John Powell
March 11th 2004, 03:50 AM
POWELL:
As part of my research into what the writers of the New Testament likely meant by phrases like "on the third day" and "for three days and three nights," I see that some Christian apologists use the words of Rabbi Azariah to support their view that "for three days and three nights" means the same thing as "for three days" and "on the third day."
Consequently, I'm trying to understand what R. Azariah and the others commenting in the same section likely thought about such things.
Perhaps one of our Jewish contributors at TWEB would be willing to help explain.
First I will quote the text and then requote it with comments.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/8559/TALMUD-Shabbat-9-3.htm
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
TALMUD Shabbat 9:3
310 Chapter Nine
. . .
[I.A] Said R. Yohanan, "It was from the procedure at Sinai that they derived the rule [at M. 9: 3A; alternatively, the rule in M. Miq. 8: 3]. Moses came down on Tuesday [Lieberman: "on the third (of the month)], saying to them, 'Be ready against the third day, do not come near a woman" (Ex. 19:15). Now whoever ceased to have sexual relations on the third day then may count [L adds: "the third,"] Tuesday night, Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen on Thursday night [= five spans], she is unclean, but if it was on Friday, she is clean [after five spans]. [In this case there are five spans of cleanness.]
[B] "As to whoever ceased to have sexual relations on Wednesday, we may then count Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen at night on Thursday night, she would be unclean, while if it was on Friday by day, she is clean. [In this case there are fewer than five spans of cleanness, but it was acceptable.]" [Cf. Lieberman.]
[C] Said R. Yohanan, "This is the arrangement at Sinai. But for future generations, [there will be either] four or six [spans of cleanness]."
[D] R. Aqiba says, "There must always be five such spans, even in the generations to come." [This is now amplified.]
[E] There we have learned: "She who discharges semen on the third day after having intercourse is clean, the words of R. Eleazar b. Azariah. R. Ishmael says, "Sometimes there are four spans [after which the semen loses its efficacy], sometimes five, sometimes six. lshmael wants two spans, a complete night and the day following it, to elapse to render the discharge clean. If intercourse took place at the end of the first day, and the discharge at the beginning of the fourth, two complete days or four spans intervening, it is clean. But if intercourse took place in the Yerusha1mi Shabbat 9:3 morning of the first day, the discharge will not he clean until the beginning of the fourth day, a lapse of five spans. So too if intercourse took place in the evening preceding the first day, the discharge will be clean at the beginning of the fourth day, that is, six such spans.] R. Aqiba says, "They are always five spans [M. Miq. 8:3J-L].
[F] If part of the first span had passed, they reckon that part of the sixth span completes it [T. Miq. 6: 6D].
[G] Lo, R. Ishmael treats a day as a span and a night as a span. R. Aqiba treats a day as a span and a night as a span. Then what is at issue between them?
[H] It is whether spans serve to complete [the necessary period]. R. Ishmael treats part of a span as the whole of it, and R. Aqiba does not treat part of a span as the whole of it.
[I] It has been taught contrary to the view of R. Aqiba: Therefore if part of the first season has passed, they reckon that part of the sixth season completes it [T. Mid. 6:6D].
[J] It has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Azariah says, "A day and a night constitute a span, and part of a span is equivalent to the whole of it."
[K] And thus has it been taught contrary to the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, 'There are occasions in which there is a day and any small amount of time in addition, and yet [a woman] is clean. There may be two days lacking a [small] amount of time, and the woman will be unclean." [Hence part of a span is not equivalent to the whole of it.]
[L] "A day and any small amount of time in addition, and she will be clean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
[M] If the woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath prior to sunset, and she emitted semen at the end of the Sabbath after sunset, lo, we have a full day and just a bit more time, and yet she is clean.
[N] "Two days less any amount of time, and she will be unclean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
[0] If a woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath after sunset, and she emitted semen on Sunday prior to sunset, lo, we have two days lacking only a small amount of time, and yet she is unclean.
Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud, Tract Sabbat, vol.11, Ó 1991, The University of Chicago Press.
POWELL:
Ok, now my comments.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[I.A] Said R. Yohanan, "It was from the procedure at Sinai that they derived the rule [at M. 9: 3A; alternatively, the rule in M. Miq. 8: 3]. Moses came down on Tuesday [Lieberman: "on the third (of the month)], saying to them, 'Be ready against the third day, do not come near a woman" (Ex. 19:15).
POWELL:
Moses is warning the men to not have relations with a woman that day, the next day, nor any part of the third day before they see God. It's apparently so the men (and women?) are pure enough to behold God. It does not seem to have anything to do with women discharging semen.
