Message

“And Yahweh spoke to Moshe and Ahron in the land of Mitsraim, saying : ‘This month shall be unto you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you.’”

- Shemot/Exodus 12:1-2

“Observe the month of Abib, and keep the passover unto Yahweh your Elohim; for in the month of Abib Yahweh your Elohim brought you forth out of Mitsraim by night.”

- Dabarim/Deuteronomy 16:1

It appears fairly straight forward that this is to be the beginning of the year for us, so why is it that Judaism changes the ‘year’ at the start of the seventh month? In reality, Judaism recognizes TWO new years, this being the ‘religious’ new year, and the seventh month starting the ‘civil’ new year. Yet Scripture makes no such distinction, and Yahweh specifically says that this month is the first.

The Months in the Biblical calendar are lunar in basis. Each month is started by the Chodesh - the first visible crescent of the moon seen just after sunset a day or two following the moon’s conjunction. The Hebrew word CHODESH (2320) is a noun that comes, as many Hebrew words do, from a verb meaning “to renew/repair”. The noun form thus means “THE renewal/repair”. In the case of the moon, which is physically called the YERACH (3391) in Hebrew, what ‘renews’ is the light reaching the earth.

Some have theorised that the Chodesh was the astronomical conjunction, the point at which the moon is between the earth and the sun, and not visible. This is founded on a very poor understanding of Samuel 20, and Psalms 81:3, an in-depth discussion of which is beyond our present scope here. Suffice it to say that there is copious ancient record that the Israelites saw the visible Chodesh and then the next day was the first day of that month.

In the lunar system, the month - the time from one Chodesh to the next - is either 29 or 30 days long. This results in a year of 12 months which is about 11 days short of the actual solar year. So about every third year, an extra, 13^th month is added. Scripture gives us the marker by which to identify the first month - ABIB.

ABIB is not the name of the first month, it is the condition of the barley in Israel at the time of the first month. If at the end of the 12^th month we can find abib barley, then that Chodesh starts the 1^st month of the year. If the barley is not yet abib, then the 13^th month is added.

In Jewish tradition, three guidelines were used by the ancient Sanhedrin to declare the first month - the barley, the fruit, and the equinox. Where are these other two mentioned in Tanakh as controlling the year? Nowhere. Yet, abib is mentioned repeatedly, in addition to the verse above:

"And the flax and the barley were smitten; for the barley was ABIB, and the flax was GIBOL. But the wheat and the spelt were not smitten; they were APILOT”

- Shemot/Exodus 9:31-32

“This day you go forth in the month ABIB”

        - Shemot/Exodus 13:4

“The feast of unleavened bread shall you keep; seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the Chodesh of Abib - for in it you came out from Mitsraim; and none shall appear before Me empty.”

        - Shemot/Exodus 23:15

“The feast of unleavened bread shall you keep. Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the Chodesh of Abib, for in the Chodesh of Abib you came out from Mitsraim.”

        - Shemot/Exodus 34:18

A simplified way of looking at these texts is to realise that one Chodesh per year is the one where abib barley occurs. The time from abib to full ripeness and harvest is 14-21 days, so there can only be one Chodesh (new moon) per year where the barley is in a state of abib. If it is abib this Chodesh, it will be ripe before the next.

Reconstructing a Torah-based definition of abib is also a fairly straight forward process. In the plague of hail, the barley and flax , being earlier crops, were destroyed, but the wheat and spelt were not. What this indicates to us is that the barley had moved from the dark green and flexible stage of its growth to one where it had become more brittle, enough to be destroyed by the hail. When barley does this, it’s colour also changes with golden streaks appearing until finally the entire colour changes from dark green to golden. Notice the contrast with the barley being ABIB, the flax being GIBOL (budding), but the wheat and spelt being APILOT - “dark” (in colour).

The only way in Torah to determine if we are entering the first month is to look at the crops in Israel. Much has been made about in particular the equinox as being a primary indicator of the year also, yet nowhere in Tanakh is this specifically stated. What is described in Bereshit/Genesis does not rise to that level:

“And Elohim said: 'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for OWTOT, and for MOWEDIM, and for days and years.”

