The period of sefirat ha-omer (between Pesach and Shavuot) is considered a period of mourning, but there is great confusion as to what are the periods of mourning and why there is mourning at all.
In the Torah, the Mishnah, the Talmud and the Rambam there is no mention of any type of mourning in reference to the period of sefirat ha-omer. The Talmud (Yevamot 62b) records that 12,000 pairs of students of Rabbi Akiva died between Pesach and Shavuot, but the Talmud does not mention that any mourning was instituted in this period for these scholars who died.
The first reference to mourning in this period is from the Geonim. Otzar ha-Geonim (7:141, on Yevamot 62b) quotes Rav Natronai Gaon, (9th century) and R. Hai Gaon (939-1038) that one does not marry during the entire period from Pesach to Shavuot, though one can become engaged in this period. Similarly, the Otzar Ha-Geonim (also quoted in Tur, Orah Chayyim 493) quotes R. Yitzhak ibn Giat (Spain, 1020-1089) who also mentions the custom of not marrying the entire period of sefirat ha-omer. The reason recorded for this custom is the deaths of R. Akiva's students, but Trachtenberg (2004, p. 255) notes "that according to some, the Roman superstition which forbade marriages in May" was the source of this custom not to marry. In addition, Rav Hai Gaon refers to a custom not to work at night from Pesach to Shavuot, also due to the deaths of R. Akiva's students. As noted by Sperber (1990, p.102), in all of the Geonic literature, the mourning in the period of sefirat ha-omer was for the entire period, and it consisted just of not getting married and not working at night.
This custom from the Geonim, was not mentioned by the Rambam, why not? It is difficult to believe that the Rambam was unaware of this custom of not getting married, which suggests that the Rambam rejected the custom, but why? Did the Rambam think that the deaths of R. Akiva's students were not "sufficient" to justify people not getting married during sefirat ha-omer? Or, did he think that the source of the custom not to get married was based on the Roman superstition and hence he left it out?
In the same period of the Rambam, R. Avraham Hayarchi (1155, Provence, to 1215 Toledo, Spain) writes in the Sefer ha-Manhig (quoted in Abudarham, 1995, pp. 271,272, and by Zevin, 1956, p. 299) that in some places (Provence?) the custom was to marry from Lag Ba-omer onwards. This change was based on a claim that in a text in Spain it was recorded that R. Akiva's students died until "peros" Shavuot. R. Hayarchi writes that peros means half, and as the word half appears with regard to the law of learning the laws of Pesach 30 days before Pesach, then peros means half of 30 or 15. Thus, he writes that the mourning stopped 15 days prior to Shavuot, namely on Lag Ba-omer, the 33rd day of sefirat ha-omer, and the 18th of Iyar. Similarly, in the 13th century, the Meiri (1249-1306, commentary on Yevamot 62a) who was also from Provence, writes that the custom was not to marry just from Pesach to Lag Ba-omer. According to these sources, there is still no mention of not cutting one's hair during sefirat ha-omer. In addition, with this development of the holiday of Lag Ba-omer, the custom of mourning was shortened, and became a major factor for why there are some many customs since it was not obvious how to integrate Lag Ba-omer and the shortened period of mourning into the forty nine day period of sefirat ha-omer. For a discussion of the development of the holiday of Lag Ba-omer and the drasha of peros see our discussion above on Lag Ba-omer, "You do the math," https://lobashamayim.blogspot.co.il/2009/05/lag-ba-omer.html
Also in the 13th century, the Shibolei Haleket (Italy, 1230-1300, quoted in Sperber, 1990, p. 109) writes that people do not get married during the entire period from Pesach to Shavuot, but in some places people would get married until Rosh Chodesh Iyar. Sperber suggests that the basis for this custom was that that the first Crusaders in 1096 began massacring Ashkenazi Jewry in Iyar, and hence Ashkenazi Jewry started mourning only in Iyar. According to the kinah, mi yiten mayim by R. Kalonymos ben Yehuda (12th century, Germany) that we recite on Tisha B'av, on the 8th of Iyar the Jews of Speyer were killed, on the 23rd of Iyar and on the 1st day of Sivan, the Jews of Worms were killed and on the 3rd day of Sivan, the Jews of Mainz were killed. A different possibility unrelated to the suffering due to the Crusades is that this custom of having marriages until Rosh Chodesh Iyar was a way of reducing the period of no marriages, just like the idea of allowing people to marry on and after Lag Ba-omer, again see our discussion on Lag Ba-omer, "You do the math."
The book, Sefer Minhag Tov (anonymous, apparently from Italy, end of the 13th century) quotes customs from France and Germany, and the author mentions new customs of mourning for the period. He writes (61, in Sperber, 1990, p. 107) that it is a good custom not to cut one's hair and nails, not to wear new clothing, and not to enjoy bathing from Pesach to Shavuot excluding Lag Ba-omer. Furthermore, he writes that these customs are because of the righteous who died in this period, which Sperber explains refers to the German Jews who were massacred by the Crusaders. We see that the custom of not cutting your hair during sefirat ha-omer is both a later development and not related to the custom of not getting married during this same period. Presumably it developed from the idea of not cutting one's hair by the mourning for the destruction of the Bet ha-Mikdash since the mourning for the massacres of the communities in Germany by the Crusaders was made equivalent in some ways to the mourning for the destruction of the Bet ha-Mikdash (see the kinot we recite on Tisha B'av).
The Tur (1275, Germany to 1340, Spain, Orah Chayyim 493) writes that in all places people do not marry from Pesach to Shavuot, which follows the custom from the Geonim. He also writes that some people do not cut their hair for the entire period and some people cut their hair after Lag Ba-omer. This implies that he knew of three customs with regard to cutting one's hair, see the Bach's comments on the Tur. One, some people cut their hair during the entire period of sefirat ha-omer, two, some people refrained from cutting their hair for the entire period, and three, some people did not cut their hair from Pesach to Lag Ba-omer. The Tur did not specify which places followed which custom. However, following Sperber's argument that the custom of not cutting one's hair was due to the massacres by the Crusaders, then it is likely that in Germany more people kept the custom of not cutting their hair in the entire period, as recorded by the Sefer Minhag Tov, while in Spain more people either cut their hair or just refrained from cutting their hair until Lag Ba-omer.
The Tur also refers to the custom from the Geonim of not working at night during the period from Pesach to Shavuot, but he writes that only women had this custom to not work after sunset. The Shulchan Arukh (493:4) quotes this custom, again just with regard to women. The Taz (Poland, 1586-1667, 493:3) limits it even more, as he writes that after one counts the omer, then one can work. The Arukh Hashulchan (Russia, 1829-1908, 493:9, also Chayyei Adam 131:11) writes that in his time some women kept this custom of not working until after maariv, but I am unaware of women who keep this custom today.
At around the same time as the Tur, R. Yehoshua ibn Shuiv (Spain, 14th century, quoted in Bet Yosef, 493 and Sperber, 1990, p. 104) writes that on the 34th day of the omer, people would shave apparently after not having shaven since Pesach. He might be the first person to mention not shaving during this period.
Abudarham (Abudirham?, Seville, early 14th century, laws between Pesach and Shavuot, 1985 version, p. 271) quotes two customs. One, to not get married and to not have a haircut the entire sefirat ha-omer (one possibility in the Tur), and two, to not marry and not cut one's hair from Pesach until (not including) Lag Ba-omer.
