12th CYCLE DEDICATIONS

ROSH HASHANAH 21-25 - Dedicated in memory of Max (Meir Menachem ben Shlomo ha'Levi) Turkel, by his children Eddie and Lawrence and his wife Jean Turkel/Rafalowicz. Max was a warm and loving husband and father and is missed dearly by his family and friends. His Yahrzeit is 5 Teves.

1)

(a)According to one Beraisa, if the witnesses testified that they saw the new moon to the north of the sun, their words are accepted, to the south, they are not; another Beraisa says the opposite. How do we reconcile the two Beraisos?

(b)What is the Halachic difference between a case where one of the witnesses gives the height of the new moon as two saddle-cloths, and the other, as three, on the one hand, and where one of them gives the height as three saddle-cloths, and the other, as five?

(c)What does the Tana (of the Beraisa) mean when he adds 'Aval Mitztarfin l'Eidus Acheres'? What is the reason for this (see Tosfos DH 'Aval')?

1)

(a)We reconcile the Beraisa which rules that, if the witnesses testify that they saw the new moon to the north of the sun, their words are accepted, but if they said to the south, they are not, with the Beraisa which says the reverse - by establishing the former Beraisa in the winter, when the moon (which is always seen in the south-west immediately after the Molad) arrives in the west before the sun, and can therefore be seen to the north of the sun. Whereas the latter Beraisa speaks in the summer (when the sun travels towards the north, and) when the moon cannot possibly be seen to the north of the sun as it begins to set (which is the time that the new moon can be seen, but not in the middle of the day, as we learned above in the first Perek).

(b)If one of the witnesses gives the height of the new moon as two saddle-cloths, and the other one, as three, their testimony is accepted - whereas if the one were to say 'three saddle-cloths', and the other, 'five', it is disqualified.

(c)When the Tana (of the Beraisa) adds 'Aval Mitztarfin l'Eidus Acheres' - he means that if one of the witnesses finds a second witness (other than the one with whom he clashed in this case), to testify together with him in subsequent cases, he is believed.

2)

(a)What does the Beraisa say about witnesses who testify that they saw the moon reflected in the water, through the glass of a lantern or behind the clouds?

(b)Then why does the Tana need to add that if they saw half of the moon in one of these situations and half, in the other, that their testimony is invalid? Is that not obvious?

(c)And what does the Tana of another Beraisa mean when he disqualifies the testimony of witnesses who say that they saw the new moon one moment, and when they looked again, it was gone? Does this mean that they must see the new moon all night long?

(d)Why is their testimony invalid in this case?

2)

(a)The Beraisa - rejects the testimony of witnesses who claim that they saw the moon reflected in the water, through the glass of a lantern or behind the clouds.

(b)And when the Tana adds that if they saw half of the moon in one of these situations and half in the other, their testimony is invalid - he is referring to when they saw half the moon in the water, through glass or through a lantern, and the other half in the sky. And he comes to teach us that, although they saw half of the real moon, their testimony is invalid.

(c)And when the Tana of another Beraisa) disqualifies the testimony of witnesses who say that they saw the new moon one moment, and when they looked again, it was gone he means (not that they must see the new moon all night long, but) - that they first saw it inadvertently, and then, when they looked again to see it with the intention of testifying, it was gone.

(d)And their testimony is invalid - because maybe what they saw was only a white, moon-shaped cloud.

3)

(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor ...

1. ... "va'Yedaber Moshe es Mo'adei Hash-m el Bnei Yisrael"?

2. ... "Asher Tikre'u Osom" (which is missing a 'Vav')?

(b)According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, Beis-Din declare Rosh Chodesh, whether it is on the thirtieth of the month or on the thirty-first. What does Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Tzadok say?

(c)What exactly, did Beis-Din declare?

3)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in Emor ...

1. ... "va'Yedaber Moshe es Mo'adei Hash-m el Bnei Yisrael" - that the head of Beis-Din is obligated to announce Rosh Chodesh.

2. ... "Asher Tikre'u Osom" (which is missing a 'Vav', as if it was written "Atem") - that all those present must repeat the declaration.