- Bereshit/Genesis 1:14

Since the text continues to identify the sun and the moon (and stars) as being ASAH - appointed to fill these tasks, it is assumed that the sun serves the purpose of the year. It is interesting to note on the side, that ASAH does not require a creation, but is more properly read as an appointment or commissioning. In verse 1, Elohim created (BARA) the heavens and the earth, presumably to include the sun and moon. This is a rational assumption for nowhere else in the narrative is our planet created, so verse 1 can not easily be a summary of what follows as things are missing in such a view.

What role does the sun then play in setting the year? The sun drives the seasons, and the growth of the barley, so it can be said that when the barley is abib, the sun has played the major role in such. But to assume that the Chodesh of abib MUST fall after the equinox is faulty. One of the primary rules of interpreting Scripture is that no passage ever looses its pashat (plain) meaning through a remez (hint), drash (analogy), or sod (hidden) meaning of that OR ANY OTHER passage. In this case, if a Chodesh falls before the equinox, and the barley is abib, to assume that we must wait until after the equinox is to place the remez of Bereshit 1:14 above the many pashat verses mentioning the abib.

This next year ahead of us might just be one of those occasions. The Chodesh should be visible on the night of 11 March 2005, but the equinox is not until the 21^st. There is a chance that there will be abib barley in Israel on 10-11 March, as this is within the outside limits of historical abib sighting. But the Jewish calendar this year has a 13^th month already added in, and if there is abib barley on 10-11 March, they will be a whole month off for the entire year!

How did this happen? In 359 AD, Rabbi Hillel II published what is the modern Jewish calendar. He and the leaders of the day abandoned the visible sighting of the Chodesh and replaced it with a pre-calculated calendar based on Greek calculations of the average conjunction. Thus, almost every month in the ‘modern’ Jewish calendar it is off by at least a day. Part of this process also pre-calculates which years will have the leap month added, irrespective of the abib barley.

The implications of this one move, where man changed Yahweh’s set order, are far reaching. Since, with the exception of first fruits, all the annual moedim (appointments) of Wayikra/Leviticus 23 are set on specific days of the lunar month, if one follows the Rabbinical calendar of today, MOST of these wind up being observed on the wrong day. The additional problem that may be presented this next Chodesh only further highlights an already disobedient system.

As a proponent of the moed of Shabbat also being tied to the lunar cycle, one of the objections I often encounter is the belief that the Shabbat is so holy that the Jews would never loose track of it or intentionally change it. I just shake my head and point to ALL the other moedim which they ADMIT are not correct and have been changed by Hillel’s calendar switch, and ask what the difference is. If many appointments of Yahweh have been changed by man, it is a foregone conclusion that such is possible for ANY other moed. The concept that a Shabbat ‘cycle’ has been faithfully kept looses all credibility.

Regardless of which view as to Shabbat the reader might take, the fact remains that Torah prescribes the Chodesh of abib to be the first Chodesh of the year. The final element that comes into the timing question is the first fruits which are offered during Chag haMatzot (Unleavened Bread). Although Torah does not specifically connect this presentation to the feast, such has provably been the custom from before the time of Y’shua. At that time, the Temple practice (as recorded by Philo) was to present the first fruits on the 16^th of the month. It is often argued that not only need the barley be abib at the Chodesh, but that it also must be harvest ready by the 16^th.

This argument fails on three grounds. First, such an additional requirement is not found in Torah, but is a remez (hint) of the fact that this presentation has traditionally been held on the 16^th. As already discussed, we can not have a remez being used to void a pashat. If the barley is abib at the Chodesh, having just turned so, this is still the Chodesh of abib, and by the next it will be gone. One can not assume a lengthy harvest and postpone the year or one breaks the pashat. Secondly, Karaite history shows that it will be harvest ready anyway. Thirdly, notice this:

“And if you bring a meal-offering of first-fruits unto Yahweh, you shall bring for the meal-offering of your first-fruits ABIB parched with fire, even groats of the fresh ear.” - Wayikra/Leviticus 2:14

While this is a difficult verse to translate, and offers several possibilities which are debated, the point is that Abib could be offered as a first fruit, so it need not be fully ripened anyway. Parching in the fire is a technique that is used on unripe grain.

