: One does not mention it. Rav Naḥman and Rabbi Yoḥanan both said: One mentions it. Abaye said to Rav Yosef: This opinion of Rav Huna and Rav Yehuda is Rav’s opinion, as Rav Giddel said that Rav said: In the case of the New Moon that occurs on Shabbat, the one who recites the portion from the Prophets [haftara] on Shabbat need not mention the New Moon in the blessing, as, if it were not Shabbat, there would be no reading from the Prophets on the New Moon. The haftara is unrelated to the New Moon, and therefore the New Moon is not mentioned in the blessing. The same should be true with regard to mention of Hanukkah in the additional service on the New Moon, as, if it were not the New Moon, he would not be reciting the additional service on Hanukkah. Therefore, when he recites the additional prayer, he need not mention Hanukkah. The Gemara rejects this comparison. Is this comparable? There, reading from the Prophets is not at all part of the service on the New Moon. Here, there is mention of Hanukkah in the evening, morning, and afternoon prayers. Rather, it is comparable to this: As Rav Aḥadvoi said that Rav Mattana said that Rav said: On a Festival that occurs on Shabbat, one who recites the portion from the Prophets during the afternoon service on Shabbat need not mention the Festival, as, if it were not Shabbat, there would be no reading from the Prophets during the afternoon service on a Festival. If so, even though there is a haftara during the morning service on a Festival, since they do not read from the Prophets in the afternoon, the reading is considered totally unrelated to the Festival and one does not mention the Festival. The same is true with regard to Hanukkah. One does not mention Hanukkah in the additional prayer.

and he returned to the beginning of Grace after Meals and repeated it. Giddel bar Manyumi said to Rav Naḥman: Why did the master act in that manner? He said: As Rabbi Sheila said that Rav said: If one erred, he returns to the beginning. Giddel bar Manyumi challenged: Didn’t Rav Huna say that Rav said: If one erred, he recites: Blessed…Who gave? Rav Naḥman said to him: Wasn’t it stated about this that Rabbi Menashya bar Taḥlifa said that Rav said: They only taught that one recites the short blessing in a case where he did not yet begin reciting: Who is good and does good; however, if he already began reciting: Who is good and does good, he must return to the beginning of Grace after Meals? Rav Idi bar Avin said that Rav Amram said that Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: If one erred and did not mention the formula for the New Moon in his Amida prayer, we require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. However, if one erred and forgot to mention the New Moon in Grace after Meals, we do not require him to return to the beginning and repeat it. Rav Avin said to Rav Amram about this: What is the difference between the Amida prayer and Grace after Meals? He said to him: That question was also difficult for me and I asked Rav Naḥman about it, and he said to me: I did not hear the reason from Mar Shmuel himself, but let us see if we can analyze it ourselves. For the Amida prayer, which is an obligation, we require him to return to the beginning of the prayer and repeat it. For Grace after Meals, which is not an obligation, as if he wants to eat, he eats and if he wants not to eat, he does not eat, we do not require him to return to the beginning and repeat it. Grace after Meals is not a full-fledged obligation; it is dependent upon eating, which is optional. Consequently, failure to mention the New Moon in Grace after Meals is not a source of concern. The Gemara asks: If so, on Shabbatot and Festivals, when there is a mitzva to eat and when it is not possible to refrain from eating, there too, if he erred and failed to mention them in Grace after Meals, would you say that he must return to the beginning and repeat it? He said: Yes. As Rabbi Sheila said that Rav said: If one erred, he returns to the beginning of Grace after Meals. The Gemara asks: Didn’t Rav Huna say that Rav said: If one erred, he recites: Blessed…Who gave? The Gemara rejects this: Wasn’t it stated about this: They only taught that one recites the short blessing in a case where he did not yet begin reciting: Who is good and does good; however, if he already began reciting: Who is good and does good, he must return to the beginning of Grace after Meals. There is a dispute in the mishna: How much must one eat to obligate those with whom they ate in a zimmun? An olive-bulk; Rabbi Yehuda says: An egg-bulk. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Rabbi Meir considers an olive-bulk significant and Rabbi Yehuda considers an egg-bulk significant? Didn’t we hear them say the opposite elsewhere? As we learned in a mishna: And similarly, one who left Jerusalem and remembered that there was consecrated meat in his hand, which may not be removed from Jerusalem, if he passed Mount Scopus, or anywhere that is a comparable distance from the Temple Mount, he burns the sanctified meat at the site where he is located; and if he has not yet traveled that distance, he must return to burn it before the Temple with the wood of the arrangement that was designated for burning consecrated items that were disqualified. The mishna continues: How much meat must be in their possession in order to obligate them to return? Rabbi Meir says: One must return for an egg-bulk of this, sanctified meat, and that, leaven mentioned there previously. And Rabbi Yehuda says: One must return for an olive-bulk of this and that. Their opinions there seem to contradict their opinions in our mishna. To resolve this contradiction, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The opinions are reversed in one of these sources and must be emended. Abaye said: Actually do not reverse them. Here, with regard to zimmun, they disagree with regard to the interpretation of verses. Rabbi Meir holds: “And you shall eat,” that is eating; “and be satisfied,” that is drinking after eating. The halakha is in accordance with the standard halakhic principle that eating is defined as the consumption of an olive-bulk. And Rabbi Yehuda holds: “And you shall eat and be satisfied,” refers to eating that includes satisfaction. And what is considered eating with satisfaction? The consumption of an egg-bulk. On the other hand, there, in the case of leaven and sanctified foods, they disagree not with regard to the interpretation of verses, but