Even though the 70 years of exile were counted from the destruction of the Temple and the complete exile of the Jews in 586, the count that Balshezar has done, from the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign was also somewhat true as it was the date used for Cyrus’s (Coresh) proclamation permitting the Jews to rebuild the Temple. Was it a wise thing or a foolish thing that first Acheshvaerosh made a party for the people who lived farther away and then later for the ones who lived in his city, Shushan? Why were the Jews of that generation punished (that Haman was going to destroy them)? And why were they ultimately saved if they sinned? The party was in the court of the garden of the king’s palace – was it in all three places? If so, why? All sorts of details of the party and what decorations there were are expounded by the rabbis. The rabbis also place Mordechai and Haman at the party based on drashot of the verses, even though according to the simple reading of the text, they were not mentioned. Vashti made her own party – where and why? Why was it specifically on the 7th day that the king asked Vashti to appear naked? This request was understood as punishment for what she did to Jewish women. Why did Vashti refuse? Why did Achashverosh get so angry? Achasverosh turned to the rabbis for advice – what was their quandary? They advised him to ask Amon and Moab instead. The names of the seven advisors are references to sacrifices and other Temple worship as a way of the angels saying to God – did these people ever serve you as the Jews did? Memuchan is a reference to Haman – why was he called Memuchan? Why was it beneficial to the Jews that Achashverosh sent our a proclamation that every man should wield authority in his house? Why is Mordechai called both Yehudi (presumably, from the tribe of Judah) and Yemini (from the tribe of Benjamin). Several different explanations are brought.
Siyum Masechet Avodah Zarah
Siyum Masechet Avodah Zarah is dedicated with love and pride to Terri Krivosha from her husband, Rabbi Hayim Herring, her children, Tamar, Avi and Shaina, and her grandchildren, Noam, Liba, and Orly, for completing her first Daf Yomi cycle. You embody the words of Micah 6:8, and “do justice, love goodness, and walk modestly with HaShem.”
Megillah
Masechet Megilah is sponsored by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria Esther who is completing Masechet Megilla in honor of her Bat Mitzva. Mazal tov!
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Megillah
Masechet Megilah is sponsored by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria Esther who is completing Masechet Megilla in honor of her Bat Mitzva. Mazal tov!
Siyum Masechet Avodah Zarah
Siyum Masechet Avodah Zarah is dedicated with love and pride to Terri Krivosha from her husband, Rabbi Hayim Herring, her children, Tamar, Avi and Shaina, and her grandchildren, Noam, Liba, and Orly, for completing her first Daf Yomi cycle. You embody the words of Micah 6:8, and “do justice, love goodness, and walk modestly with HaShem.”
Megillah 12
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: וְעוֹד שָׁנָה אַחֶרֶת לְבָבֶל וְעָמַד דָּרְיָוֶשׁ וְהִשְׁלִימָהּ.
This is also taught in a baraita, as an indication that the years counted were only partial years: And when Belshazzar was killed, there was still another year left for Babylonia before the reckoning of the seventy years was completed. And then Darius arose and completed it. Although seventy years were previously counted according to Belshazzar’s count, from the exile of Jehoiakim, because the years were only partial, there was still one year left in order to complete those seventy years.
אָמַר רָבָא: אַף דָּנִיאֵל טְעָה בְּהַאי חוּשְׁבָּנָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״בִּשְׁנַת אַחַת לְמׇלְכוֹ אֲנִי דָּנִיֵּאל בִּינוֹתִי בַּסְּפָרִים״. מִדְּקָאָמַר ״בִּינוֹתִי״ — מִכְּלָל דִּטְעָה.
Rava said: Daniel also erred in this calculation, as it is written: “In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, meditated in the books over the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish for the desolations of Jerusalem seventy years” (Daniel 9:2). From the fact that he said “I meditated,” a term indicating recounting and calculating, it can be inferred that he had previously erred.
מִכׇּל מָקוֹם קָשׁוּ קְרָאֵי אַהֲדָדֵי, כְּתִיב: ״מְלֹאות לְבָבֶל״, וּכְתִיב: ״לְחׇרְבוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַםִ״!
The Gemara comments: In any case, the verses contradict each other with regard to how the seventy years should be calculated. In one verse it is written: “After seventy years are accomplished for Babylonia I will remember [efkod] you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place” (Jeremiah 29:10), which indicates that the seventy years should be counted from the Babylonian exile. And in another verse it is written: “That he would accomplish for the desolations of Jerusalem seventy years” (Daniel 9:2), indicating that the seventy years are calculated from the destruction of Jerusalem.
אָמַר רָבָא: לִפְקִידָה בְּעָלְמָא. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״כֹּה אָמַר כּוֹרֶשׁ מֶלֶךְ פָּרַס כֹּל מַמְלְכוֹת הָאָרֶץ נָתַן לִי ה׳ אֱלֹהֵי הַשָּׁמָיִם וְהוּא פָקַד עָלַי לִבְנוֹת לוֹ בַיִת בִּירוּשָׁלִַם״.
Rava said in response: The seventy years that “are accomplished for Babylonia” were only for being remembered [lifekida], as mentioned in the verse, allowing the Jews to return to Eretz Yisrael but not to build the Temple. And this is as it is written with regard to Cyrus’s proclamation permitting the Jewish people’s return to Eretz Yisrael, in the seventieth year of the Babylonian exile: “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: The Lord, God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He has charged [pakad] me to build Him a house in Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:2). The verse makes use of the same root, peh-kuf-dalet, heralding the return to Jerusalem to build the Temple, but not its actual completion.
דָּרַשׁ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר רַב חִסְדָּא, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ לִמְשִׁיחוֹ לְכוֹרֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר הֶחֱזַקְתִּי בִימִינוֹ״, וְכִי כּוֹרֶשׁ מָשִׁיחַ הָיָה? אֶלָּא אָמַר לֵיהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמָשִׁיחַ: קוֹבֵל אֲנִי לְךָ עַל כּוֹרֶשׁ. אֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי: הוּא יִבְנֶה בֵּיתִי וִיקַבֵּץ גָּלִיּוֹתַי, וְהוּא אָמַר: ״מִי בָכֶם מִכׇּל עַמּוֹ וְיַעַל״.
Apropos its mention of Cyrus, the Gemara states that Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda interpreted homiletically a verse concerning Cyrus: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Thus says the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held” (Isaiah 45:1), which seemingly is referring to Cyrus as God’s anointed? Now was Cyrus God’s anointed one, i.e., the Messiah, that the verse should refer to him in this manner? Rather, the verse should be understood as God speaking to the Messiah with regard to Cyrus: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Messiah: I am complaining to you about Cyrus, who is not acting in accordance with what he is intended to do. I had said: “He shall build My House and gather My exiles” (see Isaiah 45:13), but he did not carry this out. Rather, he said: “Whoever is among you of all His people…let him go up to Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:3). He gave permission to return to Israel, but he did no more than that.
״חֵיל פָּרַס וּמָדַי הַפַּרְתְּמִים״, וּכְתִיב: ״לְמַלְכֵי מָדַי וּפָרָס״. אָמַר רָבָא: אַתְנוֹיֵי אַתְנוֹ בַּהֲדָדֵי, אִי מִינַּן מַלְכֵי — מִינַּיְיכוּ אִיפַּרְכֵי וְאִי מִינַּיְיכוּ מַלְכֵי — מִינַּן אִיפַּרְכֵי.
§ The Gemara returns to its interpretations of verses in the Megilla. The Megilla mentions that among those invited to the king’s feast were: “The army of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces” (Esther 1:3), and it is written near the conclusion of the Megilla: “In the book of chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia” (Esther 10:2). Why is Persia mentioned first at the beginning of the Megilla, while later in the Megilla, Media is mentioned first? Rava said in response: These two peoples, the Persians and the Medes, stipulated with each other, saying: If the kings will come from us, the ministers will come from you; and if the kings will come from you, the ministers will come from us. Therefore, in reference to kings, Media is mentioned first, whereas in connection with nobles and princes, Persia is given priority.
״בְּהַרְאוֹתוֹ אֶת עוֹשֶׁר כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ״, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁלָּבַשׁ בִּגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה. כְּתִיב הָכָא: ״יְקָר תִּפְאֶרֶת גְּדוּלָּתוֹ״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאֶרֶת״.
The verse states: “When he showed the riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness” (Esther 1:4). Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that Ahasuerus wore the priestly vestments. Proof for this assertion may be adduced from the fact that the same terms are written with regard to the priestly vestments, as it is written here: “The riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness.” And it is written there, with regard to the priestly garments: “For glory [kavod] and for majesty [tiferet]” (Exodus 28:2).
