בשיטת ר' יהודה אמרה דאמר (ויקרא כג, יד) עד עצם היום הזה עד עצמו של יום וקסבר עד ועד בכלל
stated his decree in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who said: When the verse states: “And you shall eat neither bread nor parched corn, nor fresh stalks, until this selfsame [etzem] day, until you have brought the offering of your God” (Leviticus 23:14), this does not teach that it is permitted to eat the new grain on the morning of the sixteenth when the eastern horizon is illuminated. Rather, it is prohibited until the essence [atzmo] of the day. And he holds that when the verse says: Until that day, it means until and including this date. If so, by Torah law, eating the new grain is permitted only after the conclusion of the sixteenth, unless the omer offering was sacrificed, in which case it is permitted to eat the new grain immediately afterward.
ומי סבר לה כוותיה והא מפליג פליג עליה דתנן משחרב בית המקדש התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי שיהא יום הנף כולו אסור א"ר יהודה והלא מן התורה הוא אסור [דכתיב עד עצם היום הזה]
The Gemara asks: And does Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda? But he disagrees with him, as we learned in a mishna (Sukka 41a): After the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that for the entire day of waving the omer offering, eating the grain of the new crop is prohibited. Rabbi Yehuda said: But isn’t it prohibited by Torah law, as it is written: “Until this selfsame day”? This indicates that Rabbi Yehuda disagrees with Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai.
התם ר' יהודה הוא דקא טעי איהו סבר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מדרבנן קאמר ולא היא מדאורייתא קאמר
The Gemara rejects this argument. There, it was Rabbi Yehuda who erred in his understanding. He thought that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was saying that eating new grain on the sixteenth of Nisan is prohibited by rabbinic law. But that is not so; he was actually saying that it is prohibited by Torah law.
והא התקין קתני מאי התקין דרש והתקין:
The Gemara raises a difficulty. But it is taught in the mishna: Instituted. This term is referring to a rabbinic ordinance, not a Torah law. The Gemara explains: What is the meaning of the term instituted? It means that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai interpreted the verse, and instituted that this is how one should act from now onward. When the Temple was standing there was no need for this halakha, as it was permitted to eat the new grain after the sacrificing of the omer.
מתני׳ בראשונה היו מקבלין עדות החדש כל היום פעם
MISHNA: Initially, they would accept testimony to determine the start of the month throughout the entire thirtieth day from the beginning of the month of Elul, before Rosh HaShana, and if witnesses arrived from afar and testified that they had sighted the New Moon the previous night, they would declare that day the Festival.
אחת נשתהו העדים מלבוא ונתקלקלו הלוים בשיר התקינו שלא יהו מקבלין אלא עד המנחה
Once, the witnesses tarried coming until the hour was late, and the Levites erred with regard to the song, i.e., the psalm that they were supposed to recite, as they did not know at the time whether it was a Festival or an ordinary weekday. From that point on, the Sages instituted that they would accept testimony to determine the start of the month only until minḥa time. If witnesses had not arrived by that hour, they would declare Elul a thirty-day month and calculate the dates of the Festivals accordingly.
ואם באו עדים מן המנחה ולמעלה נוהגין אותו היום קודש ולמחר קודש
And if witnesses came from minḥa time onward, although the calculations for the dates of the Festivals would begin from the following day, the people would nevertheless observe that day, on which the witnesses arrived, as sacred, so that in future years they would not treat the entire day as a weekday and engage in labor from the morning on the assumption that the witnesses will arrive only after minḥa time. And they would also observe the following day as sacred. On the second day, they observed Rosh HaShana in full, both by sacrificing its offerings as well as by calculating the upcoming Festivals from that date.
משחרב בית המקדש התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי שיהו מקבלין עדות החדש כל היום:
After the Temple was destroyed and there was no longer any reason for this ordinance, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that they would once again accept testimony to determine the start of the month the entire day.