The time period is probably about 48 hours, perhaps a little less. Moses presumably sees God on the first day during daylight, probably in the morning, and God instructs Moses to prepare the people to see Him on the third day. Moses is to sanctify them (say a prayer over them?) and they are to wash their clothes the first day, the same day that Moses saw God. They are to repeat the procedure the second day: Moses is to sanctify them and they are to wash their clothes. On the third day, presumably Moses need not sanctify them and they need NOT wash their clothes because there won't be enough time since they will see God fairly early in the morning.
If Moses saw God Tuesday morning then the people were sanctified by Moses and they washed their clothes Tuesday day and Wednesday day and then they saw God Thursday morning after sunrise. That's parts of 3 days and 2 nights which is fine to satisfy "on the third day" as I understand the term. This would count as parts of five 12-hour spans in what is discussed later.
God DID NOT apparently tell Moses that they should not have sex, but Moses apparently came up with that idea on his own. God wanted them to wash their clothes, presumably so they smelled ok and perhaps also as an outward sign of inner cleanliness, so they would be thinking about clean things, but He didn't show any sign that He thought sex was dirty. He presumably wanted them to procreate.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Now whoever ceased to have sexual relations on the third day . . .
POWELL:
I guess they mean the third day of the week or Tuesday.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
. . . then may count [L adds: "the third,"] Tuesday night, Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, . . .
POWELL:
Why are they counting nights AFTER the days, shouldn't it be the other way around?
Why can't the interested person count Tuesday day since that's when the sex stopped?
Even if the 3-day time period for the Israelites turned out to be parts of 5 spans does not necessarily mean that one must wait 5 spans does it? God didn't say something to the effect of "come the 5th span," or "come after 5 spans" did He?
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
. . . if a woman emitted semen on Thursday night [= five spans], she is unclean, but if it was on Friday, she is clean [after five spans]. [In this case there are five spans of cleanness.]
POWELL:
If you don't count Tuesday day and you follow their strange understanding of when the Jewish day begins then Tue night is a complete span 1, Wed day is span 2, Wed night is span 3, Thur day is span 4, Thur night is part of span 5. If you complete Thur night and get to Friday day, that would be AFTER 5 complete spans. This would be more than 60 hours which is surely more than the time involved for those at Sinai.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[B] "As to whoever ceased to have sexual relations on Wednesday, we may then count Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen at night on Thursday night, she would be unclean, while if it was on Friday by day, she is clean. [In this case there are fewer than five spans of cleanness, but it was acceptable.]" [Cf. Lieberman.]
POWELL:
Using their day-night reversal, the rest of Wednesday day would be part of span 1. Wed night would be span 2. Thursday day would be span 3. Thur night would be span 4. Fri day would be part of span 5. This would not be 5 complete spans, but it would count as parts of 5 spans. Apparently this writer does not demand 5 complete spans, but only parts of 5 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[C] Said R. Yohanan, "This is the arrangement at Sinai. But for future generations, [there will be either] four or six [spans of cleanness]."
POWELL:
What does Rabbi Yohanan mean? Perhaps he's seeing the will of God in the phrase "on the third day" instead of worrying about the "five spans" that others worry about.
You see, if you start counting on any part of Tuesday then that counts as weekday 1, Wednesday counts as weekday 2, and any part of Thursday counts as weekday 3. Using the proper night-day ordering of the Jewish weekday, this might be as few as parts of 4 spans if you start Tuesday day (rest of Tue day, Wed night, Wed day, part of Thur night) or it could be as many as 6 spans if you start Tuesday night (rest of Tue night, Tue day, Wed night, Wed day, Thur night, part of Thur day).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[D] R. Aqiba says, "There must always be five such spans, even in the generations to come." [This is now amplified.]
POWELL:
Apparently, Rabbi Aqiba believes that since those at Sinai had to wait 5 spans that's the way it should be for everyone.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[E] There we have learned: "She who discharges semen on the third day after having intercourse is clean, the words of R. Eleazar b. Azariah.
POWELL:
This I think is the earliest statement on the issue.
Where did Rabbi Azariah get this idea that the prohibition to have sex in Exo 19:15 had anything to do with semen discharge? I don't know, but it's the issue everyone here seems to be trying to explain.
JERSUSALEM TALMUD:
R. Ishmael says, "Sometimes there are four spans [after which the semen loses its efficacy], sometimes five, sometimes six.
POWELL:
Rabbi Ishmael seems to understand that "on the third day" can mean 4 spans or 5 spans or 6 spans depending on when you start and stop counting.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Ishmael wants two spans, a complete night and the day following it, to elapse to render the discharge clean.