with regard to logical reasoning. Rabbi Meir holds: The requirement to return consecrated food is analogous to its ritual impurity, and just as its susceptibility to ritual impurity is only when it is the size of an egg-bulk, so too, the requirement to return it is only when it is the size of an egg-bulk. And Rabbi Yehuda holds: The requirement to return consecrated food is analogous to its prohibition, and just as its prohibition is only when it is the size of an olive-bulk, so too, the requirement to return it is only when it is the size of an olive-bulk. MISHNA: The mishna delineates distinctions in the halakhot of the zimmun blessing, based on the number of people present. How does one recite the zimmun? In a group of three people, the one reciting the zimmun says: Let us bless the One from Whose food we have eaten. In a group of three people and him, the one reciting the zimmun says: Bless the One from Whose food we have eaten, as even without him there are enough people to recite the zimmun. With the increase in the number of participants, the blessing is more complex. In a group of ten people, the one reciting the zimmun says: Let us bless our God. In a group of ten people and him, the one reciting the zimmun says: Bless our God. This formula is recited both in a group of ten and in a group of one hundred thousand. In a group of one hundred people, the one reciting the zimmun says: Let us bless the Lord our God. In a group of one hundred people and him, the one reciting the zimmun says: Bless the Lord our God. In a group of one thousand people, the one reciting the zimmun says: Let us bless the Lord our God, the God of Israel. In a group of one thousand people and him, he says: Bless the Lord our God, the God of Israel. In a group of ten thousand people, the one reciting the zimmun says: Let us bless the Lord our God, the God of Israel, the God of Hosts, Who sits upon the cherubs, for the food that we have eaten. In a group of ten thousand people and him, the one reciting the zimmun says: Bless the Lord our God, the God of Israel, the God of Hosts, Who sits upon the cherubs, for the food that we have eaten. The principle is that just as he recites the blessing, so too those present recite in response: Blessed be the Lord our God, the God of Israel, the God of Hosts, Who sits upon the cherubs, for the food that we have eaten. On a similar note, Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: According to the size of the crowd, they recite the blessing, as it is stated: “Bless you God in full assemblies, even the Lord, you who are from the fountain of Israel” (Psalms 68:27). Rabbi Akiva said that there are no distinctions based on the size of the crowd: What do we find in the synagogue? Both when there are many and when there are few, as long as there is a quorum of ten, the prayer leader says: Bless [barekhu] the Lord. Rabbi Yishmael said that in the synagogue, one recites: Bless the Lord the blessed One. GEMARA: Shmuel said: One should never exclude himself from the collective. The Gemara raises a challenge from what we learned in our mishna: In a group of three people and him, the one reciting the zimmun says: Bless the One from Whose food we have eaten. He thereby excludes himself from the collective. The Gemara answers: Say that the meaning of the mishna is:

that the sun is shooting arrows at those who deny its divinity, using the rainbow as its bow. The concave side of the rainbow always faces away from the sun, so that it does not look like a bow held by the sun. § The mishna taught that the examination of the witnesses included the following questions: How high was the moon over the horizon, and in which direction did it tilt? It was taught in one baraita: If the witness testifies that he saw the moon to the north of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says that he saw it to its south, he has not said anything of significance, as this is impossible. The Gemara asks: Isn’t the opposite taught in a different baraita: If he testifies that he saw the moon to the south of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says he saw it to its north, he has not said anything. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, in the second baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the summer, when the moon is to the south of the sun; there, in the first baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the rainy season, when the moon is to the north of the sun. The Sages taught in a baraita: If one witness says that he saw the moon two plow handles high above the horizon, and the other one says it was three plow handles high, their testimony is valid, as a small discrepancy of this kind is reasonable. However, if one says that he saw the moon three plow handles above the horizon, and the other one says it was five plow handles high, their testimony is void, as that discrepancy is unacceptable. However, this does not mean that the witnesses themselves are disqualified, as either of them may join with another testimony, i.e., he may combine his account with that of another witness who testifies likewise. The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: We did not actually see the moon, but we saw it reflected in the water, or we saw it reflected in a glass lantern, or we saw it through thin clouds, they may not testify about it, as only a direct sighting of the moon is acceptable. If they say: We saw half of the moon’s reflection in the water, or we saw half of it through the clouds, or we saw half of it in a lantern, they still may not testify about it. The Gemara analyzes this baraita: Now, if when one sees the entire moon in this manner, you said that this is not valid testimony, is it necessary to teach that one may not testify when he sees only half of it? Rather, this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses saw half of the moon’s reflection in water and half of it directly in the sky, or half of it through the clouds and half of it in the sky, or half of it in a lantern and half of it in the sky, although they saw half of the moon directly, they may not testify about it until they see the entire moon in the sky. The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: One moment we saw the new moon, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. The Gemara asks: Must they go on watching it to such an extent, i.e., why should they have to see it for a long period of time? Abaye said that this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses say: We saw the moon on our own accord, i.e., by chance, without looking for it, and then we returned to look for it on purpose, to deliver precise testimony about it, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. What is the reason? Because one can say that the first time it was merely a small round white cloud that they saw, which they mistook for the moon, and that is why when they looked for it again they could not find it. MISHNA: After the witnesses have been examined and their testimony accepted, the head of the court says: It is sanctified. And all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. Whether the moon was seen at its anticipated time, on the thirtieth day of the previous month, or whether it was not seen at its anticipated time, in which case witnesses are not necessary to establish the following day as the New Moon, the court sanctifies it and formally proclaims the day as the New Moon. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day, as the celestial court in Heaven has already sanctified it, precluding the need for the additional sanctification by the earthly court. GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the head of the court says: It is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that the court must sanctify the New Moon, derived? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said that the verse states: “And Moses declared to the children of Israel the appointed seasons of the Lord” (Leviticus 23:44). From here it is derived that the head of the court says: It is sanctified, as it is evident from the verse that Moses, whose status was equivalent to that of the head of the Great Sanhedrin, declared the appointed times of the Festivals and New Moons in a formal manner. § The mishna further teaches that after the head of the court says: It is sanctified, all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rav Pappa said that the verse states: “Which you shall proclaim them [otam] to be sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2). Instead of otam, read into the verse: You [atem], as though the verse stated: Which you shall proclaim, you. This superfluous word you teaches that the month must be proclaimed not only by the head of the court, but also by you, the people. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that it is derived from the phrase: “These are [hem] My appointed seasons” (Leviticus 23:2). The term hem can also mean: They, which indicates that they, the people, should likewise say and announce My appointed seasons. The Gemara further asks: Why do I need the people to declare: It is sanctified; it is sanctified, twice? The Gemara answers that the reason is that it is written: “Sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2) in the plural, which indicates that they must announce it twice. § The mishna taught that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day. The Gemara cites other opinions in this regard: It is taught in a baraita that the Sage Palaimo says: If the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon, as the new moon appeared as expected and there is no need for any special sanctification. However, if the new moon was seen not at its anticipated time, the court must sanctify the New Moon. The baraita continues: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: In either case, the court does not sanctify the New Moon formally, as it is stated: “And you shall sanctify the fiftieth year” (Leviticus 25:10), from which it is derived: You must formally sanctify years in court, but you do not have to formally sanctify months, as they are sanctified automatically by Heaven. Rather, it is enough merely to announce to the public that a certain day was established as the New Moon. Rabbi Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, that if the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court sanctifies the new month; however, if it was not seen at its anticipated time, they do not sanctify it. Abaye said: We, too, learn in a mishna: If the court and all of the Jewish people saw the new moon, and the witnesses were interrogated, but the court did not manage to say: Sanctified, before nightfall, the previous month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. This indicates that full, yes; i.e., in this case, it is necessary to extend the previous month. However, sanctified, no; there is no need to formally sanctify the month, as the New Moon does not occur on its anticipated date in this case. The Gemara rejects this argument: There is no proof from here, as it was necessary for the mishna to mention that the month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. The reason is that it might enter your mind to say that since the court and the entire Jewish people saw the new moon, it has become public knowledge and therefore there is no need to render the previous month a full, thirty-day month. Consequently, the mishna teaches us that even in this case the previous month must be extended. Nevertheless, it is still possible that the New Moon must be formally sanctified on the following day. MISHNA: Rabban Gamliel had a diagram of the different forms of the moon drawn on a tablet that hung on the wall of his attic, which he would show to the laymen who came to testify about the new moon but were unable to describe adequately what they had seen. And he would say to them: Did you see a form like this or like this? GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And is it permitted to create these types of forms? Isn’t it written: “You shall not make with Me gods of silver, or gods of gold” (Exodus 20:20), which is interpreted as teaching: You shall not make images of My attendants, i.e., those celestial bodies that were created to serve God, including the sun and the moon? § Abaye said: The Torah prohibited only the images of those attendants with regard to which it is possible to reproduce an item in their likeness. Since it is impossible for anyone to reproduce the sun and the moon, the prohibition does not apply to these objects. As it is taught in a baraita: A person may not construct a house in the exact form of the Sanctuary, nor a portico in the exact form of the Entrance Hall of the Sanctuary, nor a courtyard corresponding to the Temple courtyard, nor a table corresponding to the table in the Temple, nor a candelabrum corresponding to the candelabrum in the Temple. However, one may fashion