(b)According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, Beis-Din declare Rosh Chodesh, whether it is on the thirtieth of the month or on the thirty-first - Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Tzadok maintains that if the new moon was not seen on the thirtieth (in which case it is obvious that Rosh Chodesh will fall on the thirty-first), then it is not necessary for Beis-Din to declare Rosh Chodesh, since it has already been done in Heaven.

(c)The declaration consisted of the words - 'Mekudash, Mekudash'!

4)

(a)The Beraisa cites two additional opinions regarding Beis-Din's declaration. What does Plimu hold?

(b)Perhaps the most radical opinion of all is that of Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon. What does he learn from the Pasuk in Behar "v'Kidashtem es Shenas ha'Chamishim ... "?

(c)Like which of the above opinions does Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel rule?

(d)A later Mishnah states that if Beis-Din and all Yisrael saw the new moon ... but they did not manage to declare Rosh Chodesh before night fell, the month is full (i.e. Rosh Chodesh will only fall on the following day). Why can we not infer from the Tana's words 'the month is full', that it does not require a declaration (a proof for Rav Yehudah's ruling? What might the Tana be coming to teach us?

(e)Why might we have thought otherwise?

4)

(a)The Beraisa cites two additional opinions regarding Beis-Din's declaration. Plimu holds - that if the new moon is seen on the thirtieth, Beis-Din do not need to declare Rosh Chodesh (since that is the ideal time for Rosh Chodesh to fall, and it does not require a declaration to reinforce it). It is only when it is not, and Rosh Chodesh falls on the thirty-first, that a declaration is necessary.

(b)Perhaps the most radical opinion of all is that of Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon, who learns from the Pasuk "v'Kidashtem es Shenas ha'Chamishim ... " - that only years that need sanctification, but not months (irrespective of when the new moon is seen).

(c)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel rules - like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok in our Mishnah (that one only needs to declare Rosh Chodesh, if the new moon is seen on the thirtieth).

(d)We cannot infer from a later Mishnah, which states that if Beis-Din and all Yisrael saw the new moon ... but they did not manage to declare Rosh Chodesh before night fell, the month is full (i.e. Rosh Chodesh will only be on the following day) that it does not require a declaration (a proof for Rav Yehudah's ruling like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok) - because the Tana needs to teach us the fact that the month is full ...

(e)... since we might otherwise have thought - that once Beis-Din and the whole of Yisrael see the moon, we will not postpone Rosh Chodesh.

5)

(a)How would Raban Gamliel cross-examine the witnesses as to whether they had actually seen the new moon or not?

(b)Seeing as the Torah writes (in Yisro) "Lo Sa'asun Iti" (prohibiting even the making of an image of any of Hash-m's servants), how does Abaye initially explain the fact that Raban Gamliel possessed such pictures in his house?

(c)The Beraisa prohibits constructing a replica of the Heichal, the Ulam or the Azarah. What does the Tana say about reconstructing the Holy vessels of the Beis-Hamikdash?

(d)Under which conditions does the Beraisa permit the construction of a Menorah of metal?

5)

(a)Raban Gamliel would cross-examine the witnesses as to whether they had actually seen the moon or not - by pointing to drawings of the moon on a large board and on the wall in his attic, and asking them whether they saw it like this or like that.

(b)Abaye initially confines the Pasuk (in Yisro) "Lo Sa'asun Iti" (prohibiting even the making of an image of any of Hash-m's servants), to making a replica of those physical servants that it is possible to make a replica of (but not the sun and the moon and the other heavenly bodies).

(c)The Beraisa prohibits constructing a replica of the Heichal, the Ulam or the Azarah - as well as any of the Holy vessels of the Beis-Hamikdash

(d)The Beraisa permits the construction of a Menorah of metal - provided it does not have seven branches.

24b----------------------------------------24b

6)

(a)The Tana Kama of the Beraisa forbids the construction of a seven-branch Menorah out of metal, but permits it out of wood. What does Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah say?