The Maharil (Germany, 1365-1437, Sefer Maharil, 1989, pp.154,157, quoted in Darkei Moshe 493:3 and Sperber, 1990, p. 110, footnote 37) writes that the custom in all places (Germany?) was not to marry for the entire period between Pesach and Shavuot and this apparently included Lag Ba-omer. With regard to hair cutting, he personally also did not shave for the entire period. However, he told his students that they could shave on and after Lag Ba-omer, and that he also accepted that some people shaved until Rosh Chodesh Iyar. It is not clear to me, whether he shaved on Lag Ba-omer or not. He writes that one cannot shave on erev Shabbat when Lag Ba-omer is on Sunday, which implies that one can shave on Lag Ba-omer itself, though maybe this was only according to his instructions to his students whom he told that they could shave on Lag Ba-omer.
Rav Yosef Caro (1488, Spain - 1575, Israel, Bet Yosef and Shulchan Arukh, 493) quotes that the custom is to equate the mourning of not getting married with the custom of not cutting one's hair, and that both are not done from Pesach through (including) Lag Ba-omer. In the Shulchan Arukh, he writes explicitly that haircuts are only permitted on the 34th day of the omer (the day after Lag Ba-omer), as stated by R. Yehoshua ibn Shuiv, and this apparently is also his view in reference to getting married. It seems that for R. Yosef Caro, Lag Ba-omer was not a special day.
Yaakov Gliss (1994, p.140) writes that the custom in Israel was to keep the mourning from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, but starting from Lag Ba-omer people would marry and cut their hair. This differs from the Shulchan Arukh since according to the Shulchan Arukh it is only from the 34th day of the omer that it is permitted to cut one's hair and to marry. R. Chayyim David HaLevi (Mekor Chayyim 195:18-20) writes that the custom of Sefardim today with regard to getting married is not to marry from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, while from Lag Ba-omer onwards it is permitted to marry. With regard to hair cutting, R. Chayyim David HaLevi first writes that the custom of Sefardim is not to cut one's hair until the 34th day of the omer like the Shulchan Arukh, but then he writes that some people cut their hair on Lag Ba-omer, the 33rd day of the omer.
The opinion of the Rama (Poland, d. 1572) is not clear. First, with regard to the Shulchan Arukh's comment about not getting married until the 34th day of the omer, he writes (493:1) that it is permitted to marry from Lag Ba-omer onwards. Afterwards, in reference to the Shulchan Arukh's comment that one cannot cut their hair until the 34th day of the omer, he writes (493:2) that this too is permitted on the day of Lag Ba-omer, though not the night of Lag Ba-omer. He also writes that if Lag Ba-omer is on Sunday, then one can cut their hair on erev Shabbat, the 31st day of the omer because of kavod Shabbat. Afterwards, he writes (493:3), that the custom in most places (in the Darkei Moshe, a few places?) was that one would not cut one's hair from after Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot excluding Lag Ba-omer (and Rosh Chodesh Sivan, see Darkei Moshe). This period of mourning corresponds to the attacks by the Crusaders on the Jewish communities in Germany in 1096. In this third comment, he only refers to not cutting one's hair, but does he also mean not to get married in this period? The question is does his first comment (493:1) about getting married from Lag Ba-omer onwards apply only for people who also do not cut their hair from Pesach to Lag Ba-omer or was the Rama stating that with regard to not getting married the period is from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, but with regard to not cutting one's hair the period starts from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot excluding Lag Ba-omer (and maybe Rosh Chodesh Sivan). Accordingly it not clear if the Rama himself thought that the two prohibitions of not getting married and not cutting one's hair were for the same time periods.
The Bach (1561-1640, Poland, 493), agrees with Rav Yosef Caro that the customs with regard to not getting married and not cutting one's hair are for the same time periods, and he writes that in his time, there were two customs amongst Ashkenazim. One custom was to mourn until (not including) Lag Ba-omer, while the second custom was to start the mourning the day after Rosh Chodesh Iyar and continue until Shavuot, just excluding Lag Ba-omer. He writes that according to the second custom one should not cut one's hair on Rosh Chodesh Sivan.
The Taz (1586-1667, the Bach's son-in-law, 493:2) explicitly writes that there was a difference between the customs of not getting married and of not cutting one’s hair. He writes that the custom in all places (amongst Ashkenazim? Poland?) was not to get married throughout the entire period from Pesach to Shavuot except for Lag Ba-omer. With regard to not cutting the hair, the Taz writes that this prohibition was only until Lag Ba-omer. He explains that the mourning until Lag Ba-omer is due to the deaths of the students of R. Akiva, while afterwards the mourning is due to the suffering during the Crusades. In addition, he suggests that the mourning due to the suffering during the Crusades was only to curtail great happiness like a wedding, but would not prohibit hair cutting. This is a difficult explanation since the custom not to marry for the entire period is from the time of the Geonim who lived before the time of the Crusades. In any event, the custom as stated by the Taz was soon changed by the Magen Avraham.
The Magen Avraham (Poland, 1637-1683, 493:2,5) also equates the times for the two types of mourning, but he changed the Bach's second custom since he allows people to marry in the three day period before Shavuot (the 3rd-5th days of Sivan). He records that the mourning should begin on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar (the 30th day in Nisan) and include Rosh Chodesh Sivan, which gives 33 days (1 in Nissan, 29 in Iyar including the little bit on Lag Ba-omer and three in Sivan including a little bit on the 3rd day of Sivan). This dating started the mourning two earlier than by the Bach in order that it would end two days earlier, on the third of Sivan instead of the fifth of Sivan. One problem with this dating is that this custom is invoking the principle that if one mourns a little it is like a full day twice, once by Lag Ba-omer and once on the third day of Sivan.
The Magen Avraham (see also Biur Halacha 493: Yesh nohagim) also quotes an idea to mourn the entire period except for Pesach, Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh Iyar, Rosh Chodesh Sivan and Lag Ba-omer. This idea is based on the explanation of the Maharil that the students of Rabbi Akiva did not die on the days when tachanun is recited. This explanation was theoretical for the Maharil to justify the holiday of Lag Ba-omer, but was not the custom of the Maharil. The Magen Avraham notes that as the Rama did not quote this custom it seems that he rejected it. It is unclear to me if this custom was ever followed.
The Chayyei Adam (1748-1820, Vilna, 131:11) wrote that the custom in Vilna was to follow the custom recorded by the Magen Avraham to start the mourning on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar until the third day of Sivan (a little bit on the third day) and during this period one did not marry or cut their hair. He does not state that one has to mourn a little bit on Lag Ba-omer, which might imply that people cut their hair at night on Lag Ba-omer.
The Mishnah Berurah (1907, Poland, 493:14,15) and Arukh Hashulchan (1829-1908, 493:6) both write that their custom was like the Magen Avraham. The Mishnah Berurah also quotes (end of 493:15) a custom to mourn the entire period except for Rosh Chodesh Iyar, Lag Ba-omer, and all the days of Sivan.
I have been told that the Magen Avraham's dates for the mourning was the dominant Ashkenazi Eastern European custom prior to WWII. Nowadays, this custom appears to have lost its popularity since most people, especially in Israel, follow the custom of mourning from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, with Sefardim waiting to cut their hair until the 34th (except by the chalakah?) and Ashkenazim cutting their hair on Lag Ba-omer itself. However, I have been told (in April 2014) that Jews in Switzerland and South Africa still follow this custom.