In the end then, we see that there is but one Scriptural indicator at the Chodesh of our passing into the new year - abib barley.

There is but one day spoken of for the Pasach - the fourteenth day of the first month (Shemot/Exodus 12:6,18, Wayikra/Leviticus 23:5, Bamnibar/Numbers 9:3, 5, 11). Tanakh also records five historical instances of the Pasach, each occurring on the fourteenth.

The greatest confusion over this has been caused by the adoption of a Babylonian sunset start to the 24-hour day. There is ample evidence in Scripture that a 24-hour day is properly reckoned from first light, not from sunset. This is embedded directly into the creation account which does NOT say “the night and the day were the first day”, rather W’YEHE EREB W’YEHE BOQER - “and (then) there was dusk and (then) there was dawn, day ___”, being a sequence in the narrative, NOT a summary of it.

The problem with this reckoning is that the Pasach was commanded to be sacrificed BEIN HA’ARBAIM - “between the evenings”. Linguistically, this can ONLY mean between sunset and dark, BUT, in a sunset day that is the beginning of the day, not the middle. This problem led to the rabbinical tradition of redefining this phrase to mean afternoon, which itself created yet another problem that now the Pasach was eaten on a different day than sacrificed, and not reflective of the exodus chain of events!

The other issue for Messianics is that Y’shua ate His last Pasach a day earlier, on the night of the 13^th. While some have attempted to assert that such supports an ‘early-fourteenth’ view, one can’t have the cake and eat it too. More precisely in this case, on can’t "eat the Pasach and be it too". He either ate at the correct time or He died at the correct time, they are mutually exclusive.

This presents a number of complicated but inter-related subjects to properly understand. For a complete background and Scripture study on them, I would refer to http://www.tushiyah.org/Calendar.pdf which is four chapters from the book “Reuniting The Covenant” dealing with them in more detail.

For the purposes of this subject however, I will simply state the conclusion of that study that the proper time to eat the Pasach is the night time immediately following the daylight of the 14^th day - which is also the night of the 14^th.

The subject of removing the leaven has also caused quite a deal of needless anxiety. Let’s examine Scripture and history to put this into perspective:

“Seven days shall you eat unleavened bread; on the first day you shall put away leaven out of your houses; for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.”

- Shemot/Exodus 12:15

It is easy to understand not eating anything leavened for this time period, but what does this mean to “put away leaven out of your house”? To answer that requires not just looking at the Hebrew text, but understanding cultural practice.

How did ancient peoples leaven their bread? They did not run out to the local supermarket and buy packaged yeast (not even Fleishmann’s), they had to ‘trap’ it themselves. Yeast is a bacterial organism (actually several) that is present in the environment. It is in the air, and even in our bodies all the time - it is pervasive. This is one of the reasons it makes such a good typology for sin. To trap the yeast, a mixture of flour, water or milk, and sugar, called a ‘starter’ is left out in the air. The single-celled yeast bacteria are attracted to the free food and begin to multiply causing it to bubble with carbon dioxide. Between 2 and 4 DAYS later, it is ready to make bread, this is a LONG process.

To prevent this process from having to be repeated every day, when the starter is mixed into the dough, a portion of dough was removed and left out to become the new starter. The remainder of the dough rose and was baked for that day, but the portion left out was kept for the next day. This was repeated every day, thus providing leavened bread on an almost continual basis.

With that in mind, let’s look at the Hebrew word translated “leaven” here - SH’OR (7603). The verb at the root of this word is SHAW’AR (7604) - “to leave out, left over, remain”! This is exactly what has been described in the process of ancient bread making - the portion that was left out for the next day.

The Hebrew reads: “Ach ba’yowm ha’rishon tashbitu sh’or mibataykem” The other usage here is SHABBAT, yes, just as in the seventh day, “tashbitu” - ‘you shall cease’. So the command is literally to “cease leaving over”! This is how the ancients removed the yeast, by stopping it’s cultivation in the home.

