איכא בינייהו יום תקופה מתחיל ויום תקופה גומר ולא מסיימי
The Gemara answers: Also here, the difference between them concerns the question of whether the day of the equinox begins the season or whether the day of the equinox concludes the season, but their opinions are not defined. Although it is apparent from the baraita that these two tanna’im disagree about this issue, it is not clear from their words which tanna ascribes to which of these opinions.
אחרים אומרים מיעוטו וכמה מיעוטו ארבעה עשר יום מאי קסברי אי קסברי יום תקופה גומר וכוליה חג בעינן האיכא אמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק אחרים בתקופת ניסן קיימי דכתיב (דברים טז, א) שמור את חדש האביב שמור אביב של תקופה שיהא בחדש ניסן
The baraita teaches: The tanna referred to as Aḥerim says: The year is intercalated even on account of a minority of the month, and how much is a minority of the month? Fourteen days. The Gemara asks: What do Aḥerim hold? If they hold that the day of the equinox concludes the season, and also that we require all of the Festival to take place in the new season, this condition is fulfilled even if the season is lacking fifteen days. Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak says: Aḥerim are standing in, i.e., discussing, the season of Nisan. As it is written: “Observe the month of spring and keep the Pesaḥ” (Deuteronomy 16:1), from which it is inferred: Preserve the day of the equinox of the spring, to ensure that it will be in the month of Nisan, meaning that the equinox must occur during the first part of the month of Nisan, by the fourteenth, the day the Paschal offering is sacrificed.
וליעבריה לאדר אמר רב אחא בר יעקב תנא מלמעלה למטה קחשיב והכי קאמר עד מיעוטו מעברין וכמה מיעוטו ארבעה עשר יום
The Gemara asks: In a situation like this, why is it necessary to intercalate the year? But let them intercalate the month of Adar by adding a day to it, and this will cause the day of the equinox to occur during the first half of Nisan. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: The tanna whom the baraita here refers to as Aḥerim calculated from the top, meaning the maximum number of days downward, and this is what he is saying: Up to a minority of the month, meaning, if the equinox would occur during the final days of Nisan, the court would intercalate the year and would also do so if the equinox would occur earlier in the month, unless it would be early enough that only a minority of the month would be in the previous season. And how much is a minority? Fourteen days. But if the equinox would occur on the fourteenth, the year is not to be intercalated, but instead a day should be added to the month of Adar.
רבינא אמר לעולם אחרים בתשרי קיימי וקסברי אחרים כוליה חג בעינן ויו"ט ראשון יום טוב ראשון חג האסיף כתיב חג הבא בזמן אסיפה:
Ravina said: Actually, it can be explained that Aḥerim are standing in the season of Tishrei, and were discussing Sukkot as opposed to Passover. Aḥerim hold that we require all of the festival of Sukkot, including the Festival on the first day, to take place in the new season. Since Sukkot begins on the fifteenth of Tishrei, the equinox must fall no later than the fourteenth. The Gemara asks: How is it possible to say that the Festival on the first day must also be in the new season? It is written: “The Festival of Ingathering” (Exodus 23:16), which is referring to the time when the crops are gathered. This can refer only to the intermediate days of Sukkot, since it is prohibited to gather crops on a Festival. The Gemara answers: They interpret the verse to mean: The Festival that comes at the time of ingathering, meaning in the autumn.
סמיכת זקנים: ת"ר (ויקרא ד, טו) וסמכו זקני יכול זקני השוק ת"ל עדה
§ The mishna teaches: The laying of hands by the Sages is performed by a court of three judges according to Rabbi Shimon and five according to Rabbi Yehuda. The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull before the Lord” (Leviticus 4:15). One might have thought that the verse is referring to any elders in the marketplace, meaning people who are not members of the Sanhedrin. Therefore, the verse states: “Elders of the congregation,” meaning from among the leaders and judges of the people.
אי עדה יכול קטני עדה ת"ל העדה מיוחדין שבעדה וכמה הן וסמכו שנים זקני שנים ואין ב"ד שקול מוסיפין עליהם עוד אחד הרי כאן חמשה דברי רבי יהודה רבי שמעון אומר זקני שנים ואין בית דין שקול מוסיפין עליהן עוד אחד הרי כאן שלשה
If it had written only “congregation,” one might have thought they may be the minor ones of the congregation, i.e., members of the lesser Sanhedrin. Therefore, the verse states: “The congregation,” which indicates the unique ones of the congregation, meaning that they must be members of the Great Sanhedrin. And how many must they be? The verse states: “Shall lay” in the plural form, which indicates a minimum of two; “elders” in the plural form, indicating another two; and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are five judges here; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: The verse states: “Elders,” indicating two, and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are three judges here.
ור' שמעון הכתיב וסמכו ההוא מיבעי ליה לגופיה ורבי יהודה לגופיה לא צריך דאם כן דלא אתי וסמכו לדרשה ליכתוב זקני העדה ידיהם על ראש הפר
The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon, isn’t it written: “And the elders of the congregation shall lay”? This word should be included in the derivation. The Gemara answers: That word is necessary for the matter itself, to indicate that the elders of the congregation must lay their hands on the bull, and therefore it is not part of the phrase from which the number of judges is derived. The Gemara asks: And what does Rabbi Yehuda respond to this? The Gemara answers: It is not necessary to use this word for the matter itself, as if this would be so, that the phrase: “And the elders of the congregation shall lay” does not come to be interpreted, let it write: The elders of the congregation, their hands on the head of the bull, and it could be understood that the elders lay their hands on the head of the bull.
ור' שמעון אי כתיב הכי הוה אמינא מאי על בסמוך ורבי יהודה גמר ראש ראש מעולה ור"ש לא גמר ראש ראש מעולה
And what does Rabbi Shimon respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: If it were written so, I would say: What is the meaning of: “On [al] the head of the bull”? It means adjacent to the head of the bull, as the term al often means next to or nearby. And what does Rabbi Yehuda respond to this claim? He learns that the hands are placed directly on the bull’s head by means of a verbal analogy, from the word “head” in this verse and the word “head” written in the verse discussing a burnt-offering, where the halakha states that the one bringing the offering must lay his hands literally and forcefully on the animal’s head. And what does Rabbi Shimon respond to that? He does not learn this verbal analogy from the word “head” in the verse about the elders and the word “head” in the verse discussing a burnt-offering, as he did not receive this tradition from his teachers.
תנא סמיכה וסמיכת זקנים בג' מאי סמיכה ומאי סמיכת זקנים א"ר יוחנן מיסמך סבי
§ The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 10:15): The laying of hands and the laying of hands by the Sages are performed by three judges. What is the laying of hands, and what is the laying of hands by the Sages? It is clear that one of these terms is referring to the elders laying their hands on the bull offered for an unwitting communal sin, but what is the meaning of the other expression? Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is referring to the ordination of elders, meaning, to appoint Sages and grant them the title Rabbi.
א"ל אביי לרב יוסף מיסמך סבי בשלשה מנלן אילימא מדכתיב (במדבר כז, כג) ויסמוך את ידיו עליו אי הכי תסגי בחד וכי תימא משה במקום שבעים וחד קאי אי הכי ליבעי שבעים וחד קשיא
Abaye said to Rav Yosef: From where do we derive that the ordination of elders is performed by three judges? If we say it is from the fact that it is written with regard to Moses when he appointed Joshua: “And he laid his hands on him and he commanded him” (Numbers 27:23), if so, it should be enough for one man to ordain the new Sage, as Moses ordained Joshua. And if you would say: Moses stood in place of seventy-one, meaning that no Sage in a later generation could fill the place of Moses, and only the Great Sanhedrin can fill that role, if so, then every ordination should require seventy-one judges. The Gemara responds: The matter is difficult; there is no clear source for this halakha.
אמר ליה רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי בידא ממש סמכין ליה אמר ליה סמכין ליה בשמא קרי ליה רבי ויהבי ליה רשותא למידן דיני קנסות
Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: Do they ordain him literally with the hand? Rav Ashi said to him: They ordain him by name by announcing it publicly; he is called: Rabbi, and they give him permission to adjudicate cases involving laws of fines.
וחד לא סמיך והא אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ברם זכור אותו האיש לטוב ורבי יהודה בן בבא שמו שאילמלא הוא נשתכחו דיני קנסות מישראל נשתכחו נגרוסינהו אלא
The Gemara asks: And is it so that one man alone is not able to ordain a rabbi? But doesn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav says: Indeed [beram], that man will be remembered favorably, and Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava is his name, as had it not been for him the laws of fines would have been forgotten from among the Jewish people. The Gemara challenges that assertion: Would the laws of fines actually have been forgotten? Let them study them, so they will not be forgotten. Rather, his intention was to say that