״וּבִמְלֹאות הַיָּמִים הָאֵלֶּה וְגוֹ׳״. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר: מֶלֶךְ פִּיקֵּחַ הָיָה, וְחַד אָמַר: מֶלֶךְ טִיפֵּשׁ הָיָה. מַאן דְּאָמַר מֶלֶךְ פִּיקֵּחַ הָיָה — שַׁפִּיר עֲבַד דְּקָרֵיב רַחִיקָא בְּרֵישָׁא, דִּבְנֵי מָאתֵיהּ כׇּל אֵימַת דְּבָעֵי מְפַיֵּיס לְהוּ. וּמַאן דְּאָמַר טִיפֵּשׁ הָיָה — דְּאִיבְּעִי לֵיהּ לְקָרוֹבֵי בְּנֵי מָאתֵיהּ בְּרֵישָׁא, דְּאִי מָרְדוּ בֵּיהּ הָנָךְ, הָנֵי הֲווֹ קָיְימִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ.
The verse states: “And when these days were fulfilled, the king made a feast for all the people that were present in Shushan the capital” (Esther 1:5). Rav and Shmuel disagreed as to whether this was a wise decision. One said: Ahasuerus arranged a feast for the residents of Shushan, the capital, after the feast for foreign dignitaries that preceded it, as mentioned in the earlier verses, indicating that he was a clever king. And the other one said: It is precisely this that indicates that he was a foolish king. The one who said that this proves that he was a clever king maintains that he acted well when he first brought close those more distant subjects by inviting them to the earlier celebration, as he could appease the residents of his own city whenever he wished. And the one who said that he was foolish maintains that he should have invited the residents of his city first, so that if those faraway subjects rebelled against him, these who lived close by would have stood with him.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי: מִפְּנֵי מָה נִתְחַיְּיבוּ שׂוֹנְאֵיהֶן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר כְּלָיָה? אָמַר לָהֶם: אִמְרוּ אַתֶּם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנֶּהֱנוּ מִסְּעוּדָתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע. אִם כֵּן שֶׁבְּשׁוּשַׁן יֵהָרְגוּ, שֶׁבְּכׇל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ אַל יֵהָרְגוּ! אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֱמוֹר אַתָּה! אָמַר לָהֶם: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לַצֶּלֶם.
The students of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai asked him: For what reason were the enemies of Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves when exhibiting behavior that is not in their best interests, in that generation deserving of annihilation? He, Rabbi Shimon, said to them: Say the answer to your question yourselves. They said to him: It is because they partook of the feast of that wicked one, Ahasuerus, and they partook there of forbidden foods. Rabbi Shimon responded: If so, those in Shushan should have been killed as punishment, but those in the rest of the world, who did not participate in the feast, should not have been killed. They said to him: Then you say your response to our question. He said to them: It is because they prostrated before the idol that Nebuchadnezzar had made, as is recorded that the entire world bowed down before it, except for Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: וְכִי מַשּׂוֹא פָּנִים יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר? אָמַר לָהֶם: הֵם לֹא עָשׂוּ אֶלָּא לִפְנִים — אַף הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֹא עָשָׂה עִמָּהֶן אֶלָּא לִפְנִים. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״כִּי לֹא עִנָּה מִלִּבּוֹ״.
They said to him: But if it is true that they worshipped idols and therefore deserved to be destroyed, why was a miracle performed on their behalf? Is there favoritism expressed by God here? He said to them: They did not really worship the idol, but pretended to do so only for appearance, acting as if they were carrying out the king’s command to bow before the idol. So too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, did not destroy them but did act angry with them only for appearance. He too merely pretended to desire to destroy them, as all He did was issue a threat, but in the end the decree was annulled. And this is as it is written: “For He does not afflict from His heart willingly” (Lamentations 3:33), but only for appearances’ sake.
״בַּחֲצַר גִּנַּת בִּיתַן הַמֶּלֶךְ״. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר: הָרָאוּי לֶחָצֵר — לֶחָצֵר, הָרָאוּי לַגִּינָּה — לַגִּינָּה, הָרָאוּי לַבִּיתָן — לַבִּיתָן. וְחַד אָמַר: הוֹשִׁיבָן בֶּחָצֵר וְלֹא הֶחְזִיקָתַן, בַּגִּינָּה וְלֹא הֶחְזִיקָתַן, עַד שֶׁהִכְנִיסָן לַבִּיתָן וְהֶחְזִיקָתַן. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: הוֹשִׁיבָן בֶּחָצֵר וּפָתַח לָהֶם שְׁנֵי פְתָחִים, אֶחָד לַגִּינָּה וְאֶחָד לַבִּיתָן.
The verse states: “In the court of the garden of the king’s palace” (Esther 1:5). Rav and Shmuel disagreed with regard to how to understand the relationship between these three places: Court, garden, and palace: One said: The guests were received in different places. One who, according to his stature, was fit for the courtyard was brought to the courtyard; one who was fit for the garden was brought to the garden; and one who was fit for the palace was brought to the palace. And the other one said: He first sat them in the courtyard, but it did not hold them, as they were too numerous. He then sat them in the garden, but it did not hold them either, until he brought them into the palace and it held them. A third understanding was taught in a baraita: He sat them in the courtyard and opened two entranceways for them, one to the garden and one to the palace.
״חוּר כַּרְפַּס וּתְכֵלֶת״. מַאי חוּר? רַב אָמַר: חָרֵי חָרֵי, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: מֵילָת לְבָנָה הִצִּיעַ לָהֶם. ״כַּרְפַּס״, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: כָּרִים שֶׁל פַּסִּים.
The verse states: “There were hangings of ḥur, karpas, and sky blue” (Esther 1:6). The Gemara asks: What is ḥur? Rav said: A fabric fashioned with many holes [ḥarei ḥarei], similar to lace. And Shmuel said: He spread out for them carpets of white wool, as the word ḥavar means white. And what is karpas? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: Cushions [karim] of velvet [pasim].
״עַל גְּלִילֵי כֶסֶף וְעַמּוּדֵי שֵׁשׁ מִטּוֹת זָהָב וָכֶסֶף״, תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: הָרָאוּי לְכֶסֶף — לְכֶסֶף, הָרָאוּי לְזָהָב — לְזָהָב. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה: אִם כֵּן, אַתָּה מֵטִיל קִנְאָה בַּסְּעוּדָה. אֶלָּא: הֵם שֶׁל כֶּסֶף, וְרַגְלֵיהֶן שֶׁל זָהָב.
The verse states: “On silver rods and pillars of marble; the couches were of gold and silver” (Esther 1:6). It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: Some couches were of gold and others of silver. One who, according to his stature, was fit for silver sat on a couch of silver, and one who was fit for gold sat on one of gold. Rabbi Neḥemya said to him: This was not done. If so, you would cast jealousy into the feast, for the guests would be envious of each other. Rather, the couches themselves were made of silver, and their feet were made of gold.
״בַּהַט וָשֵׁשׁ״. אֲמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: אֲבָנִים שֶׁמִּתְחוֹטְטוֹת עַל בַּעֲלֵיהֶן. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״אַבְנֵי נֵזֶר מִתְנוֹסְסוֹת עַל אַדְמָתוֹ״.
The verse continues: “Upon a pavement of bahat and marble” (Esther 1:6). Rabbi Asi said with regard to the definition of bahat: These are stones that ingratiate themselves with their owners, as they are precious stones that people are willing to spend large amounts of money to acquire. And similarly, it states elsewhere that the Jewish people will be likened to precious stones: “And the Lord their God shall save them in that day as the flock of His people; for they shall be as “the stones of a crown, glittering over His land” (Zechariah 9:16).
״וְדַר וְסוֹחָרֶת״, רַב אָמַר: דָּרֵי דָּרֵי. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֶבֶן טוֹבָה יֵשׁ בִּכְרַכֵּי הַיָּם וְ״דָרָה״ שְׁמָהּ, הוֹשִׁיבָהּ בְּאֶמְצַע סְעוּדָה וּמְאִירָה לָהֶם כַּצׇּהֳרַיִם. דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: שֶׁקָּרָא דְּרוֹר לְכׇל בַּעֲלֵי סְחוֹרָה.
The verse concludes: “And dar and soḥaret” (Esther 1:6). Rav said: Dar means many rows [darei darei] around. Similarly, soḥaret is derived from seḥor seḥor, around and around, meaning that the floor was surrounded with numerous rows of bahat and marble stones. And Shmuel said: There is a precious stone in the seaports, and its name is dara, and Ahasuerus placed it in the center of the feast, and it illuminated the festivities for them as the sun illuminates the world at midday. He explains that the word soḥaret is derived from tzohar, a light. A scholar from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught a baraita: This means that he proclaimed a remission for all the merchants, absolving them from paying their taxes, understanding that the word dar derives from deror, freedom, and soḥaret from soḥer, merchant.