POWELL:
Not quite. Apparently, R. Ishmael only requires that "on the third day" be satisfied. He does not require that it be 5 complete spans or 5 partial spans or "2 complete weekdays" or "48 hours and a little bit" as others require. R. Ishmael seems to understand that "on the third day" can be satisfied by parts of four spans or a little more than 24 hours if you happen to start counting just before sunset at the end of weekday 1 and stop counting just after sunset on weekday 3. However, if you start counting just after sunset on weekday 1, you still have to wait until just after sunset on weekday 3 which would be 5 spans and a little more than 48 hours. It would STILL be "on the third day" if you waited until the end of the third weekday for six nearly complete spans or almost 72 hours, but presumably that's not what R. Ishmael requires be done. He's merely indicating what "on the third day" CAN mathematically mean in terms of 12-hour spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
If intercourse took place at the end of the first day, and the discharge at the beginning of the fourth, two complete days or four spans intervening, it is clean.
POWELL:
This commentator (E) seems to understand R. Ishmael differently than how I understand R. Ishmael. Commentator E is trying to explain how the period might be 4, 5, or 6 spans in a different way than I understand what R. Ishmael meant. I think R. Ishmael merely required that it be parts of 3 weekdays, but Commentator E apparently thinks R. Ismael required that it be a minimum of 2 complete weekdays.
In this example, apparently Commentator E means something like sex exactly at sunset on Tues/Wed and discharge exactly at sunset on Thursday/Friday. That would be 4 complete spans, 2 complete weekdays. It's an unlikely situation since no one has sex EXACTLY at such times.
If Commentator E merely means before the end of the first day to shortly after the beginning of the fourth day then that would be 6 partial spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
But if intercourse took place in the morning of the first day, the discharge will not he [sic] clean until the beginning of the fourth day, a lapse of five spans.
POWELL:
Apparently, Commentator E means sex exactly at sunrise on Tuesday and discharge exactly at sunset on Thur/Fri which would be 5 complete spans. Stopping any earlier would not complete the two weekdays Commentator E seems to require.
If Commentator E means from after sunrise on the first day to after sunset on the fourth day then it would again be parts of 6 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
So too if intercourse took place in the evening preceding the first day, the discharge will be clean at the beginning of the fourth day, that is, six such spans.]
POWELL:
Apparently, Commentator E means sex sometime Tuesday evening, but discharge exactly at sunset on Thur/Fri. In that case it's 5 complete spans + part of 1 span or parts of 6 spans. Again, stopping any sooner would not complete the two weekdays Commentator E seems to require.
If Commentator E means Tuesday evening sex, discharge Friday evening after sunset then this would be 5 complete spans and parts of two spans or parts of 7 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
R. Aqiba says, "They are always five spans [M. Miq. 8:3J-L].
POWELL:
Rabbi Aqiba requires 5 spans, presumably because that's what those at Sinai had to do, but it's not clear whether R. Aqiba means 5 complete spans or merely 5 partial spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[F] If part of the first span had passed, they reckon that part of the sixth span completes it [T. Miq. 6: 6D].
POWELL:
This seems to be a different rule, unless R. Aqiba means the equivalent time of 5 complete spans. This rule requires waiting 60 hours or 2 1/2 24-hr days from whenever you start counting. If the first span is only partial, then you must complete it with enough of a sixth span. That's surely longer than what those at Sinai had to wait.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[G] Lo, R. Ishmael treats a day as a span and a night as a span. R. Aqiba treats a day as a span and a night as a span. Then what is at issue between them?
POWELL:
Good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[H] It is whether spans serve to complete [the necessary period]. R. Ishmael treats part of a span as the whole of it, and R. Aqiba does not treat part of a span as the whole of it.
POWELL:
Sort of.
R. Ishmael, I think, counts parts of weekdays as complete days whereas Commentator F (R. Aqiba?) does not count parts of 12-hour spans as complete 12-hour spans. R. Ishmael merely requires parts of 3 weekdays be fulfilled, whereas Commentator F apparently wants a minimum of the equivalent of 2.5 days or it doesn't count as "on the third day" for him.
I suspect Commentator F does not think it's fair to count anything less than the time equivalent of 2.5 days as "three days." For example, it's probably not fair to him to get away with 24 hours and a little bit by beginning your count at the end of one weekday and ending at the beginning of the third weekday, as R. Ishmael would allow (If I'm understanding things properly).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[I] It has been taught contrary to the view of R. Aqiba: Therefore if part of the first season has passed, they reckon that part of the sixth season completes it [T. Mid. 6:6D].
POWELL:
I don't know if this is contrary to R. Aqiba. If by 5 spans, R. Aqiba allows for either one or two partial spans among the five then this 60-hour requirement would be contrary to his view. However, if R. Aqiba means the time equivalent of 5 complete spans, then this rule would be a way to ensure it.