גמ׳ מה קלקול קלקלו הלוים בשיר הכא תרגימו שלא אמרו שירה כל עיקר רבי זירא אמר שאמרו שירה של חול עם תמיד של בין הערבים
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What error did the Levites make with regard to the song they were supposed to recite? The Gemara answers: Here, in Babylonia, they interpreted that they did not recite any song at all, as they did not know which psalm should be sung, the one for an ordinary weekday or the special one for the Festival. Rabbi Zeira said: Their mistake was that they recited the song of an ordinary weekday with the daily afternoon offering. After the witnesses testified, it became clear that they should have recited the psalm of the Festival.
אמר לו רבי זירא לאהבה בריה פוק תני להו התקינו שלא יהו מקבלין עדות החדש אלא כדי שיהא שהות ביום להקריב תמידין ומוספין ונסכיהם ולומר שירה שלא בשיבוש אי אמרת בשלמא אמור שירה דחול היינו דאיכא שיבוש אלא אי אמרת לא אמור כלל מאי שיבוש איכא
Rabbi Zeira said to his son Ahava: Go out and teach the following baraita to the Sages of Babylonia: They instituted that on Rosh HaShana the court would accept testimony to determine the start of the month only if there was enough time left in the day to sacrifice the daily offerings and the additional offerings of the Festival and their libations, and to recite the appropriate song without a mistake. Granted, if you say that they recited the song of an ordinary weekday, this is a case in which there is a mistake. However, if you say that they did not recite any psalm at all, what mistake is there? The term: Mistake, indicates the performance of an incorrect action.
כיון דלא אמור כלל אין לך שיבוש גדול מזה
The Gemara explains: Since they did not recite any psalm at all, you do not have a mistake greater than this. The failure to recite the appropriate psalm disrupts the entire sacrificial service.
מתיב רב אחא בר הונא תמיד של ראש השנה שחרית קרב כהלכתו במוסף מהו אומר (תהלים פא, ב) הרנינו לאלהים עוזנו הריעו לאלהי יעקב במנחה מהו אומר (תהלים כט, ח) קול ה' יחיל מדבר
Rav Aḥa bar Huna raised an objection from a baraita: With regard to the daily offering on Rosh HaShana, in the morning it is sacrificed in accordance with its regular halakhot, i.e., the Levites recite the regular psalm for that day of the week. When it comes to the additional offering of Rosh HaShana, what psalm does one recite? The psalm that includes the verse: “Sing aloud to God our strength; shout to the God of Jacob” (Psalms 81:2). With regard to the daily afternoon offering, what psalm does one recite? The psalm that includes the verse: “The voice of the Lord shakes the wilderness” (Psalms 29:8).
ובזמן שחל ראש השנה להיות בחמישי בשבת שהשירה שלו הרנינו לאלהים עוזנו לא היה אומר בשחרית הרנינו מפני שחוזר וכופל את הפרק
And when Rosh HaShana occurs on a Thursday, whose regular psalm even on an ordinary weekday is: “Sing aloud to God our strength,” and the witnesses came before the daily morning offering was sacrificed, one would not recite: “Sing aloud to God our strength; shout to the God of Jacob” with the daily morning offering, because one goes back and repeats that section at the time of the additional offering.
אלא מהו אומר (תהלים פא, ז) הסירותי מסבל שכמו ואם באו עדים אחר תמיד של שחר אומר הרנינו אע"פ שחוזר וכופל את הפרק
Rather, what does one recite? “I removed his shoulder from the burden” (Psalms 81:7), which is referring to Joseph, who was set free from prison on Rosh HaShana. In other words, the second half of Psalm 81 was recited with the morning offering, while the first half was recited with the additional offering. And if the witnesses came on a Thursday after the daily morning offering had already been sacrificed, one recites: “Sing aloud to God” at the additional offering, even though this means that one goes back and repeats that section again. This concludes the baraita.
אי אמרת בשלמא כל היכא דמסתפקא אמרינן שירה דחול היינו דקאמר אומרו וכופלו אלא אי אמרת לא אמור כלל מאי אומרו וכופלו
The Gemara explains the objection from this baraita: Granted, if you say that anywhere there is a doubt with regard to what to say, one recites the song of an ordinary weekday, this is the meaning of that which the tanna states: One recites the psalm for an ordinary weekday and then repeats it. However, if you say that in a case of doubt no psalm is recited at all, what is the meaning of the clause: One recites it and repeats it?