After the founding of the state of Israel, a new variation developed that Yom Ha-atzmaut became a break in the period of mourning. Thus, in Israel, where almost everybody follows the period of mourning as being from Pesach to Lag Ba-omer, many of the people who are Zionists shave (cut their hair? get married on Yom Ha-atzmaut?). After 1967, Yom Yerushalayim (the 28th of Iyar) also became a break for some people, though this was only relevant if a person kept the mourning until the third day of Sivan.
Finally, as I discuss below, "The law/ custom of not cutting one's hair in the nine days and three weeks," https://lobashamayim.blogspot.co.il/2009/07/cutting-ones-hair-in-three-weeks-and.html, I strongly believe that a person who shaves throughout the year for Shabbat, has to shave for Shabbat during the sefirat ha-omer period. To summarize the discussion there, I believe that the idea that one should not cut their hair/ shave for Shabbat during the mourning periods of the three weeks and sefirat ha-omer is from the Karaites who had no concern for kavod/ oneg Shabbat, and really the rule of the Mishnah, the Rambam, Tosafot and others is that Shabbat takes precedence over the mourning of the Bet ha-Mikdash and certainly Shabbat takes precedence over the mourning for the students of Rabbi Akiva and the suffering during the period of the Crusades. If a person normally shaves for Shabbat, and does not do so during the sefirah period (and the three weeks), then he is making the mourning more important than Shabbat and this is wrong.
To summarize all the different periods of mourning, if we exclude the Rambam's opinion of no mourning and the custom not to work at night, we see that there were at least sixteen different customs from the time of the Geonim until today with regard to getting married and cutting one's hair during sefirat ha-omer.
One, from the Geonim, the custom was not to get married throughout the entire period from Pesach to Shavuot but there was no prohibition of cutting one's hair.
Two, from Sefer ha-Manhig (12th century), the custom was not to marry until Lag Ba-omer, and there was no prohibition of cutting one's hair.
Three, mentioned by the Shibolei Haleket (13th century) was not to marry from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot, but there was no prohibition of cutting one's hair. This does not appear to have been a wide spread custom, but it might have influenced the later Ashkenazi practice.
Four, one custom quoted by the Tur and Abudarham (both early 14th century) was not to marry or to cut one's hair for the entire period of sefirat ha-omer. This custom did not allow any exception even for Lag Ba-omer. It seems the Maharil followed this custom, though he might have cut his hair/ shaved on Lag Ba-omer.
Five, also in the Tur, was the custom not to marry the entire period, but to cut one's hair on and after Lag Ba-omer. This custom accords with the Maharil's instruction to his students.
Six, a second custom in the Abudarham, was to not get married or to cut one's hair from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, but from Lag Ba-omer onwards, both are permitted. I think this is the dominant custom today.
Seven, mentioned by the Maharil (15th century), was the custom not to get married the entire period of sefirat ha-omer and not to cut one's hair from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot.
Eight, the Shulchan Arukh (16th century) writes that one does not get married or cut one's hair until the 34th day of the omer. This custom ignores Lag Ba-omer.
Nine, the Shulchan Arukh's practice is varied slightly by some (many?) Sefardim today. They wait until the 34th day of the omer to cut their hair, but will get married on the 33rd day (Mekor Chayyim).
Ten, one way of understanding the Rama (combining 493:1,2,3) is that the custom is not to marry from Pesach until Lag Ba-omer, but to start the prohibition of not getting a hair cut from the day after Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot, excluding the daytime of Lag Ba-omer (and the 31st day of the omer if Lag Ba-omer is on Sunday and maybe also Rosh Chodesh Sivan). I am not sure if this is the correct way to understand the Rama and whether this possibility was ever followed.
Eleven, from the Bach (end of 16th century, beginning of 17th century) was the custom not to marry or cut one's hair from after Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuot excluding Lag Ba-omer but including Rosh Chodesh Sivan.
Twelve, quoted by the Taz (middle 17th century) was the custom not to marry the entire period of sefirat ha-omer except for Lag Ba-omer, and not to cut one's hair until Lag Ba-omer. This custom is the same as number five, except that with this custom one could marry on Lag Ba-omer, while according to custom five one did not get married on Lag Ba-omer.
Thirteen, from the Magen Avraham (middle to late 17th century) was the custom that one does not marry or cut one's hair starting from the first day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar until the morning of the third day of Sivan, excluding Lag Ba-omer. The Magen Avraham writes that even by Lag Ba-omer there is some mourning at night, but it seems from the Chayyei Adam that the adherents to this custom did not mourn at all on Lag Ba-omer. I believe that this was the main Ashkenazi custom in Europe before the holocaust.
Fourteen, also mentioned by Magen Avraham, was the custom not to get married or to cut one's hair on all the days of sefirat ha-omer except for Pesach, Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh Iyar, Rosh Chodesh Sivan, and Lag Ba-omer (excluding a little bit).
Fifteen, mentioned by the Mishnah Berurah, though he seems to have followed possibility thirteen, is not get married or cut one's hair for the entire omer period until Rosh Chodesh Sivan, excluding Rosh Chodesh Iyar, and Lag Ba-omer. This is a slight variation (adding days 2-5 of Sivan) from possibility fourteen.
Sixteen, in Israel today (2017) amongst the dati leumi community, the mourning is from Pesach up to Lag Ba-omer, but on Yom Ha-atzmaut people attend festive celebrations, and shave. Also many people in this group shave on erev Yom Ha-atzmaut to look "clean" at the start of Yom Ha-atzmaut.
From this review, we see that the two main customs of the period of sefirat ha-omer, not to marry and not to cut one's hair, are independent of each other even though today both are observed for the same period of time. The custom not to marry might have been due to the death of the students of R. Akiva, while the custom not to cut one's hair was due to the deaths of the Jews in Germany in 1096 during the first Crusades. Also the advent of the holiday of Lag Ba-omer in the Middle Ages reduced the period of mourning from the entire period from Pesach to Shavuot to being around 33 days, and has led to many variations as to how to make this reduction.
Hello. The goal of this blog is to enhance our understanding of the Torah and the practice of Judaism. The discussions in the blog are a portion of a more extensive commentary on the Torah, which I will be happy to send to you. You can contact me at ajayschein@gmail.com. Please feel free to send comments. Also, if you want to receive an email with a link to the new posts, send me a request, and I will add you to the email group. Best wishes, Andrew Schein
Showing posts with label Sefirat ha-omer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sefirat ha-omer. Show all posts
Monday, April 24, 2017
Monday, April 15, 2013
Vayikra 23:9-22 (Emor) – On the morrow: When is the korban omer brought?
Vayikra 23:9-14 records the law to bring the omer sacrifice on the morrow of the Shabbat. Afterwards, 23:15-22 records that the fiftieth day from the bringing of the omer was a mikrei kodesh (the holiday of Shavuot) and other special sacrifices, two loaves, were to be brought. One question that concerns both sections in when is the omer sacrifice offered? When is "the morrow of the Shabbat?" Which Shabbat?
There are at least six different approaches to understanding the term "morrow of the Shabbat." One, the traditional view is that it means the day after the first day of chag ha-matzot, the 16th of Nisan. (In the Diaspora, this is the second day of Yom Tov, and in Israel the first day of chol ha-moed of Pesach.)