Perhaps, R. Aqiba means 4 complete spans and at least part of a fifth so that it's a minimum of 48 hours.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[J] It has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Azariah says, "A day and a night constitute a span, and part of a span is equivalent to the whole of it."
POWELL:
This is a passage that Christian apologists often rely on to support their view that "for three days and three nights" means the same thing as "on the third day."
However, what R. Azariah means is unclear and its relevance to the equivalence of those two phrases is unclear.
R. Azariah probably means that a daylight period counts as a 12-hour span and a night counts as a 12-hour span and that part of a daylight period counts as a complete 12-hour span and a part of the night counts as a complete 12-hour span.
However, he could also mean that 1 daylight + 1 night counts as a 24-hour span and part of 24-hour span counts as the entire 24-hour span.
The Talmud writers here seem to have understood it in both those ways.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[K] And thus has it been taught contrary to the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, 'There are occasions in which there is a day and any small amount of time in addition, and yet [a woman] is clean. There may be two days lacking a [small] amount of time, and the woman will be unclean." [Hence part of a span is not equivalent to the whole of it.]
POWELL:
IMO, this is NOT clearly contrary to what R. Azariah said nor does it imply that part of 24-hour span is not equivalent to the whole of it. Rather it implies the opposite. What R. Azariah meant is what the various authors were apparently trying to explain, but they came up with different views.
What is quoted in K *IS* contrary to what R. Aqiba and Commentator F said, but it's in line with what R. Ishmael said. The writer quoted in K understands that to satisfy "on the third (week) day" then if you start counting just before sunset on Tuesday then you would be into the third weekday just after sunset on Thursday, yet that would be a 24-hour day plus a little. On the other hand, if you start counting just after sunrise on Tuesday then you still haven't reached the third weekday until just after sunset on Thursday for a duration of almost two 24-hour days or almost 48 hours.
Although the writer quoted in K is ignoring daylight vs. night distinctions, he seems to accept that part of a 24-hour weekday counts as the whole weekday.
If the Jew says "on the third day," then according to the writer quoted in K and probably R. Ishmael, this would mean at least parts of 3 weekdays, but according to Commentator F it would mean at least 60 hours. What it would mean to R. Aqiba is unclear (2 partial spans and 3 full spans or 1 partial span and 4 full spans or what?), but it would be no less than 36 hours.
So, for the New Testament writers to claim that Jesus resurrected "on the third day" apparently could mean a Friday afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday pre-dawn resurrection *IF* Writer K's (and R. Ishmael's?) opinion is accepted, but NOT apparently if Commentator F's opinion is accepted. Commentator F would seem to require the resurrection occur 60 hours after the burial or sometime Monday night shortly before Monday day. The earliest resurrection for the earliest assumptions of R. Aqiba would be about 36 hours after the burial or sunrise on Sunday which is about what most Christians believe happened. However, R. Aqiba may have meant 4 complete 12-hour spans plus part of a fifth span which would be a minimum of 48 hours.
The problem for Christians is that if they are going to adopt Writer K's and R. Ishmael's views that from Friday afternoon to Sunday counts as "on the third day" since parts of weekdays counts as complete weekdays when counting weekdays then they would seem to be obligated to accept that "3 days and 3 nights" means parts of 3 days and 3 nights, which was not satisfied.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[L] "A day and any small amount of time in addition, and she will be clean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
POWELL:
Good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[M] If the woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath prior to sunset, and she emitted semen at the end of the Sabbath after sunset, lo, we have a full day and just a bit more time, and yet she is clean.
POWELL:
The teacher seems to understand this. If sex were on Friday afternoon before sunset and discharge occurred on Sunday night after sunset then that would be "on the third (week) day," although only a little more than 24 hours. That's in line with the view of the Writer K (and R. Ishmael?).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[N] "Two days less any amount of time, and she will be unclean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
POWELL:
Another good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[0] If a woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath after sunset, and she emitted semen on Sunday prior to sunset, lo, we have two days lacking only a small amount of time, and yet she is unclean.
POWELL:
The teacher seems to understand this one too if by "eve of the Sabbath after sunset" he means in the evening before Sabbath daylight. If sex occurs on SATURDAY night just after sunset then Sunday afternoon just before sunset would be almost 48 hours or two complete weekdays, yet it would still NOT be "on the third day."
Again, this is in line with Writer K (and R. Ishmael), but not in line with Commentator F or R. Aqiba.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud,
Tract Sabbat, vol.11, Ó 1991,
The University of Chicago Press.
POWELL:
Well, Jewish twebbers, any comments?
