Sanhedrin Daf 11 - Taking Blame, Ibur Hashana
Summary
- The text presents six exemplars of righteous people who assumed blame or included themselves among sinners to spare others embarrassment, tracing how each learned this conduct from predecessors and analyzing how to avoid outright falsehood while preserving peace. It then records that after the last prophets, *ruach ha-kodesh* ceased and a *bat kol* remained, highlights two figures deemed worthy of the *Shechinah* (Hillel HaZaken and Shmuel HaKatan) and the eulogies said for them, and notes limits on eulogizing *harugei malchut*. It proceeds to laws of *ibur ha-shanah*: requiring invited judges and the consent of the Nasi, the possibility of conditional intercalation, valid and invalid reasons, whether the added month is 29 or 30 days, contrasts in the tone of official letters across generations of Rabban Gamliel, and ancillary explanations. It concludes with criteria used to intercalate by agricultural and astronomical signs and by regional conditions, with special weight to Yehuda, and it previews that both *kiddush ha-chodesh* and *ibur ha-shanah* must be done by day.
- The text announces coverage of six cases of people who take blame to prevent embarrassment and how each learned that *hanhagah* from earlier generations. It states that three people are deemed worthy of the *hashra’at ha-Shechinah*, with two receiving the eulogy “hay chasid, hay anav,” and one worthy of such a eulogy but not given one. It states that it will explain *ibur ha-shanah al tenai*, valid and invalid reasons to intercalate, how many days are added, and the tone of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s letter compared to Rabban Gamliel HaZaken. It states that three factors and three regions are weighed in intercalation, that it is best to intercalate in Yehuda with a dispute about Galil, and that *kiddush ha-chodesh* and *ibur ha-shanah* must be done by day.
- The Gemara states that one may intercalate only with people specifically invited, and the Rambam (Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 4) explains this ensures they prepare and review the laws in advance, while the Acharon Sefer Torat Chaim adds that a judge needs time for analysis and reflection before sitting. It relates that Rabban Gamliel summoned seven to the attic and found eight; Shmuel HaKatan stood and said he came without permission only to learn *halacha lema’aseh*, whereupon Rabban Gamliel seated him and clarified that the rule is to intercalate with invitees only.
- # Rabbi, Garlic, and Rabbi Chiyya’s Act
- It states that Rabbi Chiyya learned this conduct from Rabbi Meir: when a woman claimed “one of you betrothed me with *bi’ah*,” Rabbi Meir immediately wrote her a *get* and all the scholars did likewise. The Or Sameach (Hilchot Gerushin 3) resolves a problem for Rabbi Meir’s view that signatures are the decisive act by explaining that the requirement of *lishmah* focuses on the husband’s intent for the specific woman; the scribe or witnesses need not personally know the husband’s identity if the husband’s intent is properly directed.
- The text states that Rabbi Meir learned this behavior from Shmuel HaKatan, and Shmuel HaKatan learned it from Shechaniah ben Yechiel, who said “אֲנַחְנוּ מָעַלְנוּ” while counseling Ezra despite not being personally guilty. It states that Shechaniah learned it from Yehoshua, to whom Hashem said to discover the sinner by *goral* rather than naming him directly, teaching avoidance of direct humiliation even of a sinner, and an alternative is offered from Moshe’s rebuke “*ad ana me’antem*,” which addressed the community generally although only some erred.
- # Bat Kol, Hillel, and Shmuel HaKatan
- It relates that a *bat kol* in the attic of Beit Gorya in Jericho identified one worthy of the *Shechinah* like Moshe Rabbeinu but whose generation was unworthy, and the sages fixed their gaze on Hillel HaZaken and later eulogized him “hay chasid, hay anav, talmido shel Ezra.” It notes attempts to reconcile “like Moshe” with the principle “lo kam beYisrael keMoshe od,” either by distinguishing *hashra’at Shechinah* from prophecy or by saying no one actually attained Moshe’s prophecy because no generation was fit, though a person’s personal worth could be comparable.
- # Governance of Ibbur Ha-Shanah
- # Valid and Invalid Reasons and Wording of Letters
- It presents the dispute whether the added period is 30 days or a “month,” with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel stating “month,” and Rav Pappa ruling it may be either 29 or 30 days. It contrasts “the forceful earlier ones” with “the modest later ones” by noting that Rabban Gamliel HaZaken’s letters say “it was good in my eyes and in the eyes of my colleagues,” while Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s formula appears more self-assertive. It suggests, per Rashi in Berachot 27–28, that Rabban Gamliel’s later humility followed the episode of his removal, while Tosafot explain that he referenced colleagues because he then shared the Nesi’ut with Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah. It asks why his message mentioned sheep post-Temple and, following the Yaavetz (She’elat Yaavetz I:89), suggests either retention of an older wording, the permissibility of offerings without a Temple, or expectation that the Temple would be rebuilt imminently.
- The text states that intercalation is based on three factors—*aviv*, fruit of the trees, and the *tekufah*—and that two of the three are required, with special joy when *aviv* is a ground because otherwise ripe grain would wait longer for the permissibility of *chadash*. It records that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s remark about the *tekufah* is ambiguous whether it refers to the cause of intercalation or the joy, and leaves it unresolved.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions