What if the Observational Hebrew Calendar is Reinstated?
I am frequently asked “What is the relevance of this rectified Hebrew calendar reform if the observational Hebrew calendar is reinstated by the New Sanhedrin, based on the testimony of two reliable witnesses regarding the first visibility of the new lunar crescent?” Such observations are only concerned with determining whether the new month starts on the 30th or the 31st day after the start of the previous month. In other words, crescent observations replace the molad, but not the rule for leap years. They have nothing to do with the decision to insert a leap month, therefore nothing to do with correcting the seasonal drift of the Hebrew calendar. According to what Rambam wrote in his treatise cited above, the Sanhedrin had to make the decision to insert a leap month or not well in advance of the equinox, so that pilgrims intending to come to Jerusalem would know when to begin their journey, and was based on prediction of the Tekufat Nisan (spring equinox) moment using either the Tekuf
