Jerusalem Talmud Rosh Hashanah 2:1

משנה: אִם אֵינָן מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ מְשַׁלְּחִין עִמּוֹ אַחֵר לְהַעִידוֹ. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחֹדֶשׁ מִכָּל־הָאָדָם. מִשֶּׁקִּילְקְלוּ הַמִּינִין הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְקַבְּלִין אֶלָּא מִן הַמַּכִּירִין: בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מַשִּׂיאִין מַשּׂוּאוֹת. מִשֶּׁקִּילְקְלוּ הַכּוּתִים הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ שְׁלוּחִין יוֹצְאִין: MISHNAH: If they¹The High Court which decides the calendar. do not know him, one sends²The local rabbinate, to certify the witness to be as qualified rabbinic Jew. another one with him to testify about him. Originally one accepted testimony about the new moon from anybody. After the sectarians³The Boethusian sect of Sadducees who were interested in seeing the 15th of Nisan celebrated on a Sabbath so that the `omer and Pentecost would be on a Sunday. spoiled they instituted that one would accept only from known persons. Originally they were lighting beacons⁴To quickly announce from Jerusalem to Nahardea in Babylonia that the New Moon had been declared.. After the Samaritans spoiled they instituted that messengers went out.

הלכה: אִם אֵינָן מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. הָכֵין צוֹרְכָה מִיתְנֵי. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחוֹדֶשׁ מִכָּל־אָדָם. אִם אֵינָן מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ הָיוּ מְשַׁלְּחִין עִמּוֹ אַחֵר לְהַעִידוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אֲפִילוּ כְמַתְנִיתִן אַתְיָא הִיא. אִם אֵינָן מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ מְשַׁלְּחִין עִמּוֹ אַחֵר לְהַעִידוֹ. לָמָּה. שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחוֹדֶשׁ מִכָּל־אָדָם. וְעֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן. מִשֶּׁלָּךְ נָ‍ֽתְנוּ לָךְ. בְּדִין הָיָה שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ צְרִיכִין עֵדִים. וְהֵן אָ‍ֽמְרוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ צְרִיכִין עֵדִים. וְהֵן אָ‍ֽמְרוּ עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן. HALAKHAH: “If they do not know him,” etc. Rebbi Jonah said, so should the Mishnah be stated: Originally one accepted testimony about the new moon from everybody⁵It is presumed that the quote of this sentence includes the next one about the spoiling by the sectarians.. If they do not know him, one sends another one with him to testify about him. Rebbi Yose said, even as in the Mishnah it is acceptable: If they do not know him, one sends another one with him to testify about him. Why? Because originally one accepted testimony about the new moon from anybody⁵It is presumed that the quote of this sentence includes the next one about the spoiling by the sectarians.. May a single witness be believed⁶It was stated in the previous Chapter (Halakhah 9, after Note 309) that the qualifications for a witness of the new moon are those of witnesses in criminal cases and as a consequence single witnesses are barred by biblical decree (Deut. 17:6).? They gave you from your own. It should be logical that no witnesses should be needed⁷Since the appearance of the new moon is a natural phenomenon observable by the Court as well as by any other person.. But they⁸The entire set-up is rabbinic; there can be no objections from biblical standards. said that witnesses were needed, and they said that a single witness may be believed.