״וְהַשְׁקוֹת בִּכְלֵי זָהָב וְכֵלִים מִכֵּלִים שׁוֹנִים״. ״מְשׁוּנִּים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אָמַר רָבָא, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה לָהֶם: רִאשׁוֹנִים כָּלוּ מִפְּנֵי כֵלַי, וְאַתֶּם שׁוֹנִים בָּהֶם! ״וְיֵין מַלְכוּת רָב״, אָמַר רַב: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הִשְׁקָהוּ יַיִן שֶׁגָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ בְּשָׁנִים.
The verse states: “And they gave them drink in vessels of gold, the vessels being diverse [shonim] from one another” (Esther 1:7). The Gemara asks: Why does the verse use the term shonim to express that they are different? It should have said the more proper term meshunim. Rava said: A Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: The early ones, referring to Belshazzar and his people, were destroyed because they used these vessels, the vessels of the Temple, and yet you use them again [shonim]? The verse continues: “And royal wine in abundance [rav]” (Esther 1:7). Rav said: This teaches that each and every guest at the feast was poured well-aged wine that was older [rav] than himself in years.
״וְהַשְּׁתִיָּה כַדָּת (אֵין אוֹנֵס)״, מַאי ״כַּדָּת״? אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: כְּדָת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה, מָה דָּת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה אֲכִילָה מְרוּבָּה מִשְּׁתִיָּה — אַף סְעוּדָּתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע אֲכִילָה מְרוּבָּה מִשְּׁתִיָּה.
The verse states: “And the drinking was according to the law; none did compel” (Esther 1:8). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of “according to the law”? Rabbi Ḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir: The drinking was according to the law of the Torah. Just as, according to the law of the Torah, with regard to offerings, the food sacrificed on the altar is greater in quantity than the drink, for the wine libation is quantitatively much smaller than the sacrificial offerings it accompanies, so too, at the feast of that wicked man, the food was greater in quantity than the drink.
״אֵין אוֹנֵס״, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הִשְׁקָהוּ מִיֵּין מְדִינָתוֹ. ״לַעֲשׂוֹת כִּרְצוֹן אִישׁ וָאִישׁ״, אָמַר רָבָא: לַעֲשׂוֹת כִּרְצוֹן מָרְדֳּכַי וְהָמָן. מָרְדֳּכַי — דִּכְתִיב: ״אִישׁ יְהוּדִי״, הָמָן — ״אִישׁ צַר וְאוֹיֵב״.
The verse states: “None did compel” (Esther 1:8). Rabbi Elazar said: This teaches that each and every guest at the feast was poured a drink from wine of his own country, so that he would feel entirely free, as if he were in his home country. The verse continues: “That they should do according to every man’s pleasure” (Esther 1:8). Rava commented on the literal meaning of the verse, which is referring to two men, a man and a man [ish va’ish], and said: The man and man whom they should follow indicates that they should do according to the wishes of Mordecai and Haman. The two of them served as butlers at the feast, and they were in charge of distributing the wine. Why is the verse interpreted in this way? Mordecai is called “man,” as it is written: “There was a certain Jewish man [ish] in Shushan the castle, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair” (Esther 2:5). And Haman is also called man, as it states: “A man [ish] who is an adversary and an enemy, this evil Haman” (Esther 7:6).
״גַּם וַשְׁתִּי הַמַּלְכָּה עָשְׂתָה מִשְׁתֵּה נָשִׁים בֵּית הַמַּלְכוּת״. ״בֵּית הַנָּשִׁים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אָמַר רָבָא: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי: אִיהוּ בְּקָרֵי, וְאִתְּתֵיהּ
The verse states: “Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women, in the royal house, which belonged to King Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:9). The Gemara questions why she held the feast in the royal house, a place of men, rather than in the women’s house, where it should have been. Rava said in response: The two of them had sinful intentions. Ahasuerus wished to fornicate with the women, and Vashti wished to fornicate with the men. This explains the folk saying that people say: He with pumpkins and his wife
בְּבוּצִינֵי.
with zucchinis, indicating that often a man and his wife engage in similar actions.
״בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי כְּטוֹב לֵב הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּיָּיִן״. אַטּוּ עַד הַשְׁתָּא לָא טָב לִבֵּיהּ בְּחַמְרָא? אֲמַר רָבָא: יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי שַׁבָּת הָיָה. שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין — מַתְחִילִין בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה וּבְדִבְרֵי תִשְׁבָּחוֹת. אֲבָל אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁאוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין — אֵין מַתְחִילִין אֶלָּא בְּדִבְרֵי תִיפְלוּת.
The verse states: “On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine” (Esther 1:10). The Gemara asks: Is that to say that until now his heart was not merry with wine? Did it take seven days for him to achieve merriment? Rava said: The seventh day was Shabbat, when the difference between the Jewish people and the gentiles is most apparent. On Shabbat, when the Jewish people eat and drink, they begin by occupying themselves with words of Torah and words of praise for God. But the nations of the world, when they eat and drink, they begin only with words of licentiousness.
וְכֵן בִּסְעוּדָּתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע, הַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: מָדִיּוֹת נָאוֹת, וְהַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: פָּרְסִיּוֹת נָאוֹת. אָמַר לָהֶם אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ: כְּלִי שֶׁאֲנִי מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ, אֵינוֹ לֹא מָדִיִּי וְלֹא פָּרְסִי אֶלָּא כַּשְׂדִּיִּי, רְצוֹנְכֶם לִרְאוֹתָהּ? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא עֲרוּמָּה.
The Gemara continues to detail what occurred at the feast. So too, at the feast of that wicked man, Ahasuerus, when the men began to converse, some said: The Median women are the most beautiful, while others said: The Persian women are the most beautiful. Ahasuerus said to them: The vessel that I use, i.e., my wife, is neither Median nor Persian, but rather Chaldean. Do you wish to see her? They said to him: Yes, provided that she be naked, for we wish to see her without any additional adornments.
שֶׁבַּמִּדָּה שֶׁאָדָם מוֹדֵד — בָּהּ מוֹדְדִין לוֹ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהָיְתָה וַשְׁתִּי הָרְשָׁעָה מְבִיאָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמַפְשִׁיטָתָן עֲרוּמּוֹת וְעוֹשָׂה בָּהֶן מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת. הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה כְּשׁוֹךְ חֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ זָכַר אֶת וַשְׁתִּי וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂתָה וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ״, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעָשָׂתָה — כָּךְ נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ.
The Gemara comments: Vashti was punished in this humiliating way for it is with the measure that a man measures to others that he himself is measured. In other words, God punishes individuals in line with their transgressions, measure for measure. This teaches that the wicked Vashti would take the daughters of Israel, and strip them naked, and make them work on Shabbat. Therefore, it was decreed that she be brought before the king naked, on Shabbat. This is as it is written: “After these things, when the wrath of King Ahasuerus was appeased, he remembered Vashti, and what she had done, and what was decreed against her” (Esther 2:1). That is to say, just as she had done with the young Jewish women, so it was decreed upon her.
״וַתְּמָאֵן הַמַּלְכָּה וַשְׁתִּי״. מִכְּדֵי פְּרִיצְתָּא הֲוַאי, דְּאָמַר מָר: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אֲתַאי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁפָּרְחָה בָּהּ צָרַעַת. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: [בָּא גַּבְרִיאֵל וְעָשָׂה לָהּ זָנָב].
The verse states: “But the queen Vashti refused to come” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Since she was immodest, as the Master said above: The two of them had sinful intentions, what is the reason that she did not come? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that she broke out in leprosy, and therefore she was embarrassed to expose herself publicly. An alternative reason for her embarrassment was taught in a baraita: The angel Gabriel came and fashioned her a tail.
״וַיִּקְצֹף הַמֶּלֶךְ מְאֹד״. אַמַּאי דְּלַקָה בֵּיהּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אָמַר רָבָא, שְׁלַחָה לֵיהּ: בַּר אַהוּרְיָירֵיהּ דְּאַבָּא, אַבָּא לָקֳבֵל אַלְפָּא חַמְרָא שָׁתֵי וְלָא רָוֵי, וְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא אִשְׁתַּטִּי בְּחַמְרֵיהּ, מִיָּד: ״וַחֲמָתוֹ בָּעֲרָה בוֹ״.
The verse continues: “Therefore the king was very wrathful, and his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Why did his anger burn in him so greatly merely because she did not wish to come? Rava said: Vashti not only refused to come, but she also sent him a message by way of a messenger: You, son of my father’s stableman [ahuriyyarei]. Belshazzar, my father, drank wine against a thousand men and did not become inebriated, as the verse in Daniel (5:1) testifies about him: “Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand”; and that man, referring euphemistically to Ahasuerus himself, has become senseless from his wine. Due to her audacity, immediately “his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12).
״וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ לַחֲכָמִים״, מַאן חֲכָמִים — רַבָּנַן. ״יוֹדְעֵי הָעִתִּים״ — שֶׁיּוֹדְעִין לְעַבֵּר שָׁנִים וְלִקְבּוֹעַ חֳדָשִׁים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: דַּיְּינוּהָ לִי. אֲמַרוּ: הֵיכִי נַעֲבֵיד? נֵימָא לֵיהּ: קִטְלַהּ, לִמְחַר פָּסֵיק לֵיהּ חַמְרֵיהּ וּבָעֵי לַהּ מִינַּן. נֵימָא לֵיהּ: שִׁבְקַהּ — קָא מְזַלְזְלָה בְּמַלְכוּתָא, אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְגָלִינוּ מֵאַרְצֵנוּ, נִיטְּלָה עֵצָה מִמֶּנּוּ וְאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לָדוּן דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. זִיל לְגַבֵּי עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב דְּיָתְבִי בְּדוּכְתַּיְיהוּ כְּחַמְרָא דְּיָתֵיב עַל דּוּרְדְּיֵיהּ.
The following verse states: “Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times” (Esther 1:13). The Gemara asks: Who are these wise men? These wise men are the Sages of the Jewish people, who are referred to as those “who knew the times,” for they know how to intercalate years and fix the months of the Jewish calendar. Ahasuerus said to them: Judge her for me. The Sages said in their hearts: What should we do? If we say to him: Kill her, tomorrow he will become sober and then come and demand her from us. If we say to him: Let her be, she has scorned royalty, and that cannot be tolerated. Consequently, they decided not to judge the matter, and they said to him as follows: From the day that the Temple was destroyed and we have been exiled from our land, counsel and insight have been removed from us, and we do not know how to judge capital cases, as they are exceptionally difficult. Go to the people of Ammon and Moab, who have remained permanently settled in their places like wine that is settled on its lees, and so their minds are settled as well.
וְטַעְמָא אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״שַׁאֲנַן מוֹאָב מִנְּעוּרָיו וְשׁוֹקֵט הוּא אֶל שְׁמָרָיו וְלֹא הוּרַק מִכְּלִי אֶל כֶּלִי וּבַגּוֹלָה לֹא הָלָךְ עַל כֵּן עָמַד טַעְמוֹ בּוֹ וְרֵיחוֹ לֹא נָמָר״, מִיָּד: ״וְהַקָּרוֹב אֵלָיו כַּרְשְׁנָא שֵׁתָר אַדְמָתָא תַרְשִׁישׁ״.
And they provided a good reason when they spoke to him, as they proved that one who is settled retains his reasoning: For it is written: “Moab has been at ease from his youth, and he has settled on his lees, and has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, neither has he gone into exile; therefore his taste has remained in him, and his scent is not changed” (Jeremiah 48:11). Ahasuerus immediately acted on their advice and asked his advisors, as it is written: “And next to him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan” (Esther 1:14).
אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי: כׇּל פָּסוּק זֶה עַל שׁוּם קׇרְבָּנוֹת נֶאֱמַר.
Rabbi Levi said: This entire verse listing the names of the king’s advisors is stated on account of offerings. Each name alludes to an aspect of the sacrificial service that was unique to the Jewish people, which the ministering angels mentioned as merit for the Jewish people.
״כַּרְשְׁנָא״ — אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ כָּרִים בְּנֵי שָׁנָה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהִקְרִיבוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפָנֶיךָ? ״שֵׁתָר״ — כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ שְׁתֵּי תוֹרִין? ״אַדְמָתָא״ — כְּלוּם בָּנוּ לְפָנֶיךָ מִזְבֵּחַ אֲדָמָה? ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ״ — כְּלוּם שִׁימְּשׁוּ לְפָנֶיךָ בְּבִגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ וְשֹׁהַם וְיָשְׁפֵה״? ״מֶרֶס״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בְּדָם לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מַרְסְנָא״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בִּמְנָחוֹת לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מְמוּכָן״ — כְּלוּם הֵכִינוּ שֻׁלְחָן לְפָנֶיךָ?
“Carshena”; the ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, did the gentiles ever offer before You lambs [karim] of the first year [shana], as the Jewish people have offered before You? “Shethar”; have they ever offered before You two turtledoves [shetei torim]? “Admatha”; have they ever built before You an altar of earth [adama]? “Tarshish”; have they ever ministered before You in the priestly vestments, as it is written that on the fourth of the four rows of precious stones contained on the breastplate were: “A beryl [tarshish], an onyx, and a jasper” (Exodus 28:20). “Meres”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the blood of the offerings before You? “Marsena”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the meal-offering before You? “Memucan”; have they ever prepared [hekhinu] the table before You, on which the shewbread was placed?
״וַיֹּאמֶר מְמוּכָן״. תָּנָא: מְמוּכָן זֶה הָמָן, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ מְמוּכָן? שֶׁמּוּכָן לְפוּרְעָנוּת. אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: מִכָּאן שֶׁהַהֶדְיוֹט קוֹפֵץ בָּרֹאשׁ.
The verse states: “And Memucan said” (Esther 1:16). A Sage taught in a baraita: Memucan is Haman. And why is Haman referred to as Memucan? Because he was prepared [mukhan] to bring calamity upon the Jewish people. Rav Kahana said: From here we see that the common man jumps to the front and speaks first, for Memucan was mentioned last of the king’s seven advisors, and nevertheless he expressed his opinion first.
״לִהְיוֹת כׇּל אִישׁ שׂוֹרֵר בְּבֵיתוֹ״. אָמַר רָבָא: אִלְמָלֵא אִגְּרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת לֹא נִשְׁתַּיֵּיר מִשּׂוֹנְאֵיהֶן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל שָׂרִיד וּפָלִיט.
The king sent out letters to the people of all his provinces, in which it was written: “That every man shall wield authority in his own house and speak according to the language of his people” (Esther 1:22). Rava said: Were it not for the first letters sent by Ahasuerus, which everybody discounted, there would not have been left among the enemies of the Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves, a remnant or a refugee. Since these first letters were the subject of ridicule, people didn’t take the king seriously and did not immediately act upon the directive of the later letters, calling for the Jewish people’s destruction.
אָמְרִי: מַאי הַאי דְּשַׁדַּיר לַן ״לִהְיוֹת כׇּל אִישׁ שׂוֹרֵר בְּבֵיתוֹ״? פְּשִׁיטָא, אֲפִילּוּ קָרָחָה — בְּבֵיתֵיהּ פַּרְדַּשְׁכָּא לֶיהֱוֵי!
The Gemara continues. The reason that the first letters were not taken seriously is that they who received them would say: What is this that he has sent us: “That every man shall wield authority in his own house”? This is obvious; even a lowly weaver is commander [paredashekha] in his house. If so, why then did the king find it necessary to make such a proclamation?
״וְיַפְקֵד הַמֶּלֶךְ פְּקִידִים״. אָמַר רַבִּי, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כׇּל עָרוּם יַעֲשֶׂה בְדָעַת וּכְסִיל יִפְרֹשׂ אִוֶּלֶת״ —
The verse describes Ahasuerus’s search for a new wife by stating: “And let the king appoint officers in all the provinces of his kingdom, that they may gather together all the fair young virgins unto Shushan the castle” (Esther 2:3). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “In everything a prudent man acts with knowledge, but a fool unfolds his folly” (Proverbs 13:16)? The verse highlights the difference between two kings’ approaches to finding a wife.
״כׇּל עָרוּם יַעֲשֶׂה בְדָעַת״ — זֶה דָּוִד, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ עֲבָדָיו יְבַקְשׁוּ לַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה״; כֹּל מַאן דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ בְּרַתָּא — אַיָּיתַהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ. ״וּכְסִיל יִפְרוֹשׁ אִוֶּלֶת״ — זֶה אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְיַפְקֵד הַמֶּלֶךְ פְּקִידִים״; כֹּל מַאן דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ בְּרַתָּא — אַיטְמְרַהּ מִינֵּיהּ.
“In everything a prudent man acts with knowledge”; this statement is referring to David, who also sought a wife for himself, as it is written: “And his servants said to him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin” (I Kings 1:2). Since he sought one maiden, whoever had a daughter brought her to him, for everyone wanted his daughter to be the king’s wife. With regard to the continuation of the verse: “But a fool unfolds his folly” (Proverbs 13:16), this statement is referring to Ahasuerus, as it is written: “And let the king appoint officers” to seek out many maidens. Since it became clear that the king would have relations with all of them, but in the end he would choose only one as his bride, whoever had a daughter hid her from him.
״אִישׁ יְהוּדִי הָיָה בְּשׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה וְגוֹ׳ אִישׁ יְמִינִי״. מַאי קָאָמַר: אִי לְיַחוֹסֵיהּ קָאָתֵי — לְיַחֲסֵיהּ וְלֵיזִיל עַד בִּנְיָמִין! אֶלָּא מַאי שְׁנָא הָנֵי?
