Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

This month is added to juxtapose the lunar calendar upon which the months are based, with the solar calendar, which governs the years.

The Mechilta (commenting on Exodus 12:2) states that just as when a month is made full the addition is made at the end of the month, so too, when a year is made full the addition is made at the end. (The year is considered as beginning in Nisan and ending in Adar.)

Based on Hilchot Nedarim 10:6, it appears that the Rambam considers the first Adar to be the additional month of the leap year. The Tur and the Ramah (Orach Chayim 427:1) differ and consider the second Adar to be the additional month.
In practice, Purim is always celebrated in the second Adar (Hilchot Megillah 1:12). There is a difference of opinion with regard to whether to commemorate birthdays, yahrzeits, and the like that took place in Adar of an ordinary year in the first or the second Adar of a leap year. The accepted custom in the Ashkenazic community is to commemorate them in the first Adar of a leap year (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 221:3)

Based on this verse, Rav Sa’adiah Gaon considers the adjustment of the yearly calendar to be a separate mitzvah. The Rambam, by contrast, considers it one dimension of the mitzvah of establishing the calendar.

An equinox occurs twice a year (spring, around 20 March, and fall, around 22 September), when the tilt of the Earth’s axis is inclined neither away from nor towards the Sun, the center of the Sun being in the same plane as the Earth’s equator. The term equinox can also be used in a broader sense, meaning the date when such a passage happens. The name “equinox” is derived from the Latin aequus (equal) and nox (night), because around the equinox, the night and day have approximately equal length. Pesach must be after the vernal equinox to be considered חֹדֶשׁ הָאָבִיב, a ‘springtime holiday.’

We have translated the Hebrew word אביב as “ripening,” as in Exodus 9:31. Because the agricultural cycle was so much an integral part of the calendar, the word אביב also means “spring” in Hebrew.

The calculations that the court would consider are outlined in Chapter 9.

The Ra’avad (in his gloss on Halachah 16), the Ramah and others take issue with the Rambam on this point, maintaining that even when Pesach falls before the vernal equinox, another factor is necessary for a leap year to be declared.

Both these factors are, however, necessary. Neither in their own right is sufficient.

Based on Sanhedrin 13a, b, the Ramah (cited in the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh on Halachah 15) notes that our Sages required that the festival of Sukkot occur after the autumnal equinox. If the vernal equinox falls on the fifteenth of Nisan, it is possible that the autumnal equinox will not take place until the twenty-first of Tishrei, six days after Sukkot begins.
Several different perspectives are offered to resolve this point. Among them: The Or Sameach maintains that the Rambam’s text originally contained a reference to the autumnal equinox, and it was omitted by the later printers. Aruch HaShulchan, by contrast, maintains that, according to the Rambam, the entire discussion in Sanhedrin is not accepted as halachah. We are not at all concerned with the autumnal equinox; all that is significant is that Pesach fall after the vernal equinox.

See Leviticus 23:9-14; Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 7:3.

The climates of these lands are different, and it is possible that the barley will have ripened in one land, but not in the others.

As opposed to the factors mentioned in the following halachot.

I.e., these factors are not associated with the juxtaposition of the lunar and solar calendars, but rather related to the celebration of the pilgrimage festival of Pesach in a complete manner.

Because they were damaged by the rains.

The ovens were earthenware, and could be damaged by substantial rains.

The Jerusalem Talmud (Sanhedrin 1:2) states that an effort should be made to enable the entire Jewish people to celebrate the pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem.

Rashi, Sanhedrin 12a, writes that these factors will make the people’s journey to Jerusalem uncomfortable, but will not prevent them from making the journey.

In his commentary on the tractate of Sanhedrin (one of the few tractates of the Gemara on which the Rambam wrote a commentary), the Rambam quotes Rav Hai Gaon as explaining that this instance refers to a situation in which the people were impure because of contact with a human corpse, and no ashes from the red heifer remained to purify them. One might think that the year should be made full to enable the priests enough time to offer a new red heifer and prepare ashes. Therefore, our Sages feel it necessary to explain that this measure is not taken, and in this instance the Paschal sacrifice should be offered by a priest in a state of ritual impurity.

On the one hand, an individual who is ritually impure may not offer the Paschal sacrifice at its appropriate time, but instead should offer it a month later, on Pesach Sheni. On the other hand, when the majority of the Jewish people, or the majority of the priests, are impure, the sacrifice should be offered in a state of ritual impurity. (See Hilchot Korban Pesach 7:1; Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 4:16.)

Our Sages interpret Deuteronomy 16:16, “You shall not appear before God empty-handed,” as obligating a person to bring an olah (“burnt”) offering on the pilgrimage festivals. The Rambam maintains that doves could be brought for these offerings. (See Hilchot Chaggigah 1:1.) Other authorities differ, as explained in the commentaries on that halachah.

E. g., a woman who gives birth (Leviticus 12:8), zavim (Leviticus 15:14), and zavot (Leviticus 15:29). It was customary for people living far from Jerusalem to delay offering the sacrifices they were obligated to bring until the pilgrimage festivals.

By mentioning both factors (the barley and the fruit trees), the Rambam indicates that he does not follow the perspective suggested by Rashi (Sanhedrin 11a), which states that the lack of lambs or doves coupled with either a delay in the ripening of the barley or the blooming of the fruit trees is sufficient cause to make the year full.

See Sanhedrin 11a, which relates that Rabban Gamliel once invited seven members of the Sanhedrin to participate in the deliberations regarding whether or not to make a year full. He requested that they meet him in the loft of the court early the following morning. When an additional member of the court came, Rabban Gamliel protested and taught the Sages this halachah.

