[ Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]

Changing of the Sabbath

From: Avraham Fasick
Date: 26 Feb 2000
Time: 18:56:26
Remote Name: 166.93.39.152

Comments

Here is an excerpt from a book showing how Rabbinic Judaism has even changed when the day and therefore the Sabbath begins. My family observes Sabbath from sunrise to sunrise (Saturday sunrise to Sunday sunrise.)

RABBINICAL ESSAYS BY JACOB Z. LAUTERBACH HEBREW UNION COLLEGE PRESS CINCINNATI 1951 From page 446 - 451 with notes

Before we proceed to describe the ceremonies of the entrance of the Sabbath we must ascertain the exact time of her appearance, that is, at what time of the day the arrival of the Princess Sabbath was expected. This will help us to understand better certain features in the arrangements for welcoming her. As the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week and extends over one whole day, a brief discussion of the development of the Jewish system of reckoning the day is necessary to determine the time of the coming in and the going out of the Sabbath. There can be no doubt that in pre-exilic times the Israelites reckoned the day from morning to morning. The day began with the dawn and closed with the end of the night following it, i.e, with the last moment before the dawn of the next morning. The very description of the extent of the day in the biblical account of creation as given in Gen 1.5 presupposes such a system of reckoning the day, for it says: "And it was evening and it was morning, one day." This passage was misunderstood by the Talmud, though significantly enough when the Tosefta cites in proof Esth. 4.16 where the order occurs, but does not cite the passage in Genesis or was reinterpreted to suit the later practice of a different system. But it was correctly interpreted by R. Samuel b. Meir (1100-1160) when he remarked "It does not say that it was night time and it was day time which made one day; but it says 'it was evening,' which means that the period of the day time came to an end and the light disappeared. And when it says 'it was morning,' it means that the period of the night time came to an end and the morning dawned. Then one whole day was completed." There are many more indications in the Pentateuch pointing directly or indirectly to the mode of reckoning the day from morning to morning. To mention but a few such indications; when prescribing that a Thanksgiving offering must be consumed on the very same day on which the sacrifice is slaughtered, the Law states "on the same day it shall be eaten, ye shall leave none of it till the morning" [52] which directly indicates that the day comes to an end on the next morning.[53] And when in special case, as e, g., in regard to the Day of Atonement, where the Law wishes to make the fasting on it stricter than on any other fast day so as to include also the preceding night, the Law specifically states that it should begin with part of the preceding day and therefore expressly says: "And ye shall afflict your souls in the ninth day of the month at even, from even to even shall ye keep your Sabbath." [54 ] This indirectly but unmistakably points to a mode of reckoning the day from morning to morning.[55] In post-exilic times, however, probably not later than the beginning of the Greek period, [56] a change in the system of reckoning the day was made, and the day was reckoned as extending from the preceding to the following evening. As might be expected, such a radical innovation was not immediately generally accepted It took some time before it entirely supplanted the older system. In certain spheres of the population the older system continued to be in use, either exclusively or side by side with the newer system. Thus in the Temple service the older system continued all through the time of the existence of the second Temple, and there the day was reckoned from morning to morning, or as the Talmud [57] puts it [Hebrew quoted] "In sacrificial matters the night follows rather than precedes the day." [58] " In some circles [59] or among some Jewish sects [60] the older system continued and the Sabbath was observed from Saturday morning to Sunday morning For those groups, as for the people of the time prior to the introduction of the new system, the night following the Sabbath and not the night preceding it formed part of the Sabbath, and the morning of Saturday -- not Friday evening -- marked the entrance of the Sabbath.· But the majority of the people, following the teachings of the Halakah. [61] reckoned the day from evening to evening and the entrance of the Sabbath for them came after the sunset of Friday or on Friday evening. All the arrangements for welcoming the Sabbath and the ceremonies connected with it were set for Friday evening.

NOTES ON THE ABOVE TEXT on pages 447 - 451

[52] Lev. 22.30; see also Lev. 7.15.

[53] For further proofs see Morgenstern, loc, cit., to which I will add one point from the Passover legislation in Ex.12 which is not pointed out there. The law in Ex. 12 prescribes that the Paschal lamb be slaughtered on the fourteenth day of the month and eaten at the following night and that nothing be left till the next morning (verses 6-I0). And we are told that on the very same day, i.e., the fourteenth of the month God brought out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt ( ibid., verse 5I )· And in verse 42 of the same chapter we read as follows: "It is a night of watching unto the Lord for bringing them out of Egypt." Now then, if they came out at night that is, in the night following the fourteenth day, and it is said on the very same day, that is on the fourteenth day, they were brought out, it clearly indicates that the night following the fourteenth day is still part of that day.

[54] The Rabbis of the Talmud who nowhere allude to and probably no longer knew of the earlier mode of reckoning the day felt the difficulty in the phrase: "Ye shall afflict your souls on the ninth day," and when commenting on it they say: "But are we to fast on the ninth day?" (Yoma 81b, R. H. 9a, b). A very sound objection indeed. For if the day had in Bible times been reckoned from evening to evening, as it was in Talmudic times, then the phrase: "In the ninth day of the month at evening" contains a contradiction in terms, for the evening is already part of the tenth day. Besides the special injunction "from even unto even shall ye keep your Sabbath" would be entirely superfluous, for any other day also extends from evening to evening. The Talmudic explanation that the meaning of the passage: "Ye shall afflict your souls on the ninth day" is to say who eats on the ninth day performs a Jewish religious duty and it is accounted to him as if he had fasted both on the ninth and tenth days (ibid., loc. cit.) is, of course, a homiletical subterfuge. The fact is that the Rabbis of the Talmud no longer knew or would not acknowledge that in ancient times there was another mode of reckoning the day according to which the evening preceding the tenth day still belongs to the ninth day. In the case of the Day of Atonement the Law especially prescribes that the fast be observed in a new manner, covering part of the ninth and part of the tenth days.