עֵד אֶחָד מָהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא נֶאֱמָן כִּשְׁנַיִם. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָה. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם. אֶחָד הַכֹּל מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ וְאֶחָד אֵין אָדָם מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מָהוּ שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵף עִם אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק לְהָעִיד עָלָיו. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה רַב חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב. אֵין הוּא וְאַחֵר מִצְטָ‍ֽרְפִין עַל חֲתִימַת הָעֵד הַשֵּׁינִי. לָא צוֹרְכָה דִי לָא הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם. אֶחָד הַכֹּל מַכִּירִין כְּתַב יָדוֹ וְאֶחָד אֵין אָדָם מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מָהוּ שֶׁיֵּיעָשֶׂה כְּאֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק לְהָעִיד עָלָיו. אִם כֵּן נִמְצֵאת כָּל־הָעֵדוּת מִתְקַייֶמֶת בְּעֵד אֶחָד. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. וְיֵאוּת. אִילּוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁיָּ‍ֽצְאוּ מֵעִיר אַחַת שֶׁרוּבָּהּ גּוֹיִם. כְּגוֹן הָדָא סוּסִיתָה. אֶחָד הַכֹּל מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁהוּא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶחָד אֵין אָדָם מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מַכִּירוֹ. חֲבֵירוֹ מָהוּ שֶׁיֵּיעָשֶׂה כְאֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק לְהָעִיד עָלָיו. אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ כֵּן לֹא נִמְצֵאת כָּל־הָעֵדוּת מִתְקַייֶמֶת בְּעֵד אֶחָד. וְהָכָא נִמְצֵאת כָּל־הָעֵדוּת מִתְקַייֶמֶת בְּעֵד אֶחָד. Could one witness be believed as two⁹The testimony of two witnesses is as good as the testimony of 100. If the testimony of two witnesses is contradicted by the testimony of 100, neither testimony is acceptable. But the testimony of a single witness is nothing if contradicted by two witnesses. In the case here, where one witness is accepted as two in a case purely rabbinical, does this also eliminate the biblical rule that the testimony of a single witness is nothing if contradicted by two witnesses?? How is this? If there were two, one whom everybody knows and one whom nobody knows, except that his partner knows him. May his partner teem up with one from the street to testify about him¹⁰That he is a qualified witness.? ¹¹The following is essentially from Ketubot2:4, Notes 77–83. The problem is the certification of signatures to prove that a document of indebtedness is genuine and may be used for foreclosure. In that case certainly two independent witnesses are required. Rebbi Ze`ira, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: he¹²One of the witnesses signed on the document. and another cannot team up about the signature of the second witness. This is needed in case there were two, one whose signature everybody knows and one whom nobody knows, except that his partner knows him. May his partner be like anybody from the street to testify about him? In that case the entire testimony is confirmed by one witness. Rebbi Yudan said, this is correct. For example, two who came from a town most of whose inhabitants are Gentiles, like Hippos. One of whom everybody knows that he is Jewish and one whom nobody knows¹³Whether he is Jewish or Gentile. While in general the assertion by a person that he is Jewish is believed, if this is questioned it needs two witnesses since it involves Torah prohibitions. A document signed by a Jew and a Gentile cannot be enforced in a Jewish court.
Here starts a new Genizah fragment (G)., except that his partner knows him. May his partner be like one from the street to testify about him? If you are saying yes, the entire testimony is confirmed by one witness. Also here the entire testimony is confirmed by one witness.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אָמַר לָהֶן הַמְמוּנֶּה צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אִם הִגִּיעַ זְמַן הַשְּׁחִיטָה. אִם הִגִּיעַ הָרוֹאֶה אוֹמֵר בּוֹרְקִי. מָהוּ בּוֹרְקִי. בַּרְקַת. תַּמָּן אָ‍ֽמְרֵי. בְּרֹק בּוֹרְקָה. אַנְהַר מַנְהָרָא. There, we stated¹⁴Yoma 3:1. This paragraph and the next are from Yoma 3:1, Notes 5–13.: “The overseer said to them, go and see whether the time of slaughter has arrived. When it arrived, the lookout says, it is radiant.” What means borqi? Barqat¹⁵Radiant, from בָּרָק “lightning”.. There¹⁶In Babylonia; in the formulation of the Babli Yoma 28b בָּרָק בַּרְקַאי., they are saying, בְּרוֹק בּוֹרְקָה, getting bright, radiant.

