Talmud su Neemia 4:15

A sign for it (nightfall) is after stars have become visible²⁰This is an extended quote from a parallel to the Tosephta (1:1) quoted in note 8. It is not from our Tosephta since the last sentence is missing there and the first sentence reads in the Tosephta, and in the Babylonian Talmud (2b), סימן לדבר צאת הכוֹכבים. Levi Ginzberg already has pointed out that the Biblical noun construction צאת הכוֹכבים “the emergence of stars” is never used in the Yerushalmi which prefers the verbal form. “It” referred to in this quote must be nightfall, the common time both for the criterion of R. Meïr and that of the Sages (Note 8).. And though there is no proof, at least there is a hint²¹This expression is found also in Yerushalmi Sheviït 9:2 (38d), Pesaḥim1:1 (27a), Moëd Qaṭan 1:4 (80c), Yebamot 4:11 (6a), Niddah 1:4 (49a). in (Neh. 4:15): “We wereworking; half of them were holding spears, from the beginning of dawn to the visibility of stars.” And it is written (v. 16): “The night was for us for watch duty and daytime for work.²²The argument goes as follows: Nehemiah’s people worked from dawn to dusk (in contrast to hired workers who labor from sunrise to sunset; Baba meẓia‘ 7:1). The second verse, missing in the Tosephta, contains the proof: Neḥemiah declares that “day was for work” and, since he had defined his working day as dawn to dusk in the preceding verse, his definition at least for “day” is “dawn to dusk”. This is only a “hint”, not a proof, since his working day was irregular.”

How many stars have to appear that it should be night? Rebbi Phineas²³R. Pinḥas Hacohen bar Ḥama, an Israeli Amora of the fourth generation. His source R. Abba bar Pappus was a Babylonian of the second Amora generation immigrating into Galilee. In the Babli (Šabbat 35b), the criterion of three stars is attributed to Samuel, one of the two foremost Babylonian authorities of the first generation. This criterion is originally Babylonian since the criterion of Cohanim eating their Terumah was never applicable in Babylonia. in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Pappus: one star (visible) is certainly daylight. Two are doubtful as night. Three is certainly night. Are two doubtful? Is it not written (Neh. 4:15): “To the visibility of stars?²⁴The argument here is that Neḥemiah uses a plural in his definition of nightfall. So he talks about at least two stars. Now Talmudic interpretation of Scripture follows a principle that I have discussed repeatedly (“Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition” in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. P. Longworth, London 1967, pp. 171–196; Seder Olam, North-vale NJ 1998, p. 6) that every Biblical statement must have a definite meaning. Since numbers do not have an upper bound, the only definite number indicated by a plural is 2. Hence, the plural must mean two unless it is accompanied by a description like “many”, etc. The description in the Babli is: תפסת מוּעט תפסת תפסת מרוּבה לא תפסת “If you grab the minimum you have something in your hand; if you grab more you have nothing in your hand.” It follows that Neḥemiah can talk only about two stars in his description of night.” The minimum of “stars” are two! The first one does not count²⁵Since Venus often is visible in daylight, it cannot count in the determination of nightfall. Later it is stated that no star visible during daytime hours can be counted for the determination of nightfall. This naturally seems to eliminate the count of stars as a practical procedure..