Bibliography:
Henshke, David, 1992, The history of the counting of the omer, in Rabbi Mordechai Breuer Festchrift, edited by Moshe Bar-Asher, Jerusalem: Academon Press, pp. 417-448.
Hoffmann, David (1843-1921), 1953, Leviticus, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
Leibowitz, Nehama (1905-1997), 1980, Studies in Vayikra, translated by Aryeh Newman, Jerusalem: The World Zionist Organization.
There are at least six different approaches to understanding the term "morrow of the Shabbat." One, the traditional view is that it means the day after the first day of chag ha-matzot, the 16th of Nisan. (In the Diaspora, this is the second day of Yom Tov, and in Israel the first day of chol ha-moed of Pesach.)
Two, the view of the Karaites, and possibly of the Boethusians, a sect in the time of the second Bet ha-Mikdash, that it means, the Sunday after the Saturday within chag ha-matzot. (If Pesach started on Saturday, then the Karaites, held the day was the second day of Pesach just like the traditional view.)
Three, Shmuel Sprecher (1993) has suggested that the Boethusians held that the omer was brought on the second day of chag ha-matzot like the traditional view, but the count started on the Sunday after the Saturday within chag ha-matzot.
Four, the omer was brought on the day after the last day of chag ha-matzot. (Apparently, this was the practice of Ethiopian Jews. David Hoffmann, 1953, vol.2, pp. 124-127, quotes several scholars who hold this view and claims that this is the view of the Targum Peshitta. However, Yeshayahu Maori (1995, pp. 176-178) claims the Peshitta follows the traditional view.)
Five, the book of Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and possibly the view of the Boethusians, the omer was to be brought on the first Sunday after chag ha-matzot.
Six, the omer was brought on the first Sunday after the first reaping with no connection with chag ha-matzot.
The Talmud (Menahot 65a-66a) quotes many arguments for the traditional approach, but perhaps the most convincing proof is not mentioned in the Talmud. Yehoshua 5:11 records that when the Jewish people first came into the land of Israel even before the battle of Jericho, they ate bread and wheat on the day after the pesach sacrifice (see Rambam, Laws of regular and extra sacrifices, 7:8-10, and Hoffmann, pp. 134-136). The proof is that Vayikra 23:14 only allows one to eat the new grains after the omer sacrifice was brought, and in Yehoshua 5:11 it appears that the people ate the new wheat on the day after the pesach sacrifice, which means the omer was brought on the day after the pesach sacrifice.
This proof has several problems and it is telling that the Talmud did not mention it. One, according to Yehoshua 5:10, the pesach sacrifice was brought on the 14th of Nisan, which means the day after the sacrifice was the 15th of Nisan, and this does not match up with the traditional view, which is that the omer is to be brought on the 16th of Nisan. Two, Yehoshua 5:11,12 does not state that the people ate new grains, rather that they ate grains from the land of Israel and not the mahn. Three, the book of Yehoshua makes no mention that the people celebrated chag ha-matzot that year, and hence maybe that year was a special circumstance since there was only the pesach sacrifice. (On the other hand, if one claims that pesach also means chag ha-matzot, as is the common language today, then the day after pesach could be the day after chag ha-matzot, which is the fourth view.) Four, the case is unique for another reason. Usually people have old grain stored up, but presumably when the people just came to the land of Israel, they had no supplies of grain, and hence maybe once the mahn stopped, they had to be allowed to eat even new grain immediately.
The order of the festivals in chapter 23 strongly implies that the omer offering was to be brought after chag ha-matzot. In the chapter, the Torah first records the festival of chag ha-matzot and then the bringing of the omer sacrifice.
In addition, in chapter 23, each festival is separated in the chapter by the verse, "G-d spoke to Moshe." Yet, with regard to the holiday of Shavuot there appears to be anomaly since this phrase does not appear by 23:15, which apparently begins the discussion of the laws of the day of Shavuot. N. Leibowitz (1980, pp. 218-223) quotes the Talmud and the Hinukh that there is no separating verse for Shavuot since Shavuot is a continuation of the holiday of Matzot since the goal of the exodus from Egypt was to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai. Yet, chapter 23 never alludes to the fact that the Torah was given on Shavuot. Furthermore, the phrase “G-d spoke to Moshe” appears between the laws of Pesach and the laws of Shavuot as it occurs prior to the verses that record the law of bringing the omer, 23:9.
The phrase "G-d spoke to Moshe" in 23:9 signals the beginning of the holiday of Shavuot. The holiday is a fifty day holiday, and only the last day is a mikra kodesh that one is forbidden to work, 23:21. The holiday starts with the bringing of the omer and after seven full weeks, it ended with the bringing of the two loaves. Shemot 23:16 refers to the holiday as one of reaping, and this reaping is referred to in Vayikra 23:10 by the bringing of the omer, which is the beginning of the festival. This idea accords with the name Shavuot a feast of weeks, as the holiday was for seven weeks. Similarly, Bemidbar 28:26 and Devarim 16:9-12 when discussing the festival of Shavuot refers to weeks prior to the day of Shavuot, again because the holiday is for fifty days. This understanding nullifies the first three explanations of the term "on the morrow" since it cannot be that the fifty day holiday of Shavuot started in the middle of the holiday of matzot.
This same idea that the fifty days of Shavuot begins after chag ha-matzot is evident in Devarim 16. Devarim 16:1-8 records laws of the holiday of Pesach and of the chag ha-matzot, and it refers to the second mikrei kodesh of chag ha-matzot. Afterwards, Devarim 16:9 records that one is to start counting the seven weeks. The implication is that the counting is only to begin after the chag ha-matzot ended.
I think the fourth view is correct that the phrase "on the morrow" refers to the day after chag ha-matzot. In the end of 23:15, the word shabbat means week, seven weeks. This suggests that the word shabbat in the beginning of 23:15 also means week, the morrow after the week. What week is being referred to? The week of chag ha-matzot. 23:11 then means that the omer is to be brought on the day after the end of the week of chag ha-matzot. Finally, the word shabbat in 23:16 also means week, "Until the morrow after the seventh week, you shall count fifty days."
Why did the Torah not then clearly state that that the omer is to be brought on the day after chag ha-matzot? One possibility is that really the word shabbat means a period of time when one is to rest, and while usually this is Saturday, really it can be a longer period of time, like a week. With this idea, the word shabbat does not necessarily refer to Saturday, and can just as equally refer to a festival. A second possibility is that the Torah did not want to connect Shavuot with chag ha-matzot. Chag ha-matzot is a historical holiday, while Shavuot is an agricultural holiday. If the bringing of the omer was recorded in reference to chag ha-matzot, this might have caused one to think that chag ha-matzot was an agricultural holiday, but really the holiday is only to recognize that G-d took the Jewish people out of Egypt. A third possibility is that the use of the word shabbat in conjunction with mimaharet is to re-enforce the sabbatical theme of the shabbatot of the weeks.
My guess is that the traditional approach to understanding the term "on the morrow" as being the 16th of Nisan is because Chazal deliberately moved up the counting of the omer six days in order to make the holiday of Shavuot closer to the day of the Decalogue. In the Torah there is no connection at all between Shavuot and the Decalogue, but Chazal wanted to make this connection. (This connection occurs in the book of Jubilees.) If the counting of the omer starts after chag ha-matzot, the 22nd of Nisan, then Shavuot would be celebrated on the 12th of Sivan, but if the counting of the omer starts on the 16th of Nisan, then Shavuot is on the sixth day of Sivan.
