Talmud su Zaccaria 1:1

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Also for the kings of the peoples of the world one only counts from Nisan²⁵He holds that Jewish documents, in particular biblical reports, always start regnal years in Nisan, irrespective of the official calendar of the kingdom to which it refers. The Babli 3b admits this only for good kings.. In the sixth, in year two of Darius²⁶Ḥaggai1:15. He reports that they started to build the Second Temple on 6/24 of year 2 of Darius.. In the eighth, [in year] two of Darius²⁷Sach. 1:1. If the regnal year of Darius were counted from the start of the 7th Month, Tishre, the eighth month would have to be in year three.. Should we not say, “in the eighth in year three”? Heipha said, the eighth was said first but there is no earlier and later in the Torah²⁸Since Sacharia scolds the people for not building the Temple in the eighth Month of year 2 of Darius, this must precede the date given by Haggai. Therefore the regnal year cannot be counted from Nisan, but it runs from the 1st of Tishre to the end of the following sixth month, against R. Ḥanina. That Sacharia is written after Haggai in the minor prophets has no chronological relevance. “Torah” here includes the entire Hebrew Bible (and Mishnah, Note 318) and is not restricted to the Pentateuch. Cf. Megillah1:2 (70d l.59); also Sheqalim6:1 (49d l. 70) and Sotah8:3 (Note 127) as minority opinion of R. Meïr. Babli Pesaḥim6b (Num. rabba9(44)).. Rebbi Jonah said, it is written: and now take notice, starting with this day, before a stone is set upon stone in the Temple of the Eternal²⁹Haggai2:15. The prophecy is dated 9/2 of year 2 of Darius.. How is this? In the sixth the foundation stone was laid. In the eighth³⁰This must read: “ninth”. this verse was said. If you are saying, they already laid, Heipha is correct. If you are saying, they did not lay, Heipha did not say anything³¹If the prophet says that while they are building the Temple they already notice that God’s blessing of Judean agriculture started before they actually started building, the statement cannot be used to determine the start of regnal years.. Rebbi Isaac objected: Is it not written³²Gen. 9:13., it was in the 601-st year, in the first, on the first day of the month? And it was stated on this, the year of the Flood is not counted³³This argument presupposes that Noe’s years are treated as regnal years. This is not the position of Seder Olam(of Babylonian redaction) which asserts that the numbers given in Gen. may be added, which means that overlapping parts of years have been eliminated. If the year started in Tishre, in the middle of the Flood, the statement is acceptable, but not if it started in Nisan, since the flood started only on 2/17 of that year. This problem is treated in detail by the 16th Cent. Rabbi Moses Almosnino (published in Moriah30, part 5–7, pp. 19–21, 2010.). Explain it following Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, in Tishre was the world created³⁴And therefore Noe’s years are not treated as regnal years; all years mentioned in the early history in Gen. start in Tishre. Babli 10b.. But is it not written, it was in the month of Nisan of year twenty³⁵Neh.2:1.; it was in the month of Kislew of year twenty³⁶Neh. 1:1. Nehemiah was informed in Kislew of year 20 of Artaxerxes of the sorry state of Jerusalem; in Nisan of the same year he asked permission to leave Susa and go to Jerusalem. The regnal year must have started in the fall.? Explain it following Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, any year of which 30 days have not elapsed is not counted as a full year. But is it not written³⁷Ex. 40:17., It was in the first month of the second year, on the first of the month, when the Sanctuary was erected? If you are saying that it was the third year and because 30 days had not elapsed it is not counted as a full year, is it not written³⁸Num. 10:11 (misquoted). Since this verse refers to the service in the Tabernacle, it must refer to a time posterior to that quoted in the preceding verse; the statement in the name of R. Eliezer must be rejected. (In the Babli 10b the statement is formulated in a way which makes it not relevant to the case discussed here.), it was in the second year in the second month, on the twentieth of the month? There are 50 days in the year, and it would not be counted as a whole year? That is one of Rebbi Isaac’s answers which are difficult³⁹And the statement of R. Eleazar in the name of R. Ḥanina has to be rejected. The entire text of R. Isaac is copied by Tosaphot 3b, s. v. מניינא..