For a leap year can be declared only by the High Court, or by a court deputized by the High Court (Chapter 5, Halachah 1).

When there are fewer than seven judges in the court, a leap year is instituted only when the decision to do so is unanimous. Only when the court is expanded to include seven judges is a majority ruling accepted as binding (Rabbenu Chananel, Sanhedrin 10b).

I.e., the head of the court.

Lest the lesser judges be intimidated after hearing the decision of the head of the court, and refrain from expressing their own opinion.

For the matter is more of a formality; the head of the court merely pronounces the month as sanctified.

Based on this ruling, Rabbi Akiva Eiger questions why King Chizkiyah was able to institute a leap year, as related in Pesachim 4:10.

Rashi (Sanhedrin 18b) states that the king would pay his soldiers a yearly salary, and therefore, by instituting an extra month, he would gain.
The B’nei Binyamin explains that there is also a reason for a king to desire to refrain from instituting an extra month. Bridegrooms, those who have built new homes, and those who have planted vineyards are freed from army service for a year. If a leap year is instituted, they benefit. Therefore, if a sizable portion of the population fell into these categories, and men were required for the army, it would be preferable for the king not to institute a leap year.

I.e., the Temple in Jerusalem. Curiously, however, it does not appear that the Rambam requires the proceedings to be carried out in the Temple, or even in Jerusalem.

Sanhedrin 11b states that there is an equation between the institution of a leap year and the sanctification of the new moon. As mentioned in Chapter 2, Halachah 8, the new moon can be sanctified only during the day.
Based on the equation between these two practices, the Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 4) questions the law mentioned previously: Why may the moon be sanctified throughout Eretz Yisrael (Chapter 1, Halachah 8) if a leap year may be instituted only in the territory of Judea?

Sanhedrin 12a relates that once, when Rabbi Akiva was imprisoned by the Romans, he instituted three leap years for the future.

Shorshei HaYam cites the fact that the year can be declared a leap year well in advance, as support for the Rambam’s thesis (Halachah 2) that the fact that Pesach would be celebrated before the vernal equinox is, by itself, sufficient cause to declare a leap year. At the beginning of the year, it is impossible to know the state of the barley harvest, or the fruit trees.

Rashi (Sanhedrin, ibid.) relates that this refers to a situation when it was feared that the Romans would prevent the leap year from being instituted if the court waited for the usual time.
Note the Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 4), which explains that an early declaration should be made only in a pressing situation. The court may, however, calculate months and even years in advance, even in cases where the situation is not pressing.

I.e., although, as the Rambam continues, if they instituted a leap year on this date their ruling would be binding, at the outset they should not take such a step.

Retroactively, it appears that the thirtieth day was fit to be Rosh Chodesh Nisan, and therefore the institution of the leap year would not have been effective. Nevertheless, since in actual fact, the declaration of the leap year preceded the sanctification of the new month, it is effective.

Sanhedrin 12a credits Elisha the prophet with the institution of this prohibition.

The prohibition of chadash prevents one from partaking of grain from the new harvest until the offering of the omer of barley on the sixteenth of Nisan (Hilchot Ma’achalot Asurot 10:2-5). When the previous year has been plagued with famine, it is undesirable to keep this prohibition in effect any longer than necessary.

The Rambam follows the opinion in Sanhedrin (loc. cit.), which forbids instituting a leap year only in the Sabbatical year. Another opinion forbids instituting a leap year in the year following the Sabbatical year.

Our translation follows the commentary of the Perush, which explains that according to the Torah, all agricultural labor is forbidden in the Sabbatical year. It is, nevertheless, permitted to take crops that grow from seeds strewn by the wind or that grow from other causes that did not result from conscious human labor. Although our Sages forbade benefitting from such crops for personal use, it was from these crops that the grain used for the omer offering and the two loaves of bread were harvested.
The Sages forbade using these crops for personal use. Nevertheless, since the prohibition did not originate in the Torah, our Sages feared that it would not be observed by the common people and the crops would not remain for these sacrifices.
Significantly, Rashi and others offer a second rationale for this practice, that our Sages did not want to prolong a year when it was forbidden to do agricultural work.

See Leviticus 23:17. As the verse states, this offering and the omer must be from the harvest of the new year.

So that the farmers would have an extra month to work the land and gather its crops (Rashi, Sanhedrin, loc. cit.).

This expression indicates a ruling that the Rambam derives from his own logic without an explicit source in the works of our Sages. The Or Sameach cites a passage (Sanhedrin 26a), which appears to indicate that it is impossible to declare a Sabbatical year a leap year. There are, however, other interpretations of that passage. (See Tosafot, loc. cit..)

It appears that the Rambam’s logic is that since according to the Torah, it is necessary to declare a leap year under such circumstances, the leap year should be declared. There is no obligation from the Torah to declare a leap year, because of problems with the roads or because of the other circumstances mentioned in Halachah 5. The Sages prescribed ordaining a leap year in these circumstances out of consideration for the people. In a Sabbatical year or a year of famine, the considerations mentioned in the previous halachah override those that would ordinarily require the year to be declared a leap year.
Significantly, the Ra’avad, the Ramah, and others do not accept the distinction made by the Rambam, and maintain that a Sabbatical year and a year of famine should never be declared leap years.

The Rambam’s statement is based on the narrative in Sanhedrin 11b, which relates that Rabban Gamliel sent letters to Jews throughout the diaspora notifying them of the declaration of a leap year.

Since through calculations, it is possible to know whether or not it is likely for the moon to be sighted on the thirtieth night, the court would notify the people in the outlying areas accordingly. This notification would, however, be conditional on the actual sighting of the moon.