The verse that initially describes Mordecai states: “There was a certain Jew in Shushan the castle, whose name was Mordecai the son of Jair the son of Shimei the son of Kish, a Benjamite” (Esther 2:5). The Gemara asks: What is it conveying in the verse by saying the names of Mordecai’s ancestors? If the verse in fact comes to trace his ancestry, it should continue tracing his lineage back all the way to Benjamin, the founder of his tribe. Rather, what is different about these names that they deserve special mention?
תָּנָא: כּוּלָּן עַל שְׁמוֹ נִקְרְאוּ. ״בֶּן יָאִיר״ — בֵּן שֶׁהֵאִיר עֵינֵיהֶם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּתְפִלָּתוֹ. ״בֶּן שִׁמְעִי״ — בֵּן שֶׁשָּׁמַע אֵל תְּפִלָּתוֹ. ״בֶּן קִישׁ״ — שֶׁהִקִּישׁ עַל שַׁעֲרֵי רַחֲמִים וְנִפְתְּחוּ לוֹ.
The Gemara answers: A Sage taught the following baraita: All of them are names by which Mordecai was called. He was called “the son of Jair” because he was the son who enlightened [heir] the eyes of all of the Jewish people with his prayers; “the son of Shimei” because he was the son whom God heard [shama] his prayers; “the son of Kish” because he knocked [hikish] on the gates of mercy and they were opened to him.
קָרֵי לֵיהּ ״יְהוּדִי״ — אַלְמָא מִיהוּדָה קָאָתֵי, וְקָרֵי לֵיהּ ״יְמִינִי״ — אַלְמָא מִבִּנְיָמִין קָאָתֵי! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מָרְדֳּכַי מוּכְתָּר בְּנִימוּסוֹ הָיָה.
The Gemara points out a contradiction: Mordecai is referred to as a “Jew [Yehudi],” apparently indicating that he came from the tribe of Judah, but in the continuation of the verse he is called “Benjamite” [Yemini], which indicates that he came from the tribe of Benjamin. Rav Naḥman said: Mordecai was crowned with honorary names. Yehudi is one such honorary epithet, due to its allusion to the royal tribe of Judah, but it is not referring to Mordecai’s tribal affiliation.
אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: אָבִיו מִבִּנְיָמִין, וְאִמּוֹ מִיהוּדָה. וְרַבָּנַן אָמְרִי: מִשְׁפָּחוֹת מִתְגָּרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ. מִשְׁפַּחַת יְהוּדָה אוֹמֶרֶת: אֲנָא גְּרַמִי דְּמִתְיְלִיד מָרְדֳּכַי, דְּלָא קַטְלֵיהּ דָּוִד לְשִׁמְעִי בֶּן גֵּרָא. וּמִשְׁפַּחַת בִּנְיָמִין אָמְרָה: מִינַּאי קָאָתֵי.
Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said an alternative explanation: Mordecai’s father was from the tribe of Benjamin, and his mother was from the tribe of Judah. Therefore, he was both a Yemini, a Benjamite, and a Yehudi, from the tribe of Judah. And the Rabbis say that the dual lineage is due to a dispute: The families competed with each other over which tribe could take credit for Mordecai. The family of Judah would say: I caused the birth of Mordecai, as only because David did not kill Shimei, the son of Gera, when he cursed him (see II Samuel 16) was it possible for Mordecai to be born later from his descendants. And the family of Benjamin said in response: In the end he came from me, as he in fact was from Benjamin’s tribe.
רָבָא אָמַר: כְּנֶסֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל אָמְרָה לְאִידַּךְ גִּיסָא: רְאוּ מָה עָשָׂה לִי יְהוּדִי וּמָה שִׁילֵּם לִי יְמִינִי. מָה עָשָׂה לִי יְהוּדִי —
Rava said: The Congregation of Israel at the time said this from the opposite perspective, not as a boast, but as a complaint, remarking: See what a Judean has done to me and how a Benjamite has repaid me. What a Judean has done to me is referring to
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
Mamaroneck, NY, United States
I started learning when my brother sent me the news clip of the celebration of the last Daf Yomi cycle. I was so floored to see so many women celebrating that I wanted to be a part of it. It has been an enriching experience studying a text in a language I don’t speak, using background knowledge that I don’t have. It is stretching my learning in unexpected ways, bringing me joy and satisfaction.
Warwick, Rhode Island, United States
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
London, United Kingdom
I LOVE learning the Daf. I started with Shabbat. I join the morning Zoom with Reb Michelle and it totally grounds my day. When Corona hit us in Israel, I decided that I would use the Daf to keep myself sane, especially during the days when we could not venture out more than 300 m from our home. Now my husband and I have so much new material to talk about! It really is the best part of my day!
Hashmonaim, Israel
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Minnesota, United States
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!
Berlin, Germany
I started Daf during the pandemic. I listened to a number of podcasts by various Rebbeim until one day, I discovered Rabbanit Farbers podcast. Subsequently I joined the Hadran family in Eruvin. Not the easiest place to begin, Rabbanit Farber made it all understandable and fun. The online live group has bonded together and have really become a supportive, encouraging family.
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
I began my journey two years ago at the beginning of this cycle of the daf yomi. It has been an incredible, challenging experience and has given me a new perspective of Torah Sh’baal Peh and the role it plays in our lives
Efrat, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Ra’anana, Israel
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
אפרת, Israel
I was inspired to start learning after attending the 2020 siyum in Binyanei Hauma. It has been a great experience for me. It’s amazing to see the origins of stories I’ve heard and rituals I’ve participated in my whole life. Even when I don’t understand the daf itself, I believe that the commitment to learning every day is valuable and has multiple benefits. And there will be another daf tomorrow!
Jerusalem, Israel
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Far Rockaway, United States
Inspired by Hadran’s first Siyum ha Shas L’Nashim two years ago, I began daf yomi right after for the next cycle. As to this extraordinary journey together with Hadran..as TS Eliot wrote “We must not cease from exploration and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we began and to know the place for the first time.
Jerusalem, Israel
Blacksburg, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others. Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life. Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.
Englewood NJ, United States
I began my journey two years ago at the beginning of this cycle of the daf yomi. It has been an incredible, challenging experience and has given me a new perspective of Torah Sh’baal Peh and the role it plays in our lives
Efrat, Israel
Megillah 12
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: וְעוֹד שָׁנָה אַחֶרֶת לְבָבֶל וְעָמַד דָּרְיָוֶשׁ וְהִשְׁלִימָהּ.
This is also taught in a baraita, as an indication that the years counted were only partial years: And when Belshazzar was killed, there was still another year left for Babylonia before the reckoning of the seventy years was completed. And then Darius arose and completed it. Although seventy years were previously counted according to Belshazzar’s count, from the exile of Jehoiakim, because the years were only partial, there was still one year left in order to complete those seventy years.
אָמַר רָבָא: אַף דָּנִיאֵל טְעָה בְּהַאי חוּשְׁבָּנָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״בִּשְׁנַת אַחַת לְמׇלְכוֹ אֲנִי דָּנִיֵּאל בִּינוֹתִי בַּסְּפָרִים״. מִדְּקָאָמַר ״בִּינוֹתִי״ — מִכְּלָל דִּטְעָה.
Rava said: Daniel also erred in this calculation, as it is written: “In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, meditated in the books over the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish for the desolations of Jerusalem seventy years” (Daniel 9:2). From the fact that he said “I meditated,” a term indicating recounting and calculating, it can be inferred that he had previously erred.
מִכׇּל מָקוֹם קָשׁוּ קְרָאֵי אַהֲדָדֵי, כְּתִיב: ״מְלֹאות לְבָבֶל״, וּכְתִיב: ״לְחׇרְבוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַםִ״!
The Gemara comments: In any case, the verses contradict each other with regard to how the seventy years should be calculated. In one verse it is written: “After seventy years are accomplished for Babylonia I will remember [efkod] you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place” (Jeremiah 29:10), which indicates that the seventy years should be counted from the Babylonian exile. And in another verse it is written: “That he would accomplish for the desolations of Jerusalem seventy years” (Daniel 9:2), indicating that the seventy years are calculated from the destruction of Jerusalem.
אָמַר רָבָא: לִפְקִידָה בְּעָלְמָא. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״כֹּה אָמַר כּוֹרֶשׁ מֶלֶךְ פָּרַס כֹּל מַמְלְכוֹת הָאָרֶץ נָתַן לִי ה׳ אֱלֹהֵי הַשָּׁמָיִם וְהוּא פָקַד עָלַי לִבְנוֹת לוֹ בַיִת בִּירוּשָׁלִַם״.
Rava said in response: The seventy years that “are accomplished for Babylonia” were only for being remembered [lifekida], as mentioned in the verse, allowing the Jews to return to Eretz Yisrael but not to build the Temple. And this is as it is written with regard to Cyrus’s proclamation permitting the Jewish people’s return to Eretz Yisrael, in the seventieth year of the Babylonian exile: “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: The Lord, God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He has charged [pakad] me to build Him a house in Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:2). The verse makes use of the same root, peh-kuf-dalet, heralding the return to Jerusalem to build the Temple, but not its actual completion.