[55] 'See also H. J. Bornstein in Ha Tekufah V1, 254 and 303 ff, and especially 313.

[56] See Morgenstern, op.cit,. p. 179, note. Also "Three Calendars of Ancient Israel," in Hebrew Union College Annual X (Cincinnati, 1935; 146, note 236. The fact that the Samaritans also reckon the day from evening to evening would not be any argument against the fixing of this period for the innovation. For, in the first place we do not know the exact date the Samaritans finally and absolutely separated from the Jews. Furthermore or they may have accepted Jewish practices even after the separation, may independently of the Jews, have interpreted the passage in Lev. 23.32: "From even to even shall you keep your Sabbath" to apply to every Sabbath and Holiday and not only to the Day of Atonement. In my paper referred to above (note 47) I expressed the idea, which was accepted by Morgenstern ("The Sources of the Creation Story" op. cit., p. 179, note) that the statement in the Talmud (b. Ber. 33a) that the men of the Great Synagogue instituted the ritual of Kiddush and Habdalah, also points to the time of the beginning of the Greek period for the innovation of the system of reckoning the day from evening to evening, since the ceremonies of Kiddush and Habdalah are now observed on Friday evening and Saturday night respectively. I would, however; now qualify this idea somewhat to the extent we must understand the Talmudic statement to refer to the last generation of the men of the Great Synagogue, who lived after the beginning of the Greek period. It is however, possible that the reference is to the earlier Men of the Great Synagogue Yet this would not necessitate the fixing the date for the innovation of the system in reckoning the day before the Greek period. For the Talmudic statement only says that they instituted a ritual for consecrating the Sabbath at its entrance and for marking its distinction from the week days at its going out but does not say when the coming in and going out of the Sabbath at the time when these rituals were first introduced, took place. According to the Talmud (ibid., loc cit.) some changes as to when or where the ritual of the Habdalah should be recited were made even during the period of the Men of the Great Synagogue. It is therefore not impossible that another change in the time for reciting these rituals also took place during the period of the Men of the Great Synagogue. When the older generation of that period first instituted these rituals they may have been recited at Sabbath morning and at Sunday morning respectively. Then, when the reckoning of the day was changed the times for reciting these rituals were correspondingly shifted to Friday and Saturday night respectively. (See below note 58.) The passage in Neh. 13:19-21 does not necessarily prove that already at the time of Nehemiah, the night preceding the Sabbath was part of the Sabbath as assumed by Bornstein (op. cit., p 305). See Morgenstern, "Three Calendars of Ancient Israel," op. cit., P 22, note 36.

[57] Hul. 83a.

[58] This simply means that in the sanctuary the conservative priests persistently held on to the older practice though in all other spheres of life it had been abolished or changed The fact that in the Temple service the night followed the day is another support for the theory that the innovation was introduced in the period of the Men of the Great Synagogue (see note 56). For had it been introduced earlier in that period in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, before the, Temple was rebuilt and the sacrificial cult restored it would have been introduced into the Temple service also. The Temple may have been slow in admitting changes in practices that were continuously observed but when the service was instituted anew and everything reorganized there would have been no reason to go back to a practice which had been observed in pre-exilic times, but discontinued for a time and changed 59 According to the Talmud (p. Ned. 8.1 [40d]) even among the common people the older system continued and in the popular language [~Hebrew quoted ~~ ~~] the day included the following and not the preceding night. See commentary [ Hebrew] ad loc. and cf.. also Bornstein,, op. cit P 311. Likewise the author of the Gospel according to Matthew has preserved the older system, for we read there 28.1: "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week." So according to him the Sabbath extended towards the dawn of Sunday morning.

[60]. Benjamin of Tudela (second half of the twelfth century) reports about a certain Jewish sect on the island of Cyprus whose members observed the Sabbath from Saturday morning to Sunday morning, or as he puts it, who desecrated the night preceding but kept holy the night following the Sabbath day. See [ Hebrew Quoted ] L. Griinhut, I (Frankfurt a. M., 1904) p. 23. According to S. A, Poznanski in his introduction to Eliezer of Beaugency's commentary to Ezekiel and the twelve minor prophet" (Waraw, 1913), P 43, Ibn Ezra's attack in his [Hebrew] (Kerem Hemed V [Prague 1839], 115 ff.) was directed not against R. Samuel b. Meir and his interpretation of Gen.1.5, but against those heretical sects who drew practical conclusions from this interpretation and observed the Sabbath from morning to morning. Cf, also Bornstein, op cit., 304.

[61]But even among those who followed the Halakah allusion to the continuance of the older system and traces of an extension of the Sabbath rest to the night following Saturday are to be found. Thus in commenting on the different expressions [Hebrew] used respectively in connection with the commandment about the Sabhath in the two versions of the Decalogue (Ex.20.8 and Deut. 5.12) the Mekilta says: " 'Remember' and 'Observe.' Remember it before it comes and observe it after it has gone" (Mekilta deR. Ishmael Bahodesh VII [ed. Lauterbach, II, 252]). How to remember the Sabbath before it comes is well illustrated there (ibid., P 253), but no illustration is given as to how the Sabbath is to be observed after it is gone. Instead of such an illustration there is added the remark about the conclusions which the teachers drew from the interpretation of the word "observe" as meaning "observe it after it has gone" This remark reads: [Hebrew quoted] Hence the teachers said: "We should always increase what is holy by adding to it some of the non-holy." But no illustration of the observance of the Sabbath after it has gone is given in the Mekilta.

Avraham Fasick


Last changed: February 26, 2000