“ ‘You shall count from the next day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering: seven Sabbaths shall be completed.
To count forty-nine days from the offering of the omer to Shavuot
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
וּסְפַרְתֶּם לָכֶם מִמׇּחֳרַת הַשַּׁבָּת מִיּוֹם הֲבִיאֲכֶם אֶת־עֹמֶר הַתְּנוּפָה שֶׁבַע שַׁבָּתוֹת תְּמִימֹת תִּהְיֶינָה
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
היא שצונו לספור מקצירת העומר תשעה וארבעים יום. והוא אמרו יתעלה וספרתם לכם ממחרת השבת וגו'. ודע כי כמו שנתחייבו בית דין למנות שנות יובל שנה שנה שמטה שמטה כמו שביארתי במה שקדם כן חייב כל אחד ואחד ממנו למנות ימות העומר יום יום ושבוע שבוע. הוא שאמר תספרו חמשים יום ואמר שבעה שבועות תספר לך. וכמו שמצות מנין השנים והשמיטה מצוה אחת כמו שבארנו (מצוה ק"מ:) כן ספירת העומר מצוה אחת, וכן מנה אותה כל מי שקדמנו מצוה אחת. ואל יטעך אמרם (מנחות ס"ו) מצוה לממני יומי ומצוה לממני שבועי ותחשוב שהם שתי מצות כי כל חלק וחלק מחלקי מצוה שיהיו לה חלקים מצוה לעשות כל חלק ממנה. ואמנם היו שתי מצות אילו אמרו מנין הימים מצוה ומנין שבועות מצוה, וזה מה שלא יעלם למי שלא יטעה אותם הדבור. כי אתה כשתאמר מצוה לעשות כך וכך הנה לא יתחייב מזה המאמר שהפעולה ההיא מצוה בפני עצמה. והראיה הברורה על זה היותנו מונים גם כן בכל לילה שהם כך וכך שבועות כך וכך ימים ואילו היו השבועות מצוה בפני עצמה לא היינו מסדרין ענינה אלא בליל השבועות והיינו אומרים שתי ברכות על ספירת העומר ועל ספירת שבועי העומר. ואין הדברים כן אלא המצוה היא ספירת העומר יומי ושבועי כמו שתקנו. ומצוה זו אין הנשים חייבות בה. (אמור אל הכהנים, תמידין ומוספין פ"י):
That is that He commanded us to count forty-nine days from the harvesting of the omer. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "you shall count for yourselves seven weeks from the morrow of the Shabbat, etc." (Leviticus 23:15). And you should know that just like the court is obligated to count the years of the Jubilee, year by year [and] cycle by cycle - as we explained in what came previously (Sefer Hamitzvot, Positive Commandments 140) - so too is each and every one of us obligated to count the days of the omer, day by day and week by week. And that is His having said, "you must count fifty days" (Leviticus 23:16), and "Seven weeks shall you count for yourself" (Deuteronomy 16:8). And just like the commandment of counting the years and the sabbatical cycles is one commandment - as we explained - so too is the counting of the omer, one commandment. And do not be fooled by their saying (Menachot 66a), "It is a commandment to count days and it is a commandment to count weeks," and think that they are two commandments. For it is a commandment to do each and every part of commandments that have have different parts. However had they said, "From where [do we know that] the days are a commandment; and from where [do we know that] the weeks are a commandment" - it would have been two commandments. And this will not be lost on the one that will not be fooled by the words. Since were you to say, "It is an obligation to do such and such," it surely does not necessarily make that action a separate commandment. And the clear proof for this is our counting every night that it is such and such weeks and such and such days. And were it to be a separate commandment, we would only arrange its content on the night of Shavuot; and we would say two blessings - on the counting of the omer; and on the counting of the weeks of the omer. But the things are not like this. Rather the commandment is counting the omer daily and weekly [together], as they ordained. And women are not obligated in this commandment. (See Parashat Emor; Mishneh Torah, Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 10.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a ritual instruction
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Recorded as practiced today
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
No court-imposed penalty is recorded.
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding
- Conservative Binding
- Reform Kept as an ethical principle
- Reconstructionist Not binding
- Karaite Binding, with modification
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls)
- 11QTemple (11Q19) cols. 18-19 The catalog describes this reception as: sectarian calendrical reinterpretation
- 4Q320-330 (calendrical texts) reinterpreted it
Rabbinic aggadah
- Vayikra Rabbah 28:3 expanded it homiletically
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 2.162-176 read it allegorically
Josephus
- Ant. 3.250-252 rationalized it
The New Testament
- Acts 2:1 reinterpreted it Pentecost (the fiftieth day) becomes the setting for the Spirit's descent, presupposing the omer count's terminus
- 1 Corinthians 16:8 The catalog describes this reception as: incidental reference Paul dates his travel plans by Pentecost, attesting the festival as a calendrical landmark in diaspora Judaism rather than engaging the counting law itself
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
No tension with the catalogued modern frameworks is recorded here.