John Powell
As part of my research into what the writers of the New Testament likely meant by phrases like "on the third day" and "for three days and three nights," I see that some Christian apologists use the words of Rabbi Azariah to support their view that "for three days and three nights" means the same thing as "for three days" and "on the third day."
Consequently, I'm trying to understand what R. Azariah and the others commenting in the same section likely thought about such things.
Perhaps one of our Jewish contributors at TWEB would be willing to help explain.
First I will quote the text and then requote it with comments.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/8559/TALMUD-Shabbat-9-3.htm
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
TALMUD Shabbat 9:3
310 Chapter Nine
. . .
[I.A] Said R. Yohanan, "It was from the procedure at Sinai that they derived the rule [at M. 9: 3A; alternatively, the rule in M. Miq. 8: 3]. Moses came down on Tuesday [Lieberman: "on the third (of the month)], saying to them, 'Be ready against the third day, do not come near a woman" (Ex. 19:15). Now whoever ceased to have sexual relations on the third day then may count [L adds: "the third,"] Tuesday night, Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen on Thursday night [= five spans], she is unclean, but if it was on Friday, she is clean [after five spans]. [In this case there are five spans of cleanness.]
[B] "As to whoever ceased to have sexual relations on Wednesday, we may then count Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen at night on Thursday night, she would be unclean, while if it was on Friday by day, she is clean. [In this case there are fewer than five spans of cleanness, but it was acceptable.]" [Cf. Lieberman.]
[C] Said R. Yohanan, "This is the arrangement at Sinai. But for future generations, [there will be either] four or six [spans of cleanness]."
[D] R. Aqiba says, "There must always be five such spans, even in the generations to come." [This is now amplified.]
[E] There we have learned: "She who discharges semen on the third day after having intercourse is clean, the words of R. Eleazar b. Azariah. R. Ishmael says, "Sometimes there are four spans [after which the semen loses its efficacy], sometimes five, sometimes six. lshmael wants two spans, a complete night and the day following it, to elapse to render the discharge clean. If intercourse took place at the end of the first day, and the discharge at the beginning of the fourth, two complete days or four spans intervening, it is clean. But if intercourse took place in the Yerusha1mi Shabbat 9:3 morning of the first day, the discharge will not he clean until the beginning of the fourth day, a lapse of five spans. So too if intercourse took place in the evening preceding the first day, the discharge will be clean at the beginning of the fourth day, that is, six such spans.] R. Aqiba says, "They are always five spans [M. Miq. 8:3J-L].
[F] If part of the first span had passed, they reckon that part of the sixth span completes it [T. Miq. 6: 6D].
[G] Lo, R. Ishmael treats a day as a span and a night as a span. R. Aqiba treats a day as a span and a night as a span. Then what is at issue between them?
[H] It is whether spans serve to complete [the necessary period]. R. Ishmael treats part of a span as the whole of it, and R. Aqiba does not treat part of a span as the whole of it.
[I] It has been taught contrary to the view of R. Aqiba: Therefore if part of the first season has passed, they reckon that part of the sixth season completes it [T. Mid. 6:6D].
[J] It has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Azariah says, "A day and a night constitute a span, and part of a span is equivalent to the whole of it."
[K] And thus has it been taught contrary to the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, 'There are occasions in which there is a day and any small amount of time in addition, and yet [a woman] is clean. There may be two days lacking a [small] amount of time, and the woman will be unclean." [Hence part of a span is not equivalent to the whole of it.]
[L] "A day and any small amount of time in addition, and she will be clean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
[M] If the woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath prior to sunset, and she emitted semen at the end of the Sabbath after sunset, lo, we have a full day and just a bit more time, and yet she is clean.
[N] "Two days less any amount of time, and she will be unclean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
[0] If a woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath after sunset, and she emitted semen on Sunday prior to sunset, lo, we have two days lacking only a small amount of time, and yet she is unclean.
Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud, Tract Sabbat, vol.11, Ó 1991, The University of Chicago Press.
POWELL:
Ok, now my comments.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[I.A] Said R. Yohanan, "It was from the procedure at Sinai that they derived the rule [at M. 9: 3A; alternatively, the rule in M. Miq. 8: 3]. Moses came down on Tuesday [Lieberman: "on the third (of the month)], saying to them, 'Be ready against the third day, do not come near a woman" (Ex. 19:15).
POWELL:
Moses is warning the men to not have relations with a woman that day, the next day, nor any part of the third day before they see God. It's apparently so the men (and women?) are pure enough to behold God. It does not seem to have anything to do with women discharging semen.