דָּרַשׁ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר רַב חִסְדָּא, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ לִמְשִׁיחוֹ לְכוֹרֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר הֶחֱזַקְתִּי בִימִינוֹ״, וְכִי כּוֹרֶשׁ מָשִׁיחַ הָיָה? אֶלָּא אָמַר לֵיהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמָשִׁיחַ: קוֹבֵל אֲנִי לְךָ עַל כּוֹרֶשׁ. אֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי: הוּא יִבְנֶה בֵּיתִי וִיקַבֵּץ גָּלִיּוֹתַי, וְהוּא אָמַר: ״מִי בָכֶם מִכׇּל עַמּוֹ וְיַעַל״.
Apropos its mention of Cyrus, the Gemara states that Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda interpreted homiletically a verse concerning Cyrus: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Thus says the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held” (Isaiah 45:1), which seemingly is referring to Cyrus as God’s anointed? Now was Cyrus God’s anointed one, i.e., the Messiah, that the verse should refer to him in this manner? Rather, the verse should be understood as God speaking to the Messiah with regard to Cyrus: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Messiah: I am complaining to you about Cyrus, who is not acting in accordance with what he is intended to do. I had said: “He shall build My House and gather My exiles” (see Isaiah 45:13), but he did not carry this out. Rather, he said: “Whoever is among you of all His people…let him go up to Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:3). He gave permission to return to Israel, but he did no more than that.
״חֵיל פָּרַס וּמָדַי הַפַּרְתְּמִים״, וּכְתִיב: ״לְמַלְכֵי מָדַי וּפָרָס״. אָמַר רָבָא: אַתְנוֹיֵי אַתְנוֹ בַּהֲדָדֵי, אִי מִינַּן מַלְכֵי — מִינַּיְיכוּ אִיפַּרְכֵי וְאִי מִינַּיְיכוּ מַלְכֵי — מִינַּן אִיפַּרְכֵי.
§ The Gemara returns to its interpretations of verses in the Megilla. The Megilla mentions that among those invited to the king’s feast were: “The army of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces” (Esther 1:3), and it is written near the conclusion of the Megilla: “In the book of chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia” (Esther 10:2). Why is Persia mentioned first at the beginning of the Megilla, while later in the Megilla, Media is mentioned first? Rava said in response: These two peoples, the Persians and the Medes, stipulated with each other, saying: If the kings will come from us, the ministers will come from you; and if the kings will come from you, the ministers will come from us. Therefore, in reference to kings, Media is mentioned first, whereas in connection with nobles and princes, Persia is given priority.
״בְּהַרְאוֹתוֹ אֶת עוֹשֶׁר כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ״, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁלָּבַשׁ בִּגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה. כְּתִיב הָכָא: ״יְקָר תִּפְאֶרֶת גְּדוּלָּתוֹ״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאֶרֶת״.
The verse states: “When he showed the riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness” (Esther 1:4). Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that Ahasuerus wore the priestly vestments. Proof for this assertion may be adduced from the fact that the same terms are written with regard to the priestly vestments, as it is written here: “The riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness.” And it is written there, with regard to the priestly garments: “For glory [kavod] and for majesty [tiferet]” (Exodus 28:2).
״וּבִמְלֹאות הַיָּמִים הָאֵלֶּה וְגוֹ׳״. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר: מֶלֶךְ פִּיקֵּחַ הָיָה, וְחַד אָמַר: מֶלֶךְ טִיפֵּשׁ הָיָה. מַאן דְּאָמַר מֶלֶךְ פִּיקֵּחַ הָיָה — שַׁפִּיר עֲבַד דְּקָרֵיב רַחִיקָא בְּרֵישָׁא, דִּבְנֵי מָאתֵיהּ כׇּל אֵימַת דְּבָעֵי מְפַיֵּיס לְהוּ. וּמַאן דְּאָמַר טִיפֵּשׁ הָיָה — דְּאִיבְּעִי לֵיהּ לְקָרוֹבֵי בְּנֵי מָאתֵיהּ בְּרֵישָׁא, דְּאִי מָרְדוּ בֵּיהּ הָנָךְ, הָנֵי הֲווֹ קָיְימִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ.
The verse states: “And when these days were fulfilled, the king made a feast for all the people that were present in Shushan the capital” (Esther 1:5). Rav and Shmuel disagreed as to whether this was a wise decision. One said: Ahasuerus arranged a feast for the residents of Shushan, the capital, after the feast for foreign dignitaries that preceded it, as mentioned in the earlier verses, indicating that he was a clever king. And the other one said: It is precisely this that indicates that he was a foolish king. The one who said that this proves that he was a clever king maintains that he acted well when he first brought close those more distant subjects by inviting them to the earlier celebration, as he could appease the residents of his own city whenever he wished. And the one who said that he was foolish maintains that he should have invited the residents of his city first, so that if those faraway subjects rebelled against him, these who lived close by would have stood with him.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי: מִפְּנֵי מָה נִתְחַיְּיבוּ שׂוֹנְאֵיהֶן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר כְּלָיָה? אָמַר לָהֶם: אִמְרוּ אַתֶּם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנֶּהֱנוּ מִסְּעוּדָתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע. אִם כֵּן שֶׁבְּשׁוּשַׁן יֵהָרְגוּ, שֶׁבְּכׇל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ אַל יֵהָרְגוּ! אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֱמוֹר אַתָּה! אָמַר לָהֶם: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ לַצֶּלֶם.
The students of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai asked him: For what reason were the enemies of Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves when exhibiting behavior that is not in their best interests, in that generation deserving of annihilation? He, Rabbi Shimon, said to them: Say the answer to your question yourselves. They said to him: It is because they partook of the feast of that wicked one, Ahasuerus, and they partook there of forbidden foods. Rabbi Shimon responded: If so, those in Shushan should have been killed as punishment, but those in the rest of the world, who did not participate in the feast, should not have been killed. They said to him: Then you say your response to our question. He said to them: It is because they prostrated before the idol that Nebuchadnezzar had made, as is recorded that the entire world bowed down before it, except for Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: וְכִי מַשּׂוֹא פָּנִים יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר? אָמַר לָהֶם: הֵם לֹא עָשׂוּ אֶלָּא לִפְנִים — אַף הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֹא עָשָׂה עִמָּהֶן אֶלָּא לִפְנִים. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״כִּי לֹא עִנָּה מִלִּבּוֹ״.
They said to him: But if it is true that they worshipped idols and therefore deserved to be destroyed, why was a miracle performed on their behalf? Is there favoritism expressed by God here? He said to them: They did not really worship the idol, but pretended to do so only for appearance, acting as if they were carrying out the king’s command to bow before the idol. So too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, did not destroy them but did act angry with them only for appearance. He too merely pretended to desire to destroy them, as all He did was issue a threat, but in the end the decree was annulled. And this is as it is written: “For He does not afflict from His heart willingly” (Lamentations 3:33), but only for appearances’ sake.
״בַּחֲצַר גִּנַּת בִּיתַן הַמֶּלֶךְ״. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר: הָרָאוּי לֶחָצֵר — לֶחָצֵר, הָרָאוּי לַגִּינָּה — לַגִּינָּה, הָרָאוּי לַבִּיתָן — לַבִּיתָן. וְחַד אָמַר: הוֹשִׁיבָן בֶּחָצֵר וְלֹא הֶחְזִיקָתַן, בַּגִּינָּה וְלֹא הֶחְזִיקָתַן, עַד שֶׁהִכְנִיסָן לַבִּיתָן וְהֶחְזִיקָתַן. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: הוֹשִׁיבָן בֶּחָצֵר וּפָתַח לָהֶם שְׁנֵי פְתָחִים, אֶחָד לַגִּינָּה וְאֶחָד לַבִּיתָן.
The verse states: “In the court of the garden of the king’s palace” (Esther 1:5). Rav and Shmuel disagreed with regard to how to understand the relationship between these three places: Court, garden, and palace: One said: The guests were received in different places. One who, according to his stature, was fit for the courtyard was brought to the courtyard; one who was fit for the garden was brought to the garden; and one who was fit for the palace was brought to the palace. And the other one said: He first sat them in the courtyard, but it did not hold them, as they were too numerous. He then sat them in the garden, but it did not hold them either, until he brought them into the palace and it held them. A third understanding was taught in a baraita: He sat them in the courtyard and opened two entranceways for them, one to the garden and one to the palace.
״חוּר כַּרְפַּס וּתְכֵלֶת״. מַאי חוּר? רַב אָמַר: חָרֵי חָרֵי, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: מֵילָת לְבָנָה הִצִּיעַ לָהֶם. ״כַּרְפַּס״, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: כָּרִים שֶׁל פַּסִּים.
