A new Sefer- THE Great Z’manim Debate
Et ḥata’ai hayom ani azkir. It is the day after Yom Kippur, and I already admitted my sin to the person I unwittingly offended. Now for the rest of the story.
Two weeks ago, Rabbi Luban alerted me to a new sefer on zemanim – THE GREAT Z’MANIM DEBATE – by Rabbi Ahron Notis. The announcement by Mosaica press mentioned endorsements by R. Shlomo Miller and R. Yisroel Reisman. Readers of my Ḥakirah articles about errors in the halakhic literature might remember that one of the endorsers was referenced in the article. Also advertised was the sefer’s ability to bring a scientific perspective to halakha. Those endorsements coupled with that specific stated purpose of the sefer seemed contradictory. Ad khan ha’ḥet.
The sefer fundamental conclusions strongly opposing
- fixed time intervals like 72 minutes and
- reliance le’kulah on Rabbeinu Tam
are two important points that I strongly endorse. Surprisingly, the author told me that the two mentioned endorsers are at least re-evaluating their positions. Regardless of where they are in that process, that they were more than willing to endorse a well-organized and argued sefer despite their (previous) views stands to their credit.
In addition to explaining modern science, the sefer does an excellent job explaining how earlier generations from the Talmud through the times of Rishonim and early Aḥronim envisioned the universe. As I noted many times, regardless of assumed scientific theory, careful observation, both ancient and current, deserves respect.
There are several areas where I disagree with the sefer’s conclusions. Two that should be mentioned relate to the earliest time for tzait ha’kokhavim and the opinion on sha’ot ha’yom of the Magen Avraham. With respect to the former, I disagree both with the approach and the conclusion and am more maḥmir. On the latter, my sefer in progress on Sha’ot Ha’yom presents a variety of different approaches to the Magen Avraham. A current version, very soon to be updated is on this website. Nonetheless, the sefer provides valuable background and insights.
” A current version, very soon to be updated is on this website. Nonetheless, the sefer provides valuable background and insights.”
I very much look forward to this update. Is it due soon?
Sholom Dr. Gewirtz.
I see that I am not alone in regards to Rabbi Notis sefer. I believe that despite R. Notis observations, the Torah – halacha was given to the average observer with good vision not to astronomers. When I discussed this with R. Notis a few months back he agreed that 17 minutes in EY is a bit early but that is the shiur the Gemara provides so we rely on that shiur. R. Notis further needs to supports the 22.5 minute mil as one will not see stars based on the 18 minute mil. In my study of the sugya as well as the poskim the 18 minute mil seems correct. My main issue with R. Notis’ conclusion is that he supports ending a fast day at a -4.5 SDA. I have not found a source to assume the Gemara in Shabbos 34b refers to the spring rather than the fall. Are we to assume that since the Pesachim 93b refers to Nissan, the same is true for Shabbos 34b? As you point out based on Prof. Levi in the fall these stars aren’t visible until almost 5 minutes later. found your novel interpretation of Shmuel’s one star day etc.. and the 3\4 of a mil as an upward shiur maximum (Torah Umada 2021) very interesting.
Thank you rabbi, on the debate between 18 and 22.5, i also tend to favor 18, but is not the view of most rishonim. !8 is theview of Saadyah Gaon and likely Rambam.
The Gaon’sposition on the gemara in Shabbat only refering to the spring/fall like the gemara in pesachim is as you say challenging for many reasons including that in tthe fall stars appear much later. no Rishon makes such a claim and all seem to assume thegemara in shabbat appears to apply year-round. Most critically, the gemara is focused on when bein hashemashot begins, NOT WHEN IT ENDS. My forthcoming book on bein hashemashot dscusses more reasons to reject the Gaon’s approach