וְעֵד אֶחָד נָאֱמָן. שַׁנְייָא הִיא הָכָא שֶׁאֵין אַתְּ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עָלָיו. וְחָשׁ לוֹמַר. עַד דְּהוּא עֲלִיל וּנְפַק הִיא מַנָהָרָא. חֲכִימָא הִיא מִילְּתָא. אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד. נוֹלַד אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי בַשַּׁבָּת. מַלִּין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּיו. חֲשֵׁיכָה מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת. מְטַלְטְלִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּיו. רִבִּי אִמִּי מְטַלְטֵל עַל פּוּמָה דִמְלַוִּיתָה. רִבִּי מַתַּנְייָה מְטַלְטֵל עַל אִיבִירִיתָה דְזִהֲרָא. רִבִּי אִימִּי מָל עַל פִּי נָשִׁים. דְאָ‍ֽמְרָן. שִׁמְשָׁא הֲווָת עַל סוּסִיתָה. May one witness be believed¹⁷The Babli holds in general that a single witness can be believed in matters of prohibitions; the biblical requirement of two witnesses is binding only in criminal cases and matters that may have implications in criminal law. From the present paragraph it seems that the Yerushalmi does not accept this in general but that in cases where one witness is sufficient there is no difference between male or female witnesses.? It is different here since one cannot control him; should we not worry and say, by the time somebody climbs up and goes out it will shine¹⁸While the time indicated must be approximately correct, since one asks only at the end of the night, and by the time somebody climbs up to check it clearly will be dawn, this does not prove that at the time of the assertion dawn was really visible. The text cannot be amended and the “not” deleted since it is confirmed by both sources.? The matter can be verified. If one witness says, this male was born on a Sabbath, one circumcises him on his word¹⁹Even though circumcising on the Sabbath a child not born on the Sabbath is a deadly sin.. It is dark at the end of the Sabbath, one carries (him) on his word²⁰This is a new item. One may believe a single witness that it is no longer Sabbath and all Sabbath prohibitions are no longer relevant. The word in parentheses has to be disregarded with G.. Rebbi Immi was carrying on the result of elapsed time²¹Arabic מלוה “interval of time”. He computed the end of the Sabbath astronomically, for a smooth terrestrial globe; a severe restriction for Tiberias situated on a steep Eastern slope.. Rebbi Mattaniah was carrying on the saying of the moon shining^21*The translation of איביריתא is conjectural. The direction of the shining part of the moon indicates the position of the sun, from which its position below the horizon (of a smooth terrestrial globe) can be inferred without complicated computations.. Rebbi Immi was circumcising on the saying of women, the sun was over Hippos²²Since circumcision has to be performed during daytime, R. Immi is consistently restrictive; in this case he does not rely on astronomical computations of sunrise but on the much later observation of the sun appearing over the mountains to the East since Hippos was on a mountain over the Eastern shore of the Lake of Galilee..

מַכִּירוֹ מַכִּירָיו מָהוּ לְחַלֵּל עָלֵיהֶן אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. אָמַר [רִבִּי] נוֹהֲרַיי כָּאן שַׁנְייָה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁיָּרַדָתִּי לְהָעִיד עַל עֵד אֶחָד בְּאוּשָׁא. וְלֹא הָיוּ צְרִיכִין לִי אֶלָּא עִילָּה בִיקַּשְׁתִּי לְהַקְבִּיל פְּנֵי חֲבֵירַיי. May people who know those who know him desecrate the Sabbath for him²³The translation and the reading of G follows Liebermann’s correction of Ginzberg’s text (Tosephta kiFshutahMo`ed p. 1028). There is nobody known to the Court who knows the witness personally, but there is one known to the court who knows a reliable person who can testify that the witness is not a Boethusian. If the new moon is seen on a Sabbath, may the person known to the court go with this acquaintance to certify the witness?? Let us hear from the following²⁴Tosephta 1:16; Babli 22b.: “[Rebbi]²⁵Corrector’s addition from the Tosephta, not in G. Noharai (here) <ben>²⁶The <genizah text>is to be accepted. Shanai said, it happened that I descended to Usha²⁷The place where the successor to the Synhedrion was constituted in the aftermath of the Bar Kochba uprising. to testify for one witness²⁸The witness not of seeing the new moon but the reliability of the witness for the new moon.. They did not need me but I looked for a pretext to see my colleagues.”