The time period is probably about 48 hours, perhaps a little less. Moses presumably sees God on the first day during daylight, probably in the morning, and God instructs Moses to prepare the people to see Him on the third day. Moses is to sanctify them (say a prayer over them?) and they are to wash their clothes the first day, the same day that Moses saw God. They are to repeat the procedure the second day: Moses is to sanctify them and they are to wash their clothes. On the third day, presumably Moses need not sanctify them and they need NOT wash their clothes because there won't be enough time since they will see God fairly early in the morning.
If Moses saw God Tuesday morning then the people were sanctified by Moses and they washed their clothes Tuesday day and Wednesday day and then they saw God Thursday morning after sunrise. That's parts of 3 days and 2 nights which is fine to satisfy "on the third day" as I understand the term. This would count as parts of five 12-hour spans in what is discussed later.
God DID NOT apparently tell Moses that they should not have sex, but Moses apparently came up with that idea on his own. God wanted them to wash their clothes, presumably so they smelled ok and perhaps also as an outward sign of inner cleanliness, so they would be thinking about clean things, but He didn't show any sign that He thought sex was dirty. He presumably wanted them to procreate.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Now whoever ceased to have sexual relations on the third day . . .
POWELL:
I guess they mean the third day of the week or Tuesday.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
. . . then may count [L adds: "the third,"] Tuesday night, Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, . . .
POWELL:
Why are they counting nights AFTER the days, shouldn't it be the other way around?
Why can't the interested person count Tuesday day since that's when the sex stopped?
Even if the 3-day time period for the Israelites turned out to be parts of 5 spans does not necessarily mean that one must wait 5 spans does it? God didn't say something to the effect of "come the 5th span," or "come after 5 spans" did He?
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
. . . if a woman emitted semen on Thursday night [= five spans], she is unclean, but if it was on Friday, she is clean [after five spans]. [In this case there are five spans of cleanness.]
POWELL:
If you don't count Tuesday day and you follow their strange understanding of when the Jewish day begins then Tue night is a complete span 1, Wed day is span 2, Wed night is span 3, Thur day is span 4, Thur night is part of span 5. If you complete Thur night and get to Friday day, that would be AFTER 5 complete spans. This would be more than 60 hours which is surely more than the time involved for those at Sinai.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[B] "As to whoever ceased to have sexual relations on Wednesday, we may then count Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen at night on Thursday night, she would be unclean, while if it was on Friday by day, she is clean. [In this case there are fewer than five spans of cleanness, but it was acceptable.]" [Cf. Lieberman.]
POWELL:
Using their day-night reversal, the rest of Wednesday day would be part of span 1. Wed night would be span 2. Thursday day would be span 3. Thur night would be span 4. Fri day would be part of span 5. This would not be 5 complete spans, but it would count as parts of 5 spans. Apparently this writer does not demand 5 complete spans, but only parts of 5 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[C] Said R. Yohanan, "This is the arrangement at Sinai. But for future generations, [there will be either] four or six [spans of cleanness]."
POWELL:
What does Rabbi Yohanan mean? Perhaps he's seeing the will of God in the phrase "on the third day" instead of worrying about the "five spans" that others worry about.
You see, if you start counting on any part of Tuesday then that counts as weekday 1, Wednesday counts as weekday 2, and any part of Thursday counts as weekday 3. Using the proper night-day ordering of the Jewish weekday, this might be as few as parts of 4 spans if you start Tuesday day (rest of Tue day, Wed night, Wed day, part of Thur night) or it could be as many as 6 spans if you start Tuesday night (rest of Tue night, Tue day, Wed night, Wed day, Thur night, part of Thur day).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[D] R. Aqiba says, "There must always be five such spans, even in the generations to come." [This is now amplified.]
POWELL:
Apparently, Rabbi Aqiba believes that since those at Sinai had to wait 5 spans that's the way it should be for everyone.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[E] There we have learned: "She who discharges semen on the third day after having intercourse is clean, the words of R. Eleazar b. Azariah.
POWELL:
This I think is the earliest statement on the issue.
Where did Rabbi Azariah get this idea that the prohibition to have sex in Exo 19:15 had anything to do with semen discharge? I don't know, but it's the issue everyone here seems to be trying to explain.
JERSUSALEM TALMUD:
R. Ishmael says, "Sometimes there are four spans [after which the semen loses its efficacy], sometimes five, sometimes six.
POWELL:
Rabbi Ishmael seems to understand that "on the third day" can mean 4 spans or 5 spans or 6 spans depending on when you start and stop counting.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Ishmael wants two spans, a complete night and the day following it, to elapse to render the discharge clean.
