Yahrzeit/Birthdays should be in Adar II

[mjradwin]

Submitted by mradwin on 2003-01-07 15:30:57

(originally reported by Shmuel Birnbaum
sambam@optonline.net)

hebcal -Y calculates regular Adar yarhzeits as occurring
in Adar I on a leap year, which is incorrect according to
some sources.

Looking at Reingold & Dershowitz's "Calendrical
Calculations", it says, "The birthday of someone born in
Adar of an ordinary year or Adar II of a leap year is also
always in the last month of the year, be that Adar or
Adar II. Someone born on the thirtieth day of Cheshvan,
Kislev, or Adar I has his birthday postponed until the first
of the following month in years where that day does not
occur." (p. 111)

The rule for Yarzeit is different, however, according to
Reingold & Dershowitz:

"The customary anniversary date of a death is more
complicated and depends also on the character of the
year in which the first anniversary occurs. There are
several cases:

• If the date of death is Cheshvan 30, the anniversary in
  general depends on the first anniversary; if that first
  anniversary was not Chesvan 30, use the day before
  Kislev 1.
• If the date of death is Kislev 30, the anniverary in
  general again depeds on the first anniverary -- if that was
  not Kislev 30, use the day before Tevet 1.
• If the date of death is Adar II, the anniversary is the
  same day in the last month of the Hebrew year (Adar or
  Adar II).
• If the date of death is Adar I 30, the anniversary in a
  Hebrew year that is not a leap year (in which Adar only
  has 29 days) is the last day in Shevat.
• In all other cases, use the normal (birthday) anniverary
  of the date of death." (p. 113)

And lastly

"There are minor variations in custom regarding the
anniversary date in some of these cases. For example,
Spanish and Portuguese Jews never observe the
anniversary in Adar I." (p. 114)

[mjradwin]

Submitted by mradwin on 2003-01-27 10:26:47

Logged In: YES
user_id=304306

hebcal 3.3beta10 contains a fix for this issue.

[mjradwin]

Submitted by nobody on 2003-02-11 07:22:45

Logged In: NO

this is gay!