(b)Each Tana derives his opinion from the Pasuk in Terumah "v'Asisa Menoras Zahav Tahor, Mikshah Te'aseh ... ". How does ...

1. ... the Tana Kama learn his opinion from a 'Klal u'Perat u'Klal'?

2. ... Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah learn his from a 'Ribuy, Miyut, v'Ribuy'?

(c)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah proves his point from the Chashmona'im, who used a wooden Menorah. How do the Chachamim repudiate his proof?

6)

(a)The Tana Kama of the Beraisa forbids the construction of a seven-branch Menorah out of metal, but permits it out of wood. Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah - forbids even one of wood too (since that is what the Chashmona'im used in the Beis Hamikdash).

(b)Each Tana derives his opinion from the Pasuk in Terumah "v'Asisa Menoras Zahav Tahor, Mikshah Te'aseh ... ".

1. The Tana Kama learns from a 'Klal u'Ferat u'Ch'lal' - "v'Asisa Menoras (Klal); Zahav Tahor (P'rat); Mikshah Te'aseh (Klal), that whatever is similar to gold (metal) is Kasher by the Menorah, and therefore forbidden to manufacture outside the Beis Hamikdash.

2. Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah - learns from the same words, but in the form of a 'Ribuy, Miyut, v'Ribuy' - which includes everything, with one exception, and that is earthenware.

(c)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah proves his point from the Chashmona'im, who used a wooden Menorah. The Chachamim repudiate his proof however - because, in their opinion, the Chashmona'im's Menorah was made of iron and overlaid with tin.

7)

(a)What does the Tana of another Beraisa learn from the same Pasuk ("Lo Sa'asun Iti", quoted earlier) that refutes Abaye's answer (the current contention that the Torah only forbids those servants that it is possible to duplicate)?

(b)How does Abaye explain 'ki'Demus Shamashai ha'Meshamshin Lefanai ba'Marom' to reject that refutation?

(c)How does he reconcile this with the Beraisa which specifically forbids the image of a human being?

(d)Abaye changes his mind again when they questioned him from another Beraisa which forbids making an image of the Ofanim, the Serafim, the Chayos ha'Kodesh and Malachei ha'Shareis. How does he re-interpret "Iti" to accommodate this Beraisa?

7)

(a)The Tana of another Beraisa learns from the same Pasuk ("Lo Sa'asun Iti", quoted earlier) 'Lo Sa'asun ki'Demus Shamashai ha'Meshamshin Lefanai ba'Marom' - refuting Abaye's contention that the Torah only forbids those servants that it is possible to duplicate).

(b)To reject that refutation, Abaye explains 'ki'Demus Shamashai ha'Meshamshin Lefanai ba'Marom' - to refer exclusively to making a combined image of the four creatures (comprising a person, a lion, an ox and an eagle) which support Hash-m's throne.

(c)He reconcile this with the Beraisa which specifically forbids the image of a human being - by pointing to the fact that "Iti" can also be read as "Osi" (and Hash-m appeared to Yechezkel in the form of a man - or at least it was a man representing Hash-m).

(d)To accommodate the Beraisa which forbids making an image of the Ofanim, the Serafim, the Chayos ha'Kodesh and Malachei ha'Shareis, Abaye changing his mind again explains "Iti" - to incorporate all those servants that serve Hash-m in the seventh Heaven (Hash-m's abode - kiv'Yachol), precluding the sun, moon and stars, whose dwell in the second heaven.

8)

(a)In view of what we just learned, how will we explain the Beraisa, which includes in the Isur, the sun, moon, stars and constellations from the Pasuk in Yisro "Asher ba'Shamayim mi'Ma'al"? Which Isur are we talking about?

(b)What does the Beraisa learn from ...

1. ... "Asher ba'Aretz"?

2. ... "mi'Tachas"?

(c)In view of the Beraisa that we quoted earlier ("Lo Sa'asun Iti" ... 'Lo Sa'asun ki'Demus Shamashai ha'Meshamshin Lafanai ba'Marom"), on what grounds was Raban Gamliel permitted to keep a board with the pictures of the various phases of the moon?