It is not obvious in the Torah on which day the Decalogue occurred. Shemot 19:1 records that the Jewish people came to Mount Sinai on the third month (Sivan) and the verse seems to be referring to the first day of the month. Afterwards, there are several conversations between G-d and Moshe and it is not clear when they took place, on one day or spread out over several days. Shemot 19:10 records the next explicit reference to time that the Decalogue would take place three days later, which at a minimum was the third day of Sivan. However, in the Talmud (Shabbat 86b) the Rabbis maintained that each conversation between G-d and Moshe occurred on a separate day, and then the Decalogue was either on the sixth or seventh of Sivan.
The Tosefta, Erechin 1:4, and Talmud Rosh Hashanah 6b, note that in the time when the calendar was determined by sight, the holiday of Shavuot was celebrated on either the fifth, sixth or seventh of Sivan depending on the length of the months of Nisan and Iyar, see Henshke, 1992, pp. 441-444. This means that even if the omer was offered on the 16th of Nisan, still Shavuot was sometimes celebrated near the date of the Decalogue but not always on the day of the Decalogue,
My guess is that Chazal moved up the omer offering to have Shavuot be close to the day when they thought that the Decalogue occurred. They could not get it exact since the lengths of the months were not exact, but they could make the two events close. When the calendar and the months were fixed, then they could get them to be exact, but this also took to interpreting Shemot 19 to mean that the Decalogue was on the sixth of Sivan. The jump of moving the counting of the omer a week earlier was not so ground-breaking since according the fourth view, the day of the morrow was the day after the last day of chag ha-matzot, while now it would be the day after the first day of chag ha–matzot. Finally, according to the Mishnah (Rosh Hashanah 2:10) and the Talmud (Pesachim 117b and Berakhot 49a), Chazal have the power to decide when a holiday is celebrated, and hence they can decide to celebrate Shavuot a week earlier on the sixth of Sivan instead of the twelfth of Sivan.
The Talmud (Menahot 65a-66a) quotes many arguments for the traditional approach, but perhaps the most convincing proof is not mentioned in the Talmud. Yehoshua 5:11 records that when the Jewish people first came into the land of Israel even before the battle of Jericho, they ate bread and wheat on the day after the pesach sacrifice (see Rambam, Laws of regular and extra sacrifices, 7:8-10, and Hoffmann, pp. 134-136). The proof is that Vayikra 23:14 only allows one to eat the new grains after the omer sacrifice was brought, and in Yehoshua 5:11 it appears that the people ate the new wheat on the day after the pesach sacrifice, which means the omer was brought on the day after the pesach sacrifice.
This proof has several problems and it is telling that the Talmud did not mention it. One, according to Yehoshua 5:10, the pesach sacrifice was brought on the 14th of Nisan, which means the day after the sacrifice was the 15th of Nisan, and this does not match up with the traditional view, which is that the omer is to be brought on the 16th of Nisan. Two, Yehoshua 5:11,12 does not state that the people ate new grains, rather that they ate grains from the land of Israel and not the mahn. Three, the book of Yehoshua makes no mention that the people celebrated chag ha-matzot that year, and hence maybe that year was a special circumstance since there was only the pesach sacrifice. (On the other hand, if one claims that pesach also means chag ha-matzot, as is the common language today, then the day after pesach could be the day after chag ha-matzot, which is the fourth view.) Four, the case is unique for another reason. Usually people have old grain stored up, but presumably when the people just came to the land of Israel, they had no supplies of grain, and hence maybe once the mahn stopped, they had to be allowed to eat even new grain immediately.
The order of the festivals in chapter 23 strongly implies that the omer offering was to be brought after chag ha-matzot. In the chapter, the Torah first records the festival of chag ha-matzot and then the bringing of the omer sacrifice.
In addition, in chapter 23, each festival is separated in the chapter by the verse, "G-d spoke to Moshe." Yet, with regard to the holiday of Shavuot there appears to be anomaly since this phrase does not appear by 23:15, which apparently begins the discussion of the laws of the day of Shavuot. N. Leibowitz (1980, pp. 218-223) quotes the Talmud and the Hinukh that there is no separating verse for Shavuot since Shavuot is a continuation of the holiday of Matzot since the goal of the exodus from Egypt was to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai. Yet, chapter 23 never alludes to the fact that the Torah was given on Shavuot. Furthermore, the phrase “G-d spoke to Moshe” appears between the laws of Pesach and the laws of Shavuot as it occurs prior to the verses that record the law of bringing the omer, 23:9.
The phrase "G-d spoke to Moshe" in 23:9 signals the beginning of the holiday of Shavuot. The holiday is a fifty day holiday, and only the last day is a mikra kodesh that one is forbidden to work, 23:21. The holiday starts with the bringing of the omer and after seven full weeks, it ended with the bringing of the two loaves. Shemot 23:16 refers to the holiday as one of reaping, and this reaping is referred to in Vayikra 23:10 by the bringing of the omer, which is the beginning of the festival. This idea accords with the name Shavuot a feast of weeks, as the holiday was for seven weeks. Similarly, Bemidbar 28:26 and Devarim 16:9-12 when discussing the festival of Shavuot refers to weeks prior to the day of Shavuot, again because the holiday is for fifty days. This understanding nullifies the first three explanations of the term "on the morrow" since it cannot be that the fifty day holiday of Shavuot started in the middle of the holiday of matzot.
This same idea that the fifty days of Shavuot begins after chag ha-matzot is evident in Devarim 16. Devarim 16:1-8 records laws of the holiday of Pesach and of the chag ha-matzot, and it refers to the second mikrei kodesh of chag ha-matzot. Afterwards, Devarim 16:9 records that one is to start counting the seven weeks. The implication is that the counting is only to begin after the chag ha-matzot ended.
I think the fourth view is correct that the phrase "on the morrow" refers to the day after chag ha-matzot. In the end of 23:15, the word shabbat means week, seven weeks. This suggests that the word shabbat in the beginning of 23:15 also means week, the morrow after the week. What week is being referred to? The week of chag ha-matzot. 23:11 then means that the omer is to be brought on the day after the end of the week of chag ha-matzot. Finally, the word shabbat in 23:16 also means week, "Until the morrow after the seventh week, you shall count fifty days."
Why did the Torah not then clearly state that that the omer is to be brought on the day after chag ha-matzot? One possibility is that really the word shabbat means a period of time when one is to rest, and while usually this is Saturday, really it can be a longer period of time, like a week. With this idea, the word shabbat does not necessarily refer to Saturday, and can just as equally refer to a festival. A second possibility is that the Torah did not want to connect Shavuot with chag ha-matzot. Chag ha-matzot is a historical holiday, while Shavuot is an agricultural holiday. If the bringing of the omer was recorded in reference to chag ha-matzot, this might have caused one to think that chag ha-matzot was an agricultural holiday, but really the holiday is only to recognize that G-d took the Jewish people out of Egypt. A third possibility is that the use of the word shabbat in conjunction with mimaharet is to re-enforce the sabbatical theme of the shabbatot of the weeks.