The verse states: “There were hangings of ḥur, karpas, and sky blue” (Esther 1:6). The Gemara asks: What is ḥur? Rav said: A fabric fashioned with many holes [ḥarei ḥarei], similar to lace. And Shmuel said: He spread out for them carpets of white wool, as the word ḥavar means white. And what is karpas? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: Cushions [karim] of velvet [pasim].
״עַל גְּלִילֵי כֶסֶף וְעַמּוּדֵי שֵׁשׁ מִטּוֹת זָהָב וָכֶסֶף״, תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: הָרָאוּי לְכֶסֶף — לְכֶסֶף, הָרָאוּי לְזָהָב — לְזָהָב. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה: אִם כֵּן, אַתָּה מֵטִיל קִנְאָה בַּסְּעוּדָה. אֶלָּא: הֵם שֶׁל כֶּסֶף, וְרַגְלֵיהֶן שֶׁל זָהָב.
The verse states: “On silver rods and pillars of marble; the couches were of gold and silver” (Esther 1:6). It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: Some couches were of gold and others of silver. One who, according to his stature, was fit for silver sat on a couch of silver, and one who was fit for gold sat on one of gold. Rabbi Neḥemya said to him: This was not done. If so, you would cast jealousy into the feast, for the guests would be envious of each other. Rather, the couches themselves were made of silver, and their feet were made of gold.
״בַּהַט וָשֵׁשׁ״. אֲמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: אֲבָנִים שֶׁמִּתְחוֹטְטוֹת עַל בַּעֲלֵיהֶן. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״אַבְנֵי נֵזֶר מִתְנוֹסְסוֹת עַל אַדְמָתוֹ״.
The verse continues: “Upon a pavement of bahat and marble” (Esther 1:6). Rabbi Asi said with regard to the definition of bahat: These are stones that ingratiate themselves with their owners, as they are precious stones that people are willing to spend large amounts of money to acquire. And similarly, it states elsewhere that the Jewish people will be likened to precious stones: “And the Lord their God shall save them in that day as the flock of His people; for they shall be as “the stones of a crown, glittering over His land” (Zechariah 9:16).
״וְדַר וְסוֹחָרֶת״, רַב אָמַר: דָּרֵי דָּרֵי. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֶבֶן טוֹבָה יֵשׁ בִּכְרַכֵּי הַיָּם וְ״דָרָה״ שְׁמָהּ, הוֹשִׁיבָהּ בְּאֶמְצַע סְעוּדָה וּמְאִירָה לָהֶם כַּצׇּהֳרַיִם. דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: שֶׁקָּרָא דְּרוֹר לְכׇל בַּעֲלֵי סְחוֹרָה.
The verse concludes: “And dar and soḥaret” (Esther 1:6). Rav said: Dar means many rows [darei darei] around. Similarly, soḥaret is derived from seḥor seḥor, around and around, meaning that the floor was surrounded with numerous rows of bahat and marble stones. And Shmuel said: There is a precious stone in the seaports, and its name is dara, and Ahasuerus placed it in the center of the feast, and it illuminated the festivities for them as the sun illuminates the world at midday. He explains that the word soḥaret is derived from tzohar, a light. A scholar from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught a baraita: This means that he proclaimed a remission for all the merchants, absolving them from paying their taxes, understanding that the word dar derives from deror, freedom, and soḥaret from soḥer, merchant.
״וְהַשְׁקוֹת בִּכְלֵי זָהָב וְכֵלִים מִכֵּלִים שׁוֹנִים״. ״מְשׁוּנִּים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אָמַר רָבָא, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה לָהֶם: רִאשׁוֹנִים כָּלוּ מִפְּנֵי כֵלַי, וְאַתֶּם שׁוֹנִים בָּהֶם! ״וְיֵין מַלְכוּת רָב״, אָמַר רַב: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הִשְׁקָהוּ יַיִן שֶׁגָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ בְּשָׁנִים.
The verse states: “And they gave them drink in vessels of gold, the vessels being diverse [shonim] from one another” (Esther 1:7). The Gemara asks: Why does the verse use the term shonim to express that they are different? It should have said the more proper term meshunim. Rava said: A Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: The early ones, referring to Belshazzar and his people, were destroyed because they used these vessels, the vessels of the Temple, and yet you use them again [shonim]? The verse continues: “And royal wine in abundance [rav]” (Esther 1:7). Rav said: This teaches that each and every guest at the feast was poured well-aged wine that was older [rav] than himself in years.
״וְהַשְּׁתִיָּה כַדָּת (אֵין אוֹנֵס)״, מַאי ״כַּדָּת״? אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: כְּדָת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה, מָה דָּת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה אֲכִילָה מְרוּבָּה מִשְּׁתִיָּה — אַף סְעוּדָּתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע אֲכִילָה מְרוּבָּה מִשְּׁתִיָּה.
The verse states: “And the drinking was according to the law; none did compel” (Esther 1:8). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of “according to the law”? Rabbi Ḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir: The drinking was according to the law of the Torah. Just as, according to the law of the Torah, with regard to offerings, the food sacrificed on the altar is greater in quantity than the drink, for the wine libation is quantitatively much smaller than the sacrificial offerings it accompanies, so too, at the feast of that wicked man, the food was greater in quantity than the drink.
״אֵין אוֹנֵס״, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הִשְׁקָהוּ מִיֵּין מְדִינָתוֹ. ״לַעֲשׂוֹת כִּרְצוֹן אִישׁ וָאִישׁ״, אָמַר רָבָא: לַעֲשׂוֹת כִּרְצוֹן מָרְדֳּכַי וְהָמָן. מָרְדֳּכַי — דִּכְתִיב: ״אִישׁ יְהוּדִי״, הָמָן — ״אִישׁ צַר וְאוֹיֵב״.
The verse states: “None did compel” (Esther 1:8). Rabbi Elazar said: This teaches that each and every guest at the feast was poured a drink from wine of his own country, so that he would feel entirely free, as if he were in his home country. The verse continues: “That they should do according to every man’s pleasure” (Esther 1:8). Rava commented on the literal meaning of the verse, which is referring to two men, a man and a man [ish va’ish], and said: The man and man whom they should follow indicates that they should do according to the wishes of Mordecai and Haman. The two of them served as butlers at the feast, and they were in charge of distributing the wine. Why is the verse interpreted in this way? Mordecai is called “man,” as it is written: “There was a certain Jewish man [ish] in Shushan the castle, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair” (Esther 2:5). And Haman is also called man, as it states: “A man [ish] who is an adversary and an enemy, this evil Haman” (Esther 7:6).
״גַּם וַשְׁתִּי הַמַּלְכָּה עָשְׂתָה מִשְׁתֵּה נָשִׁים בֵּית הַמַּלְכוּת״. ״בֵּית הַנָּשִׁים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אָמַר רָבָא: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי: אִיהוּ בְּקָרֵי, וְאִתְּתֵיהּ
The verse states: “Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women, in the royal house, which belonged to King Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:9). The Gemara questions why she held the feast in the royal house, a place of men, rather than in the women’s house, where it should have been. Rava said in response: The two of them had sinful intentions. Ahasuerus wished to fornicate with the women, and Vashti wished to fornicate with the men. This explains the folk saying that people say: He with pumpkins and his wife
בְּבוּצִינֵי.
with zucchinis, indicating that often a man and his wife engage in similar actions.
״בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי כְּטוֹב לֵב הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּיָּיִן״. אַטּוּ עַד הַשְׁתָּא לָא טָב לִבֵּיהּ בְּחַמְרָא? אֲמַר רָבָא: יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי שַׁבָּת הָיָה. שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין — מַתְחִילִין בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה וּבְדִבְרֵי תִשְׁבָּחוֹת. אֲבָל אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁאוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין — אֵין מַתְחִילִין אֶלָּא בְּדִבְרֵי תִיפְלוּת.
The verse states: “On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine” (Esther 1:10). The Gemara asks: Is that to say that until now his heart was not merry with wine? Did it take seven days for him to achieve merriment? Rava said: The seventh day was Shabbat, when the difference between the Jewish people and the gentiles is most apparent. On Shabbat, when the Jewish people eat and drink, they begin by occupying themselves with words of Torah and words of praise for God. But the nations of the world, when they eat and drink, they begin only with words of licentiousness.
וְכֵן בִּסְעוּדָּתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע, הַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: מָדִיּוֹת נָאוֹת, וְהַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: פָּרְסִיּוֹת נָאוֹת. אָמַר לָהֶם אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ: כְּלִי שֶׁאֲנִי מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ, אֵינוֹ לֹא מָדִיִּי וְלֹא פָּרְסִי אֶלָּא כַּשְׂדִּיִּי, רְצוֹנְכֶם לִרְאוֹתָהּ? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא עֲרוּמָּה.