The Mitswot is NOT to remove every trace of anything that once contained yeast, but to stop actively cultivating yeast. How does this apply today? Of course, any packets of yeast need to go. Once something leavened is baked, the yeast is dead. Accordingly, crumbs of old bread hiding in cupboard cracks or couch cushions was not in view here. There is no active yeast in these things anyway. Spring cleaning is certainly a good thing, but it is not commanded. Simply removing any active yeast from the home fulfils the Mitswot.

And this is also the DEEPER analogy often missed - sin is present everywhere, in us, and even in the air. Like our ancestors making bread, we need to learn to stop cultivating sin.

What about baking soda or powder (sodium bicarbonate)? This is an interesting matter, as such was not in use at the time, and is not directly spoken to. Seeing as SH’OR is the “left over”, and not “that which makes to rise”, one can not blanket assume that the term would cover baking soda.

I think that the key in answering this lies in understanding another principle behind Chag ha’Matzot. The putting away of the starter, while in one way symbolic of sin, can also be viewed as an act of reliance on Yahweh for provision, and remembering that our ancestors leaving Mitsraim for the desert had to learn (repeatedly) to rely on Him. So our act of eating unleavened bread for these days is an act of getting back to the basics of reliance on our heavenly Father.

It is for this reason that I personally view baking soda as included in the Mitswot and prohibited, but such is certainly not a pashat interpretation. If it were only an issue of yeast symbolising sin, baking soda would be fine, but in the expanded picture it’s not. We need to be focusing on simplicity and the ways our ancestors ate when they came out of Mitsraim, not looking for modern ways to defeat the purpose.

Many modern Seders have traditions added which did not exist in the first century. The boiled egg has a questionable pedigree, for example. Fortunately, in the Mishneh we have a solid historical record of exactly what was in the Seder as observed by Y’shua. Rabbi Yehudah ha’Nassi, writing in the tractate Pasach, gives us the complete order as then followed. This is the basis from which our own Seder - "ha’Rabah Haggadah" - derives, and can be viewed on a link at the top of the page http://www.tushiyah.org/hrh.html.

But the primary issue today is the lamb. Do we eat it or just have a symbolic shank bone?

At the exodus, and in the wilderness, each family killed the Pasach lamb themselves at the home. When Israel came into the land, the sacrifice was moved to the Temple, or more precisely - to the place of His Name (Dabarim/Deuteronomy 16:1-6).

The temple was destroyed in 70 AD, but His Name had long since left there. At Y'shua's death the veil was torn in two and the Glory of Yahweh left the temple. Why? Simply because the only purpose the temple fulfilled was to offer sacrifice - and the final sacrifice for sin had just been made. So where does His Name dwell today? His Ruach dwells IN US!! He will once again cause His Name to dwell in Yerushalaim when He returns. So it can be rationally argued that we are back to the wilderness in practice, and that the Mitswot to sacrifice at the Temple only applies ‘in the land’ and when there is a Temple.

There are two schools of thought on how this impacts Pasach. One side says that if we can't observe every detail of the sacrifice, we should not eat any lamb at Pasach. The other says, do what we can, where we are, with the understanding that it is incomplete. I am personally of the latter persuasion. Our Pasach has fire roasted lamb (of the frozen variety), we use the blood on the doorposts and lintel, and we incinerate anything left over. This is what we are able to do.

The issue also then becomes, what about those who can do more and actually select a flawless one year old male sheep or goat on the 10^th and kill it on the 14^th? We don't live in an area where we could get a whole lamb, but I see nothing wrong with those who are able to do so trying to fulfil more of the requirements. Pasach was commanded to be an eternal ordinance, not 'until Messiah'. Thus, there is no way to split Scripture and say we only can observe part of it if we are able to observe all of it.

There are requirements which have to be met in order for someone to be allowed to observe the Pasach or participate in the Paschal meal. Yahweh is explicitly clear in Exodus 12 that TWO things are required:

1. A DESIRE to follow Yahweh.

2. Physical CIRCUMCISION if a male.

BOTH are required eternally and equally.