8)

(a)In view of what we just learned, we establish the Beraisa, which includes in the Isur, the sun, moon, stars and constellations from the Pasuk in Yisro "Asher ba'Shamayim mi'Ma'al" - with regard to worshipping, but does not incorporate an Isur to make them.

(b)The Beraisa learns from ...

1. ... "Asher ba'Aretz" - that one may not worship mountains, hills, seas, rivers, streams or valleys.

2. ... "mi'Tachas" - that one may not even worship a worm.

(c)In view of the Beraisa that we quoted earlier ("Lo Sa'asun Iti" ... 'Lo Sa'asun ki'Demus Shamashai ha'Meshamshin Lafanai ba'Marom"), Raban Gamliel was permitted to keep a board with the pictures of the various phases of the moon - because it was not he who carved the pictures, but Nochrim.

9)

(a)We just learned that one is permitted to retain a picture that Nochrim made (not with the intention of worshipping it). What problem does that create with regard to Shmuel? What did Shmuel instruct Rav Yehudah to do with his signet-ring, that had been manufactured by Nochrim?

(b)Why may a signet-ring whose seal (in the form of an image) ...

1. ... protrudes, be used but not worn?

2. ... is sunken, be worn but not used?

9)

(a)If, as we just learned, one is permitted to retain a picture that Nochrim made (not with the intention of worshipping it) - then why did Shmuel instruct Rav Yehudah to blind the eye of the image that formed part of his signet-ring, even though it had been manufactured by Nochrim?

(b)A signet-ring whose seal (in the form of an image) ...

1. ... protrudes, may be used but not worn - because people will suspect the wearer of worshipping it.

2. ... is sunken, may be worn but not used - because whenever one stamps with it, he makes an image.

10)

(a)Seeing as we just learned that it is forbidden to retain an image (even if it was made by a Nochri) due to Chashad, how will we explain the Shul of Shaf v'Yasiv in Neherda'a that had an image in it, yet Rav and Shmuel and others would Daven there without qualms?

(b)Who built the Shul of Shaf v'Yasiv, and what did they build it with?

10)

(a)In spite of the Isur of retaining an image (even if it was made by a Nochri) due to Chashad, Rav and Shmuel and others would Daven in the Shul of Shaf v'Yasiv in Neherda'a that had an image in it - because the concept of Chashad (that people will suspect one of sinning ['Mar'is ha'Ayin']) does not apply to what is done in large public places.

(b)King Yechonyah and those who were taken down to Bavel with him built the Shul of Shaf v'Yasiv - with the heavy stones that they were forced to carry with them down to Bavel (and about them the Pasuk in Tehilim writes - "Ki Ratzu Avadecha es Avanehah").

11)

(a)We ask how Raban Gamliel, who was an individual, could possibly allow a board with pictures of the moon (even if Nochrim did make it for him). Raban Gamliel's pictures were not three dimensional, so what is the problem (see Tosfos DH 've'Ha')?

(b)And we answer that, since Raban Gamliel was the prince, and there were always guests by him, he had the Din of a community (to whom, we just learned, Chashad does not apply). What third answer do we give, based on the Pasuk "Lo Silmad La'asos"?

(c)What second answer do we give?

11)

(a)We ask how Raban Gamliel, who was an individual, could possibly retain a board with pictures of the moon (even if Nochrim did make it for him). The fact that his pictures were not three-dimensional makes no difference - because anything that is seen in only two dimensions (such as the heavenly bodies) are also forbidden in two dimensions (Tosfos DH 've'Ha').

(b)And we answer that, since Raban Gamliel was the prince, who constantly had guests, he had the Din of a community (to whom, we just learned, Chashad does not apply). Based on the Pasuk "Lo Silmad La'asos", we give a third answer - that since these pictures were only made in the first place for learning purposes, and not to be used practically, they were permitted.

(c)The second answer is - that, since the pictures in Raban Gamliel's attic were not whole pictures, but made up of parts, Chashad did not apply.