POWELL:
Not quite. Apparently, R. Ishmael only requires that "on the third day" be satisfied. He does not require that it be 5 complete spans or 5 partial spans or "2 complete weekdays" or "48 hours and a little bit" as others require. R. Ishmael seems to understand that "on the third day" can be satisfied by parts of four spans or a little more than 24 hours if you happen to start counting just before sunset at the end of weekday 1 and stop counting just after sunset on weekday 3. However, if you start counting just after sunset on weekday 1, you still have to wait until just after sunset on weekday 3 which would be 5 spans and a little more than 48 hours. It would STILL be "on the third day" if you waited until the end of the third weekday for six nearly complete spans or almost 72 hours, but presumably that's not what R. Ishmael requires be done. He's merely indicating what "on the third day" CAN mathematically mean in terms of 12-hour spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
If intercourse took place at the end of the first day, and the discharge at the beginning of the fourth, two complete days or four spans intervening, it is clean.
POWELL:
This commentator (E) seems to understand R. Ishmael differently than how I understand R. Ishmael. Commentator E is trying to explain how the period might be 4, 5, or 6 spans in a different way than I understand what R. Ishmael meant. I think R. Ishmael merely required that it be parts of 3 weekdays, but Commentator E apparently thinks R. Ismael required that it be a minimum of 2 complete weekdays.
In this example, apparently Commentator E means something like sex exactly at sunset on Tues/Wed and discharge exactly at sunset on Thursday/Friday. That would be 4 complete spans, 2 complete weekdays. It's an unlikely situation since no one has sex EXACTLY at such times.
If Commentator E merely means before the end of the first day to shortly after the beginning of the fourth day then that would be 6 partial spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
But if intercourse took place in the morning of the first day, the discharge will not he [sic] clean until the beginning of the fourth day, a lapse of five spans.
POWELL:
Apparently, Commentator E means sex exactly at sunrise on Tuesday and discharge exactly at sunset on Thur/Fri which would be 5 complete spans. Stopping any earlier would not complete the two weekdays Commentator E seems to require.
If Commentator E means from after sunrise on the first day to after sunset on the fourth day then it would again be parts of 6 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
So too if intercourse took place in the evening preceding the first day, the discharge will be clean at the beginning of the fourth day, that is, six such spans.]
POWELL:
Apparently, Commentator E means sex sometime Tuesday evening, but discharge exactly at sunset on Thur/Fri. In that case it's 5 complete spans + part of 1 span or parts of 6 spans. Again, stopping any sooner would not complete the two weekdays Commentator E seems to require.
If Commentator E means Tuesday evening sex, discharge Friday evening after sunset then this would be 5 complete spans and parts of two spans or parts of 7 spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
R. Aqiba says, "They are always five spans [M. Miq. 8:3J-L].
POWELL:
Rabbi Aqiba requires 5 spans, presumably because that's what those at Sinai had to do, but it's not clear whether R. Aqiba means 5 complete spans or merely 5 partial spans.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[F] If part of the first span had passed, they reckon that part of the sixth span completes it [T. Miq. 6: 6D].
POWELL:
This seems to be a different rule, unless R. Aqiba means the equivalent time of 5 complete spans. This rule requires waiting 60 hours or 2 1/2 24-hr days from whenever you start counting. If the first span is only partial, then you must complete it with enough of a sixth span. That's surely longer than what those at Sinai had to wait.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[G] Lo, R. Ishmael treats a day as a span and a night as a span. R. Aqiba treats a day as a span and a night as a span. Then what is at issue between them?
POWELL:
Good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[H] It is whether spans serve to complete [the necessary period]. R. Ishmael treats part of a span as the whole of it, and R. Aqiba does not treat part of a span as the whole of it.
POWELL:
Sort of.
R. Ishmael, I think, counts parts of weekdays as complete days whereas Commentator F (R. Aqiba?) does not count parts of 12-hour spans as complete 12-hour spans. R. Ishmael merely requires parts of 3 weekdays be fulfilled, whereas Commentator F apparently wants a minimum of the equivalent of 2.5 days or it doesn't count as "on the third day" for him.
I suspect Commentator F does not think it's fair to count anything less than the time equivalent of 2.5 days as "three days." For example, it's probably not fair to him to get away with 24 hours and a little bit by beginning your count at the end of one weekday and ending at the beginning of the third weekday, as R. Ishmael would allow (If I'm understanding things properly).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[I] It has been taught contrary to the view of R. Aqiba: Therefore if part of the first season has passed, they reckon that part of the sixth season completes it [T. Mid. 6:6D].
POWELL:
I don't know if this is contrary to R. Aqiba. If by 5 spans, R. Aqiba allows for either one or two partial spans among the five then this 60-hour requirement would be contrary to his view. However, if R. Aqiba means the time equivalent of 5 complete spans, then this rule would be a way to ensure it.