In our Seder, which we open to christians, I generally take the first part to be fulfilled, even though a christian is not necessarily walking in Torah, they DO seek to follow Yahweh, but just don't know or have not been taught that Torah is for them today. I take the Acts 15 view that obedience comes with time and learning. The issue in Exodus 12 is the desire to follow, not that there must be a perfection of one’s walk, or we would all be in trouble.

The second part though is too often taken lightly. Yes, “circumcision of the heart” is important, but it is the physical kind that is being SPECIFICALLY commanded here, as an eternal ordinance, and with the express command that there is to be ONE TORAH for everyone. No exceptions.

It is a direct defiance of Torah to allow a physically uncircumcised male to participate in Pasach. It matters not that they have all the desire in the world, without physical circumcision they may NOT participate - this is the direct command of Yahweh.

What we do for those who are not circumcised is to first lovingly explain that we did not make the rule, that HE did, and show them Exodus 12 which is very clear. We invite them to sit back, and listen to the Seder, and ask questions if they have them. We serve a separate meal to them, but they do not participate in the bread, ritual wine, lamb, herbs, etc.

Our haggadah goes through an extensive teaching on the two houses of Israel and the Messianic elements of Pasach - the real ones, not the supposed 'trinity' in the bread. We encourage those to whom we can not serve the meal to allow us to serve them something even more valuable - the story of Pasach.

There is a lot of teaching circulating that circumcision is only necessary to eat the lamb itself, but not required to participate in the rest. This is a faulty understanding of a key passage in Shemot/Exodus 12.

The confusion starts because the Hebrew word PAYSACH (phonetic spelling)(6452/6453) can be confusing as it can refer to two things, separately OR in combination - the lamb and the entire Passover ceremony. Context must be the guide in determining what is meant. A good rule is that since the entire Passover is general in nature, and the lamb is specific, one should view 'PASACH' as the GENERAL CEREMONY - unless the context is clearly referencing the lamb only. Pasach commemorates when Yahweh "Pasach" (passed over). Yahweh is not a lamb, so the word obviously as applied to Him means more broadly "to leap or pass by". Thus, one can not say that the word MUST be applied only to the lamb unless context is specific. With this in mind, let's go through an abbreviated Shemot 12:

1. Yahweh spoke.

2. This is the first month.

3. Speak to ISRAEL take a lamb on the 10^th for each house.

As a brief side note, it is also often erroneously taught that they took it INTO the home, but such is not what the text says. The animal was identified on the 10^th.

4. Share If the household is too small.

5. Lamb without blemish, 1yr old male.

6. Keep it to the 14th, ALL ISRAEL kill it at dusk.

7. Put blood on the door.

8. Eat the FLESH roasted AND unleavened bread and bitter herbs.

9. Don't eat it raw or boiled.

10. Burn anything left to morning.

11. Eat it in haste - it is Yahweh's Pasach.

OK, let's pause and determine what is referred to as 'Yahweh's Pasach'. While the passage begins by obviously focusing on the lamb, it adds in the unleavened bread and bitter herbs as part of the meal. In this context, “Pasach” can only be the entire meal and observance, not just the lamb, as "it" is being eaten in haste. Was just the lamb eaten in haste? Of course not, the whole meal was.

12. I will smite the firstborn.

13. When I see the blood, I'll pass over you.

14. THIS DAY shall be a memorial forever, you shall keep the feast forever.

What feast? PASACH - not just the lamb, but everything commanded about Pasach including the blood on the door, unleavened bread, bitter herbs, and even the timing of eating it after dark, and letting nothing remain until dawn. ALL this is the Pasach. AND - the observance of the DAY itself is the Pasach.

For the next few verses, the narrative shifts to instruction about the adjoining feast of Unleavened Bread. Then, in verse 21 a new section of the text starts, noted in the Hebrew text by the division of a 'Petuhah' indicating a major division of concept.

After this dividing mark, Moses specifically instructs the Israelites about the LAMB. In the future, when the children ask about it they are to say "It is the sacrifice of Yahweh's Pasach for He passed over the houses of the children of Israel" (27b JPS).