My guess is that the traditional approach to understanding the term "on the morrow" as being the 16th of Nisan is because Chazal deliberately moved up the counting of the omer six days in order to make the holiday of Shavuot closer to the day of the Decalogue. In the Torah there is no connection at all between Shavuot and the Decalogue, but Chazal wanted to make this connection. (This connection occurs in the book of Jubilees.) If the counting of the omer starts after chag ha-matzot, the 22nd of Nisan, then Shavuot would be celebrated on the 12th of Sivan, but if the counting of the omer starts on the 16th of Nisan, then Shavuot is on the sixth day of Sivan.
It is not obvious in the Torah on which day the Decalogue occurred. Shemot 19:1 records that the Jewish people came to Mount Sinai on the third month (Sivan) and the verse seems to be referring to the first day of the month. Afterwards, there are several conversations between G-d and Moshe and it is not clear when they took place, on one day or spread out over several days. Shemot 19:10 records the next explicit reference to time that the Decalogue would take place three days later, which at a minimum was the third day of Sivan. However, in the Talmud (Shabbat 86b) the Rabbis maintained that each conversation between G-d and Moshe occurred on a separate day, and then the Decalogue was either on the sixth or seventh of Sivan.
The Tosefta, Erechin 1:4, and Talmud Rosh Hashanah 6b, note that in the time when the calendar was determined by sight, the holiday of Shavuot was celebrated on either the fifth, sixth or seventh of Sivan depending on the length of the months of Nisan and Iyar, see Henshke, 1992, pp. 441-444. This means that even if the omer was offered on the 16th of Nisan, still Shavuot was sometimes celebrated near the date of the Decalogue but not always on the day of the Decalogue,
My guess is that Chazal moved up the omer offering to have Shavuot be close to the day when they thought that the Decalogue occurred. They could not get it exact since the lengths of the months were not exact, but they could make the two events close. When the calendar and the months were fixed, then they could get them to be exact, but this also took to interpreting Shemot 19 to mean that the Decalogue was on the sixth of Sivan. The jump of moving the counting of the omer a week earlier was not so ground-breaking since according the fourth view, the day of the morrow was the day after the last day of chag ha-matzot, while now it would be the day after the first day of chag ha–matzot. Finally, according to the Mishnah (Rosh Hashanah 2:10) and the Talmud (Pesachim 117b and Berakhot 49a), Chazal have the power to decide when a holiday is celebrated, and hence they can decide to celebrate Shavuot a week earlier on the sixth of Sivan instead of the twelfth of Sivan.
Henshke, David, 1992, The history of the counting of the omer, in Rabbi Mordechai Breuer Festchrift, edited by Moshe Bar-Asher, Jerusalem: Academon Press, pp. 417-448.
Hoffmann, David (1843-1921), 1953, Leviticus, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
Leibowitz, Nehama (1905-1997), 1980, Studies in Vayikra, translated by Aryeh Newman, Jerusalem: The World Zionist Organization.
Maori, Yeshayahu, 1995, The Peshitta version of the Pentateuch and early Jewish exegesis, Jerusalem: Magnes Press.
Sprecher, Shmuel, 1993, "The offering of the omer and counting of the omer: The view of the Boethusians," Sidra, 9, pp. 105-116.
Sprecher, Shmuel, 1993, "The offering of the omer and counting of the omer: The view of the Boethusians," Sidra, 9, pp. 105-116.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Lag Ba-omer - You do the math
Lag Ba-omer, literally the 33rd day in the counting of the omer or the 18th of Iyar, is a mysterious day since there is no obvious explanation for why the day is special.
The traditional reason for the holiday is that it is claimed that this is the day when the students of R. Akiva stopped dying. The Talmud (Yevamot 62b) records that 12,000 pairs of students of R. Akiva died at one time since they did not respect each other, and the Talmud explains that they died from Pesach to Shavuot.
The Talmud makes no mention of Lag Ba-omer, and also in the time of the Geonim (9th, 10th centuries) there is no mention of Lag Ba-omer. Interestingly in the 9th century there is a reference to the 18th of Iyar in a piyyut which refers to the day as the fast of Yehoshua due to the battle of Ai, Joshua 7:6 (quoted in Levinsky, 1955, vol. 6, p.357), but again there is no mention of Lag Ba-omer. Also, the Rambam does not mention Lag Ba-omer, and in Yemen, the Dardaim, who did not accept the Zohar, treated Lag Ba-omer as a regular day (Lavinsky, p.363).
In Provence, France in the Middle Ages, we have the first references to Lag Ba-omer. R. Avraham Hayarchi (1155, Provence, to 1215 Toledo, Spain) writes in the Sefer Hamanhig (quoted in Zevin, 1956, p. 299) that in France and Provence the custom was to marry from Lag Ba-omer onwards. To support this practice, he writes that he heard from R. Zecharya Halevi (1125 Gerona to 1186, Provence) that a text was found in Spain which records that R. Akiva's students died until "peros" Shavout. R. Hayarchi writes that peros means half, and as the word half appears with regard to the law of learning the laws of Pesach 30 days before Pesach, then peros means half of 30 or 15. Thus, he writes that Lag Ba-omer is 15 days prior to Shavout.
This explanation of peros is very difficult since even if peros means half why should the word be related to the 30 days before Pesach and mean 15? In addition, Lag Ba-omer is not 15 days before Shavout but 17 days. In fact, because of this reason of peros, the Shulchan Arukh (1488-1575, Orah Chayyim 493:2) writes that the period of mourning ends during the 34th day of the omer, which is 15 days less than 49. It seems that the Shulchan Arukh did not consider Lag Ba-omer a special day. Finally, Daniel Sperber (1995a, pp.237-239) quotes Saul Liebermann that the word peros means the day before, and then the phrase peros Shavout means that the students of R. Akiva died until the day before Shavout, which corresponds to the Talmud.
The Meiri (1249-1306, commentary on Yevamot 62a) who was also from Provence writes that there exists a tradition from the Geonim that the students of R. Akiva stopped dying on Lag Ba-omer. Most likely he knew the drasha of peros but because it was so weak he just relied on saying that a tradition existed without quoting the drasha. He also wrote more that due to this tradition people do not fast on Lag Ba-omer, which implies that he knew of the initial custom to fast on Lag Ba-omer.
This idea from Provence that Lag Ba-omer is because the students of R. Akiva stopped dying on the day is difficult independent of the problems with the drasha of peros. First, it contradicts our Gemara, and secondly, as the Prei Hadesh (1659-1695, 493:2) asks what is the happiness that the students stopped dying as all the students were dead?
The Maharil (1365-1437, Germany, Sefer Maharil, 1989, p.156) writes that Lag Ba-omer was a day of happiness, and he suggested a new reason for the day. He follows the Talmud that the students of R. Akiva died throughout the entire period, but he claims that they only died on days when tachanun was recited. There were 17 days when tachanun was not said (Pesach, 7, Shabbat, 7, and Rosh Hodesh, 3) between Pesach and Shavout, and hence the students died for 32 days. With this rationale Lag Ba-omer is celebrated not because the students of R. Akiva did not die on the day but as a sign that they died only for 32 days. Thus, the Maharil ingenuously combined the Talmud that the students of R. Akiva died throughout the entire period, the idea in Provence that they died for only thirty three days, and Lag ba-omer. However, this is also a difficult approach. How did he know that the students of R. Akiva died only when tachanun was said? In addition, there are other days when tachanun is not said, the month of Nisan, Pesach Sheni, and the three days before Shavout, and also one of the days of Shabbat was on Pesach, see Sperber, 1990, p.104 and 1995a, pp.239-241. Again, it seems that Lag Ba-omer was an accepted holiday and the derivation is a justification for the holiday.