Perhaps, R. Aqiba means 4 complete spans and at least part of a fifth so that it's a minimum of 48 hours.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[J] It has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Azariah says, "A day and a night constitute a span, and part of a span is equivalent to the whole of it."
POWELL:
This is a passage that Christian apologists often rely on to support their view that "for three days and three nights" means the same thing as "on the third day."
However, what R. Azariah means is unclear and its relevance to the equivalence of those two phrases is unclear.
R. Azariah probably means that a daylight period counts as a 12-hour span and a night counts as a 12-hour span and that part of a daylight period counts as a complete 12-hour span and a part of the night counts as a complete 12-hour span.
However, he could also mean that 1 daylight + 1 night counts as a 24-hour span and part of 24-hour span counts as the entire 24-hour span.
The Talmud writers here seem to have understood it in both those ways.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[K] And thus has it been taught contrary to the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, 'There are occasions in which there is a day and any small amount of time in addition, and yet [a woman] is clean. There may be two days lacking a [small] amount of time, and the woman will be unclean." [Hence part of a span is not equivalent to the whole of it.]
POWELL:
IMO, this is NOT clearly contrary to what R. Azariah said nor does it imply that part of 24-hour span is not equivalent to the whole of it. Rather it implies the opposite. What R. Azariah meant is what the various authors were apparently trying to explain, but they came up with different views.
What is quoted in K *IS* contrary to what R. Aqiba and Commentator F said, but it's in line with what R. Ishmael said. The writer quoted in K understands that to satisfy "on the third (week) day" then if you start counting just before sunset on Tuesday then you would be into the third weekday just after sunset on Thursday, yet that would be a 24-hour day plus a little. On the other hand, if you start counting just after sunrise on Tuesday then you still haven't reached the third weekday until just after sunset on Thursday for a duration of almost two 24-hour days or almost 48 hours.
Although the writer quoted in K is ignoring daylight vs. night distinctions, he seems to accept that part of a 24-hour weekday counts as the whole weekday.
If the Jew says "on the third day," then according to the writer quoted in K and probably R. Ishmael, this would mean at least parts of 3 weekdays, but according to Commentator F it would mean at least 60 hours. What it would mean to R. Aqiba is unclear (2 partial spans and 3 full spans or 1 partial span and 4 full spans or what?), but it would be no less than 36 hours.
So, for the New Testament writers to claim that Jesus resurrected "on the third day" apparently could mean a Friday afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday pre-dawn resurrection *IF* Writer K's (and R. Ishmael's?) opinion is accepted, but NOT apparently if Commentator F's opinion is accepted. Commentator F would seem to require the resurrection occur 60 hours after the burial or sometime Monday night shortly before Monday day. The earliest resurrection for the earliest assumptions of R. Aqiba would be about 36 hours after the burial or sunrise on Sunday which is about what most Christians believe happened. However, R. Aqiba may have meant 4 complete 12-hour spans plus part of a fifth span which would be a minimum of 48 hours.
The problem for Christians is that if they are going to adopt Writer K's and R. Ishmael's views that from Friday afternoon to Sunday counts as "on the third day" since parts of weekdays counts as complete weekdays when counting weekdays then they would seem to be obligated to accept that "3 days and 3 nights" means parts of 3 days and 3 nights, which was not satisfied.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[L] "A day and any small amount of time in addition, and she will be clean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
POWELL:
Good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[M] If the woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath prior to sunset, and she emitted semen at the end of the Sabbath after sunset, lo, we have a full day and just a bit more time, and yet she is clean.
POWELL:
The teacher seems to understand this. If sex were on Friday afternoon before sunset and discharge occurred on Sunday night after sunset then that would be "on the third (week) day," although only a little more than 24 hours. That's in line with the view of the Writer K (and R. Ishmael?).
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[N] "Two days less any amount of time, and she will be unclean": What would be a practical illustration of such a case?
POWELL:
Another good question.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
[0] If a woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath after sunset, and she emitted semen on Sunday prior to sunset, lo, we have two days lacking only a small amount of time, and yet she is unclean.
POWELL:
The teacher seems to understand this one too if by "eve of the Sabbath after sunset" he means in the evening before Sabbath daylight. If sex occurs on SATURDAY night just after sunset then Sunday afternoon just before sunset would be almost 48 hours or two complete weekdays, yet it would still NOT be "on the third day."
Again, this is in line with Writer K (and R. Ishmael), but not in line with Commentator F or R. Aqiba.
JERUSALEM TALMUD:
Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud,
Tract Sabbat, vol.11, Ó 1991,
The University of Chicago Press.
POWELL:
Well, Jewish twebbers, any comments?
John Powell