וּמַה קִיְלְקוּל הֲוָה תַמָּן. שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים. עֲצֶרֶת לְאַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת. וְהָיוּ יוֹצְאִין עָלָיו מִבָּעֶרֶב בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁנִּתְקַדֵּשׁ. מֵעַתָּה עַל נִיסָן לָא יְקַבְּלִינוּן. עַל שְׁאַר יַרְחַיָא יְקַבְּלִינוּן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. עִיקַּר קִלְקַלתְּהוֹן מִן אָדָר הֲווָת. מֵעַתָּה כַּד הִיא דִכְווַתְהוֹן יְקַבְּלִינוּן. אִין לֵית הִוּא דִכְווַתְהוֹן לָא יְקַבְּלִינוּן. זוֹ מִפְּנֵי זוֹ. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁשָּׂ‍ֽכְרוּ בַייְתוּסִין שְׁנֵי עֵידֵי שֶׁקֶר לְהָעִיד עַל הַחוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁנִּתְקַדֵּשׁ. וּבָא אֶחָד וְהֵעִיד עֵדוּתוֹ וְהָלַךְ לוֹ. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר. עוֹלֶה הָיִיתִי בְּמַעֲלֶה אֲדוּמִים וּרְאִיתִיו רָבוּץ בֵּין שְׁנֵי סְלָעִים רֹאשׁוֹ דוֹמֶה לָעֶגֶל אָזְנָיו דּוֹמוֹת לַגְּדִי. וּרְאִיתִיו וְנִבְהַלְתִּי וְנִרְתַּעְתִּי לַאֲחוֹרַיי. וַהֲרֵי מָאתַיִם זוּז קְשׁוּרִים בַּאֲפוּנְדָּתִי. אָ‍ֽמְרוּ לוֹ. הֲרֵי מָאתַיִם זוּז נְתוּנִין לָךְ בְמַתָּנָה. וּשְׁלוֹחֶיךָ יָבֹאוּ וְיִלְקוּ. אַתָּה לָמָּה הִכְנַסְתָּה עַצְמָךְ לְמִסְפֵּק. אָמַר לָהֶן. רָאִיתִי אוֹתָם מְבַקְּשִׁין לְהַטְעוֹת אֶת חֲכָמִים. אָמַרְתִּי. מוֹטָּב שֶׁאֵלֵךְ אֲנִי וְנוֹדִיעַ לַחֲכָמִים. What spoiling was there²⁹This refers to the sectarians mentioned first in the Mishnah.? Because they³⁰In G correctly: the Boethusians. were saying, Pentecost is after the Sabbath; one always was going out in the evening on the presumption that it would be sanctified³¹While in theory the day of the New Moon was determined only by observation, most months followed a regular pattern alternation between 29 and 30 days. Since the Sanctification of the Month as judicial act could be done only during daytime, one nevertheless could be reasonably assured on the preceding evening that the day would be one of the New Moon.. Then for Nisan they should not accept³²Since this was the only one of importance for the Boethusians. The majority of the people supported the Pharisees, so the other sects had no chance of seeing their adherents gaining control of the Temple., for the other months they should accept. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the main spoiling was in Adar³³If one wants credibly to manipulate the date of the 1st of Nisan, one has to make sure that the 1st of Adar is 29 days before the desired date of Nisan.. Then if it conforms with ours they should accept, if it does not conform with ours they should not accept. One because of the other. ³⁴Tosephta 1:15, Babli 22b.“It happened that the Boethusian hired two false witnesses to testify on the new moon that it be sanctified. The first came, delivered his testimony, and left. The other one said, I was climbing Maaleh Adumim³⁵Jos. 15:7. when I saw it lying down between two rocks, its head resembling a calf, its ears resembling a kid goat. Is saw it, was taken aback, and stepped backward, and there were 200 denar tied in my money belt. They told him, the 200 denar are given to you as a gift³⁶Since it is forbidden to take bribes for false testimony, the witness could not legally have acquired the money given to him as bribe; he needed a court decision to keep it., but those who sent you should come and be flogged. Why did you put yourself in this questionable situation? He said to them, I saw them trying to trip up the Sages. I said, it is better that I should go and inform the Sages.”

וּמַה קִילְקוּל הֲוָה תַמָּן. דַּהֲווֹן אִילֵּין מַסְבִּין יוֹם דֵּין וְאִילֵּין מַסְבִּין לְמָחָר. וְהָיוּ סְבוּרִין שֶׁנִּמְלְכוּ בֵית דִּין לְעַבְּרוֹ וְהֵן מִתְקַלְקְלִין. מִי בִיטֵּל אֶת הַמַּשּׂוּאוֹת. רִבִּי בִיטֵּל אֶת הַמַּשּׂוּאוֹת. וְהִתִּיר רוֹצֵחַ. וְהִתִּיר עֵד מִפִּי עֵד. וְהִתִּיר שֶׁיְּהוּ יוֹצְאִין עָלָיו מִבָּעֶרֶב בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁנִּתְקַדֵּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אַף עַל גַּב דְּאָמַר אַתְּ בִּטְלוּ אֶת הַמַּשּׂוּאוֹת לֹא בָ‍ֽטְלוּ מִיָּם טִיבֵּרִיָה. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אִילֵּין דְּחַמְייָן צְפַת מָהוּ דְיִסְבּוּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. רִבִּי בִיטֵּל אֶת הַמַּשּׂוּאוֹת. צְפַת לָמָּה מַסְבָּה. אֶלָּא בְגִין מוֹדָעָא דִאִינּוּן יָ‍ֽדְעִין. אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין לֵילֵי זְמַנּוֹ אֶלָּא לֵילֵי עִיבּוּרוֹ. לֵילֵי זְמַנּוֹ אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין מִפְּנֵי יוֹם טוֹב. אֲבָל מַשִּׂיאִין לֵילֵי עִיבּוּרוֹ. אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין אֶלָּא עַל הַחֳדָשִׁים הַמְיוּשָׁבִין בִּזְמַנָּן. מִפְּנֵי יוֹם טוֹב שֶּׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בָּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת. לֵילֵי זְמַנּוֹ אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין מִפְּנֵי יוֹם טוֹב. לֵילֵי עִיבּוּרוֹ אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹד שַׁבָּת. שֶׁאִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ. מַשִּׂיאִין בֵּין עַל הַחֳדָשִׁים הַמְיוּשָׁבִין בִּזְמַנָּן [בֵּין עַל הַחֳדָשִׁים הַמְּעוּבָּרִין שֶׁאֵינָן מְיוּשָׁבִין בִּזְמַנָּן.] אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ כֵּן אַף הֵן סְבוּרִין שֶׁמָּא נִמְלְכוּ בֵית דִּין לְעַבְּרוֹ וְהֵן מִתְקַלְקְלִין. And what spoiling was there³⁷Referring to the Samaritans mentioned later in the Mishnah.? These were kindling this day and those were kindling the next day; they were thinking that the Court was reconsidering and were spoiled³⁸Since the people in Babylonia had no way of determining the origin of the signals, they kept the Day of Atonement on the 11th of Tishre according to the rabbinic calendar.. Who disestablished the beacons? Rebbi disestablished the beacons³⁹This cannot refer to the beacons described in Mishnah 3, since these start from Jerusalem, and Rebbi’s beacons must have started in lower Galilee, according to Tosephta 1:17 on Mount Tabor. One has to conclude that the beacons were in use all during Temple times and were in some kind re-established by Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. If the interference of the Samaritans had been dated before the destruction of the Temple, it would be reasonable to infer that they started their beacon near Sartaba. In the scenario described here, the origin must have been in Samaritan communities in Galilee, of which we otherwise have no knowledge., and permitted the murderer⁴⁰A person known to be a murderer but for whose deed there are no proofs which would hold in court, is admitted as witness., and permitted hearsay⁴¹Testimony otherwise not admissible in court permitted for testimony about a New Moon (since anyhow this testimony can be controlled by astronomical computation.), and permitted that one was departing in the evening trusting that it would be sanctified⁴²If a month was not started on day 30 of the preceding month, it certainly started on day 31. Therefore the messengers for the New Moon may safely depart after the end of day 30.. Rebbi Abbahu said, even though you are saying that the beacons were disestablished, they were not disestablished from the Sea of Galilee⁴³Where local bonfires were lit to keep the remembrance of the prior custom alive.. Rebbi Ze`ira asked before Rebbi Abbahu, should those who see Safed light a beacon? He said to him, Rebbi disestablished the beacons. Why would Safed light a beacon? To communicate that they know⁴⁴As answer to the bonfires below which were visible from Safed.. One does not light a beacon in the night of its regular time, but in the night of its extension⁴⁵If beacons are lit, they are lit in the night of day 31 of the preceding month.. In the night of its regular time one cannot kindle because of the holiday, but one kindles in the night of its extension⁴⁶The problem in all this is New Year’s Day which is both a holiday and a New Moon. One cannot light the beacon in the night of the 30th day because this is part of the holiday where starting a fire is forbidden (and anyhow it would show that the fixation of the new moon by observation was a pretense.) The next night is no longer a holiday and beacons can be lit without restriction.. One kindles only for months settled on time⁴⁷Months which need a declaration by the court. If day 30 of a month is not declared the first of the next month then automatically day 31 will be the start of the next month. Beacons are lit after the end of day 30 to signal that this day was declared the first of the new month. If no beacon was lit it is a sign that the court did not act and therefore day 31 must be the first of the new month. because of a holiday which might fall on a Friday⁴⁸Which the Court should avoid since it places the day of Atonement on a Sunday and on the preceding day, a Sabbath, one could not cook.. In the night of its regular time one cannot kindle because of the holiday, in the night of its extension one cannot kindle because of the honor of the Sabbath⁴⁹One could light the beacon only in the night of Sunday, which would give a wrong information in every case. Since one does not light beacons for an extended month, even if on New Year’s Day the beacons are lit a day late nothing can go wrong since the beacon itself is proof that Elul was only 29 days.. For if you are saying, one kindles both for months settled on time [and for months not settled on time]⁵⁰Corrector’s addition supported by G. Tosephta 1:17, Babli 22b, Pesaḥim2b.; if you are saying this, they will say that maybe the Court was reconsidering and would be spoiled⁵¹Since the beacon cannot be used to distinguish between months of 29 and 30 days..