A modern explanation of the deaths of R. Akiva's students is that really these students were soldiers fighting in Bar Kokhba's rebellion (132-135). Some "proofs" for this idea is that we know that R. Akiva was an ardent supporter of Bar Kokhba and the reference to pair of students in the Talmud could mean small army (guerrilla?) units. This rationale could also explain the custom of going out with bows and arrows on Lag Ba-omer though more likely this custom developed in the Middle Ages under the influence of Christians who had archery contests in May.
Based on the connection between R. Akiva's students and Bar Kokhba, Levinsky (1955, p.342) suggests that Lag Ba-omer was the day when Bar Kokhba had one of his early victories. According to this idea, from the time of this victory onwards, there was a custom in Israel to celebrate Lag Ba-omer, and from Israel this custom spread to Provence and Germany.
Zechariah Goren (1992) argues that this connection of Bar Kokhba to Lag Ba-omer is due to Zionist ideology. The idea is that Bar Kokhba, the fighter, was viewed as a prototype of the new Jew that the Zionist movement wanted to create, and thus the Zionist movement wanted to stress the connections of the people to Bar Kokhba. However, Goren rejects the connection between Bar Kokhba and Lag Ba-omer for several reasons. One, if the holiday is celebrated due to a victory, then the holiday should be known as the 18th of Iyar since the victory has no connection with the omer. Goren notes that some people have claimed that the reference to the omer was a subterfuge to fool the Romans, but he doubts such a possibility. Also, as mentioned above, in the 9th century there is a piyyut that refers to the 18th of Iyar as the fast of Yehoshua and Goren points out that it seems that the author of the piyyut had no knowledge of any special events relating to Bar Kokhba or R. Akiva's students on Lag Ba-omer since no mention of these events are included in the piyyut. Furthermore, if Lag Ba-omer was from the second century, why then was it not mentioned until the Middle Ages? I can accept that the deaths of the students of R. Akiva relate to the Bar Kokhba revolt, but I doubt that people would celebrate any victory of Bar Kokhba in light of the fact that his rebellion led to disaster when he eventually lost to the Romans.
The second popular rationale for celebrating Lag Ba-omer is that it is claimed that this was the day that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died. However, the Hatam Sofer (quoted in Zevin, p.301) points out that the deaths of the righteous are reasons for fast days and not celebrations. Thus, there was (is?) a custom to fast on the day that Moshe died, so why would we celebrate the day that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died?
Avraham Yaari (1962) has a fascinating article where he traces the source of the celebrations at R. Shimon Bar Yochai's grave in Meron on Lag Ba-omer. He finds that there are no sources that refer to this celebration before the 16th century, though people did refer to the graves of Hillel and Shamai that were in the same area, and celebrations on the 14th of Iyar by those graves. The initial custom of the Kabbalists of Sefat in the 16th century was to go to the grave of R. Shimon Bar Yochai 10 days before Shavout and 10 days before Rosh Hashanah and not on Lag Ba-omer. Yaari claims that the source for the celebration in Meron on the Lag Ba-omer was a custom in Yerushalayim to go to the grave of Shmuel ha-Navi on the 28th of Iyar, and when this was prohibited by the Ottoman authorities, the people started going to Meron on the Lag Ba-omer.
Accordingly, there is no intrinsic connection between R. Shimon Bar Yochai and Lag Ba-omer. Furthermore, the claim that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died on Lag Ba-omer is first attributed to the Ari (16th century) but Yaari points out that the one source that makes this claim is most likely a corrupted text. Yaari notes that this point had already been made by the Hida (R. Hayyim Jospeh David Azulai, 1724-1806), and thus the Hida suggests instead that Lag Ba-omer was the day when R. Akiva started to teach his new students. Yet, this rationale just returns us to the idea that Lag Ba-omer was the day when R. Akiva's students stopped dying, which as mentioned above is difficult to accept.
From this review we see that in the Middle Ages, Lag Ba-omer had become a special day, and that the "holiday" seems to have begun in Provence. Maybe there is another possibility for the holiday based on the mourning customs during sefirat ha-omer in the time of the Geonim. Otzar Ha-Geonim (7:141, on Yevamot 62b) quotes two responses that in the time of the Geonim, there was a custom not to marry and not to work from dusk to dawn throughout entire period of the sefirat ha-omer due to the deaths of the students of Rabbi Akiva.
This custom not to marry was for quite a long time, and my guess is that in Provence there developed a "break-away" custom to shorten the period of mourning. Why starting on Lag Ba-omer could people marry? It is quite striking that Lag Ba-omer is two thirds of 49 (32.7), and thus the day signifies that two thirds of the sefirat ha-omer period has passed. Thus, as a justification for shortening the mourning period, in Provence they decided that it was enough to keep two thirds of the mourning of sefirat ha-omer. This would mean that people would only have to wait at most 33 days to marry instead of 49 days. After the restrictions ended, the following day would be a happy day, since people could then marry on that day. Most likely, this idea of a majority was not accepted by all and hence the drasha of peros was devised to support their new custom. Finally, this idea connects the holiday to sefirat ha-omer, and not to the 18th of Iyar, which would explain why the day is referred to as the 33rd day of the omer.
The traditional reason for the holiday is that it is claimed that this is the day when the students of R. Akiva stopped dying. The Talmud (Yevamot 62b) records that 12,000 pairs of students of R. Akiva died at one time since they did not respect each other, and the Talmud explains that they died from Pesach to Shavuot.
The Talmud makes no mention of Lag Ba-omer, and also in the time of the Geonim (9th, 10th centuries) there is no mention of Lag Ba-omer. Interestingly in the 9th century there is a reference to the 18th of Iyar in a piyyut which refers to the day as the fast of Yehoshua due to the battle of Ai, Joshua 7:6 (quoted in Levinsky, 1955, vol. 6, p.357), but again there is no mention of Lag Ba-omer. Also, the Rambam does not mention Lag Ba-omer, and in Yemen, the Dardaim, who did not accept the Zohar, treated Lag Ba-omer as a regular day (Lavinsky, p.363).
In Provence, France in the Middle Ages, we have the first references to Lag Ba-omer. R. Avraham Hayarchi (1155, Provence, to 1215 Toledo, Spain) writes in the Sefer Hamanhig (quoted in Zevin, 1956, p. 299) that in France and Provence the custom was to marry from Lag Ba-omer onwards. To support this practice, he writes that he heard from R. Zecharya Halevi (1125 Gerona to 1186, Provence) that a text was found in Spain which records that R. Akiva's students died until "peros" Shavout. R. Hayarchi writes that peros means half, and as the word half appears with regard to the law of learning the laws of Pesach 30 days before Pesach, then peros means half of 30 or 15. Thus, he writes that Lag Ba-omer is 15 days prior to Shavout.
This explanation of peros is very difficult since even if peros means half why should the word be related to the 30 days before Pesach and mean 15? In addition, Lag Ba-omer is not 15 days before Shavout but 17 days. In fact, because of this reason of peros, the Shulchan Arukh (1488-1575, Orah Chayyim 493:2) writes that the period of mourning ends during the 34th day of the omer, which is 15 days less than 49. It seems that the Shulchan Arukh did not consider Lag Ba-omer a special day. Finally, Daniel Sperber (1995a, pp.237-239) quotes Saul Liebermann that the word peros means the day before, and then the phrase peros Shavout means that the students of R. Akiva died until the day before Shavout, which corresponds to the Talmud.