Note that the lamb is "the sacrifice OF Yahweh's Pasach" - NOT "the Pasach of Yahweh". In other words, grammatically, the lamb is the sacrifice PORTION of the greater observance called the Pasach commemorating when Yahweh 'pasach' passed over.

The narrative continues to describe the actual events, then we find another major division, a Petuhah, after verse 42. The next concept then develops:

43. Yahweh spoke "This is the ordinance of the Pasach".

44. Servants must be circumcised.

45. No sojourners may eat.

46. Eat in one house, don't carry the FLESH or break a BONE.

47. All Israel shall keep it.

The mistaken belief that circumcision only applies to the lamb comes from tunnel-vision applying the single usage of “Pasach” in this passage. Western thinking is so used to having a word mean only one thing at a time, but in Hebraic thought, a word can operate in various meanings concurrently. If we narrowly construe this in a western style, it appears to be only speaking of the lamb as it mentions the FLESH and the BONES. But wait...

48. "And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the Passover to Yahweh, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land; but no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof." (JPS)

Does this say "may eat the lamb"? NO, it says "may keep the Pasach". We have already established earlier in the chapter that 'keeping' the Pasach involves more than just the lamb. So here we see that the word Pasach is operating in this broader sense of the entire observance. Thus, when it says that no uncircumcised person shall eat of it, the 'it' includes the entire observance, lamb, herbs, bread, wine - EVERYTHING.

The simple and often overlooked way to test this interpretation is by applying the immediate context in verse 48. AFTER one is circumcised, THEN one may do two things:

1. COME NEAR, and

2. KEEP it.

So, we have two verbs - 'COME NEAR', and 'KEEP' - that are being allowed of the foreigner ONLY after circumcision. This is KEY because if they were not circumcised, they could not come near or keep it.

QARAB (7126) is "to approach near" something, and shows the illogic in applying circumcision as a requirement for the lamb only. Could someone eat their unleavened bread and bitter herbs from AFAR without FIRST coming near?? No, they had to come near to do so and thus had to be circumcised first, otherwise, you get an image of some people in the courtyard eating bread and herbs and others inside eating bread herbs and lamb. Silly.

ASAH (6213) is "to keep and observe", and the interesting thing here is that the verb is in the infinitive - a state that emphasises the imperative nature of the verb. In other words, All Israel has been commanded to KEEP (ASAH) the Pasach (whole evening) through all our generations, and the foreigner who joins Israel has the SAME imperative obligation and privilege - AFTER they are circumcised.

Both of these words can not be applied solely to the lamb, but let's test it even further with another witness. Y'shua's last supper was a Pasach, but it was NOT eaten on the night of the 14th, but the night of the 13th. There is much detail to go into in that regard which is best left aside at the moment, as it is explained in http://www.tushiyah.org/Calendar.pdf.

We do not know whether or not He and the Talmidim ate a lamb on that night. They must have on previous Passovers, as it is required in Torah and was being practiced at the Temple during that era. Historically, at the point, there were two sacrifice times going on, one on the night of the 13^th and one on the night of the 14^th.

The salient point however is that Y'shua says "I have longed to eat THIS Passover with you" (Lk.22:15). In the Greek, TOUTO (this) is a present indicative - "this one visibly present before me". The meal they ate, He called the PASCHA (Greek 3957) - the same word the LXX uses to translate 'Pasach'. The Aramaic here concurs, using PETSKHA - “Passover”. Since we don't know if there was lamb there or not, but we DO know that there was bread, wine, and a meal of some sort, we can safely say he meant the WHOLE evening, not just the lamb. Thus, Y'shua's words agree with a broader view of the Pasach.

A final interesting thing to note is how the non-circumcision view is often 'supported' by referring to the mixed multitude that went out also eating unleavened bread for seven days. While it is true that many non-Israelites left Mitsraim along with them, these did NOT observe the Pasach! Who did Moshe and Ahron speak to? Israel. Who obeyed? Israel. There is no record of ANY non-Israelites eating that first Pasach and being saved from the death of the firstborn. Circumcision is not required to observe the feast of Unleavened Bread, but it is for Passover.