The Meiri (1249-1306, commentary on Yevamot 62a) who was also from Provence writes that there exists a tradition from the Geonim that the students of R. Akiva stopped dying on Lag Ba-omer. Most likely he knew the drasha of peros but because it was so weak he just relied on saying that a tradition existed without quoting the drasha. He also wrote more that due to this tradition people do not fast on Lag Ba-omer, which implies that he knew of the initial custom to fast on Lag Ba-omer.
This idea from Provence that Lag Ba-omer is because the students of R. Akiva stopped dying on the day is difficult independent of the problems with the drasha of peros. First, it contradicts our Gemara, and secondly, as the Prei Hadesh (1659-1695, 493:2) asks what is the happiness that the students stopped dying as all the students were dead?
The Maharil (1365-1437, Germany, Sefer Maharil, 1989, p.156) writes that Lag Ba-omer was a day of happiness, and he suggested a new reason for the day. He follows the Talmud that the students of R. Akiva died throughout the entire period, but he claims that they only died on days when tachanun was recited. There were 17 days when tachanun was not said (Pesach, 7, Shabbat, 7, and Rosh Hodesh, 3) between Pesach and Shavout, and hence the students died for 32 days. With this rationale Lag Ba-omer is celebrated not because the students of R. Akiva did not die on the day but as a sign that they died only for 32 days. Thus, the Maharil ingenuously combined the Talmud that the students of R. Akiva died throughout the entire period, the idea in Provence that they died for only thirty three days, and Lag ba-omer. However, this is also a difficult approach. How did he know that the students of R. Akiva died only when tachanun was said? In addition, there are other days when tachanun is not said, the month of Nisan, Pesach Sheni, and the three days before Shavout, and also one of the days of Shabbat was on Pesach, see Sperber, 1990, p.104 and 1995a, pp.239-241. Again, it seems that Lag Ba-omer was an accepted holiday and the derivation is a justification for the holiday.
A modern explanation of the deaths of R. Akiva's students is that really these students were soldiers fighting in Bar Kokhba's rebellion (132-135). Some "proofs" for this idea is that we know that R. Akiva was an ardent supporter of Bar Kokhba and the reference to pair of students in the Talmud could mean small army (guerrilla?) units. This rationale could also explain the custom of going out with bows and arrows on Lag Ba-omer though more likely this custom developed in the Middle Ages under the influence of Christians who had archery contests in May.
Based on the connection between R. Akiva's students and Bar Kokhba, Levinsky (1955, p.342) suggests that Lag Ba-omer was the day when Bar Kokhba had one of his early victories. According to this idea, from the time of this victory onwards, there was a custom in Israel to celebrate Lag Ba-omer, and from Israel this custom spread to Provence and Germany.
Zechariah Goren (1992) argues that this connection of Bar Kokhba to Lag Ba-omer is due to Zionist ideology. The idea is that Bar Kokhba, the fighter, was viewed as a prototype of the new Jew that the Zionist movement wanted to create, and thus the Zionist movement wanted to stress the connections of the people to Bar Kokhba. However, Goren rejects the connection between Bar Kokhba and Lag Ba-omer for several reasons. One, if the holiday is celebrated due to a victory, then the holiday should be known as the 18th of Iyar since the victory has no connection with the omer. Goren notes that some people have claimed that the reference to the omer was a subterfuge to fool the Romans, but he doubts such a possibility. Also, as mentioned above, in the 9th century there is a piyyut that refers to the 18th of Iyar as the fast of Yehoshua and Goren points out that it seems that the author of the piyyut had no knowledge of any special events relating to Bar Kokhba or R. Akiva's students on Lag Ba-omer since no mention of these events are included in the piyyut. Furthermore, if Lag Ba-omer was from the second century, why then was it not mentioned until the Middle Ages? I can accept that the deaths of the students of R. Akiva relate to the Bar Kokhba revolt, but I doubt that people would celebrate any victory of Bar Kokhba in light of the fact that his rebellion led to disaster when he eventually lost to the Romans.
The second popular rationale for celebrating Lag Ba-omer is that it is claimed that this was the day that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died. However, the Hatam Sofer (quoted in Zevin, p.301) points out that the deaths of the righteous are reasons for fast days and not celebrations. Thus, there was (is?) a custom to fast on the day that Moshe died, so why would we celebrate the day that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died?
Avraham Yaari (1962) has a fascinating article where he traces the source of the celebrations at R. Shimon Bar Yochai's grave in Meron on Lag Ba-omer. He finds that there are no sources that refer to this celebration before the 16th century, though people did refer to the graves of Hillel and Shamai that were in the same area, and celebrations on the 14th of Iyar by those graves. The initial custom of the Kabbalists of Sefat in the 16th century was to go to the grave of R. Shimon Bar Yochai 10 days before Shavout and 10 days before Rosh Hashanah and not on Lag Ba-omer. Yaari claims that the source for the celebration in Meron on the Lag Ba-omer was a custom in Yerushalayim to go to the grave of Shmuel ha-Navi on the 28th of Iyar, and when this was prohibited by the Ottoman authorities, the people started going to Meron on the Lag Ba-omer.
Accordingly, there is no intrinsic connection between R. Shimon Bar Yochai and Lag Ba-omer. Furthermore, the claim that R. Shimon Bar Yochai died on Lag Ba-omer is first attributed to the Ari (16th century) but Yaari points out that the one source that makes this claim is most likely a corrupted text. Yaari notes that this point had already been made by the Hida (R. Hayyim Jospeh David Azulai, 1724-1806), and thus the Hida suggests instead that Lag Ba-omer was the day when R. Akiva started to teach his new students. Yet, this rationale just returns us to the idea that Lag Ba-omer was the day when R. Akiva's students stopped dying, which as mentioned above is difficult to accept.
From this review we see that in the Middle Ages, Lag Ba-omer had become a special day, and that the "holiday" seems to have begun in Provence. Maybe there is another possibility for the holiday based on the mourning customs during sefirat ha-omer in the time of the Geonim. Otzar Ha-Geonim (7:141, on Yevamot 62b) quotes two responses that in the time of the Geonim, there was a custom not to marry and not to work from dusk to dawn throughout entire period of the sefirat ha-omer due to the deaths of the students of Rabbi Akiva.
This custom not to marry was for quite a long time, and my guess is that in Provence there developed a "break-away" custom to shorten the period of mourning. Why starting on Lag Ba-omer could people marry? It is quite striking that Lag Ba-omer is two thirds of 49 (32.7), and thus the day signifies that two thirds of the sefirat ha-omer period has passed. Thus, as a justification for shortening the mourning period, in Provence they decided that it was enough to keep two thirds of the mourning of sefirat ha-omer. This would mean that people would only have to wait at most 33 days to marry instead of 49 days. After the restrictions ended, the following day would be a happy day, since people could then marry on that day. Most likely, this idea of a majority was not accepted by all and hence the drasha of peros was devised to support their new custom. Finally, this idea connects the holiday to sefirat ha-omer, and not to the 18th of Iyar, which would explain why the day is referred to as the 33rd day of the omer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)