The Gemara continues to detail what occurred at the feast. So too, at the feast of that wicked man, Ahasuerus, when the men began to converse, some said: The Median women are the most beautiful, while others said: The Persian women are the most beautiful. Ahasuerus said to them: The vessel that I use, i.e., my wife, is neither Median nor Persian, but rather Chaldean. Do you wish to see her? They said to him: Yes, provided that she be naked, for we wish to see her without any additional adornments.
שֶׁבַּמִּדָּה שֶׁאָדָם מוֹדֵד — בָּהּ מוֹדְדִין לוֹ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהָיְתָה וַשְׁתִּי הָרְשָׁעָה מְבִיאָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמַפְשִׁיטָתָן עֲרוּמּוֹת וְעוֹשָׂה בָּהֶן מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת. הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה כְּשׁוֹךְ חֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ זָכַר אֶת וַשְׁתִּי וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂתָה וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ״, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעָשָׂתָה — כָּךְ נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ.
The Gemara comments: Vashti was punished in this humiliating way for it is with the measure that a man measures to others that he himself is measured. In other words, God punishes individuals in line with their transgressions, measure for measure. This teaches that the wicked Vashti would take the daughters of Israel, and strip them naked, and make them work on Shabbat. Therefore, it was decreed that she be brought before the king naked, on Shabbat. This is as it is written: “After these things, when the wrath of King Ahasuerus was appeased, he remembered Vashti, and what she had done, and what was decreed against her” (Esther 2:1). That is to say, just as she had done with the young Jewish women, so it was decreed upon her.
״וַתְּמָאֵן הַמַּלְכָּה וַשְׁתִּי״. מִכְּדֵי פְּרִיצְתָּא הֲוַאי, דְּאָמַר מָר: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אֲתַאי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁפָּרְחָה בָּהּ צָרַעַת. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: [בָּא גַּבְרִיאֵל וְעָשָׂה לָהּ זָנָב].
The verse states: “But the queen Vashti refused to come” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Since she was immodest, as the Master said above: The two of them had sinful intentions, what is the reason that she did not come? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that she broke out in leprosy, and therefore she was embarrassed to expose herself publicly. An alternative reason for her embarrassment was taught in a baraita: The angel Gabriel came and fashioned her a tail.
״וַיִּקְצֹף הַמֶּלֶךְ מְאֹד״. אַמַּאי דְּלַקָה בֵּיהּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אָמַר רָבָא, שְׁלַחָה לֵיהּ: בַּר אַהוּרְיָירֵיהּ דְּאַבָּא, אַבָּא לָקֳבֵל אַלְפָּא חַמְרָא שָׁתֵי וְלָא רָוֵי, וְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא אִשְׁתַּטִּי בְּחַמְרֵיהּ, מִיָּד: ״וַחֲמָתוֹ בָּעֲרָה בוֹ״.
The verse continues: “Therefore the king was very wrathful, and his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Why did his anger burn in him so greatly merely because she did not wish to come? Rava said: Vashti not only refused to come, but she also sent him a message by way of a messenger: You, son of my father’s stableman [ahuriyyarei]. Belshazzar, my father, drank wine against a thousand men and did not become inebriated, as the verse in Daniel (5:1) testifies about him: “Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand”; and that man, referring euphemistically to Ahasuerus himself, has become senseless from his wine. Due to her audacity, immediately “his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12).
״וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ לַחֲכָמִים״, מַאן חֲכָמִים — רַבָּנַן. ״יוֹדְעֵי הָעִתִּים״ — שֶׁיּוֹדְעִין לְעַבֵּר שָׁנִים וְלִקְבּוֹעַ חֳדָשִׁים. אֲמַר לְהוּ: דַּיְּינוּהָ לִי. אֲמַרוּ: הֵיכִי נַעֲבֵיד? נֵימָא לֵיהּ: קִטְלַהּ, לִמְחַר פָּסֵיק לֵיהּ חַמְרֵיהּ וּבָעֵי לַהּ מִינַּן. נֵימָא לֵיהּ: שִׁבְקַהּ — קָא מְזַלְזְלָה בְּמַלְכוּתָא, אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְגָלִינוּ מֵאַרְצֵנוּ, נִיטְּלָה עֵצָה מִמֶּנּוּ וְאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לָדוּן דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. זִיל לְגַבֵּי עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב דְּיָתְבִי בְּדוּכְתַּיְיהוּ כְּחַמְרָא דְּיָתֵיב עַל דּוּרְדְּיֵיהּ.
The following verse states: “Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times” (Esther 1:13). The Gemara asks: Who are these wise men? These wise men are the Sages of the Jewish people, who are referred to as those “who knew the times,” for they know how to intercalate years and fix the months of the Jewish calendar. Ahasuerus said to them: Judge her for me. The Sages said in their hearts: What should we do? If we say to him: Kill her, tomorrow he will become sober and then come and demand her from us. If we say to him: Let her be, she has scorned royalty, and that cannot be tolerated. Consequently, they decided not to judge the matter, and they said to him as follows: From the day that the Temple was destroyed and we have been exiled from our land, counsel and insight have been removed from us, and we do not know how to judge capital cases, as they are exceptionally difficult. Go to the people of Ammon and Moab, who have remained permanently settled in their places like wine that is settled on its lees, and so their minds are settled as well.
וְטַעְמָא אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״שַׁאֲנַן מוֹאָב מִנְּעוּרָיו וְשׁוֹקֵט הוּא אֶל שְׁמָרָיו וְלֹא הוּרַק מִכְּלִי אֶל כֶּלִי וּבַגּוֹלָה לֹא הָלָךְ עַל כֵּן עָמַד טַעְמוֹ בּוֹ וְרֵיחוֹ לֹא נָמָר״, מִיָּד: ״וְהַקָּרוֹב אֵלָיו כַּרְשְׁנָא שֵׁתָר אַדְמָתָא תַרְשִׁישׁ״.
And they provided a good reason when they spoke to him, as they proved that one who is settled retains his reasoning: For it is written: “Moab has been at ease from his youth, and he has settled on his lees, and has not been emptied from vessel to vessel, neither has he gone into exile; therefore his taste has remained in him, and his scent is not changed” (Jeremiah 48:11). Ahasuerus immediately acted on their advice and asked his advisors, as it is written: “And next to him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan” (Esther 1:14).
אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי: כׇּל פָּסוּק זֶה עַל שׁוּם קׇרְבָּנוֹת נֶאֱמַר.
Rabbi Levi said: This entire verse listing the names of the king’s advisors is stated on account of offerings. Each name alludes to an aspect of the sacrificial service that was unique to the Jewish people, which the ministering angels mentioned as merit for the Jewish people.
״כַּרְשְׁנָא״ — אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ כָּרִים בְּנֵי שָׁנָה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהִקְרִיבוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפָנֶיךָ? ״שֵׁתָר״ — כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ שְׁתֵּי תוֹרִין? ״אַדְמָתָא״ — כְּלוּם בָּנוּ לְפָנֶיךָ מִזְבֵּחַ אֲדָמָה? ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ״ — כְּלוּם שִׁימְּשׁוּ לְפָנֶיךָ בְּבִגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ וְשֹׁהַם וְיָשְׁפֵה״? ״מֶרֶס״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בְּדָם לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מַרְסְנָא״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בִּמְנָחוֹת לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מְמוּכָן״ — כְּלוּם הֵכִינוּ שֻׁלְחָן לְפָנֶיךָ?
“Carshena”; the ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, did the gentiles ever offer before You lambs [karim] of the first year [shana], as the Jewish people have offered before You? “Shethar”; have they ever offered before You two turtledoves [shetei torim]? “Admatha”; have they ever built before You an altar of earth [adama]? “Tarshish”; have they ever ministered before You in the priestly vestments, as it is written that on the fourth of the four rows of precious stones contained on the breastplate were: “A beryl [tarshish], an onyx, and a jasper” (Exodus 28:20). “Meres”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the blood of the offerings before You? “Marsena”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the meal-offering before You? “Memucan”; have they ever prepared [hekhinu] the table before You, on which the shewbread was placed?
״וַיֹּאמֶר מְמוּכָן״. תָּנָא: מְמוּכָן זֶה הָמָן, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ מְמוּכָן? שֶׁמּוּכָן לְפוּרְעָנוּת. אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: מִכָּאן שֶׁהַהֶדְיוֹט קוֹפֵץ בָּרֹאשׁ.
The verse states: “And Memucan said” (Esther 1:16). A Sage taught in a baraita: Memucan is Haman. And why is Haman referred to as Memucan? Because he was prepared [mukhan] to bring calamity upon the Jewish people. Rav Kahana said: From here we see that the common man jumps to the front and speaks first, for Memucan was mentioned last of the king’s seven advisors, and nevertheless he expressed his opinion first.
״לִהְיוֹת כׇּל אִישׁ שׂוֹרֵר בְּבֵיתוֹ״. אָמַר רָבָא: אִלְמָלֵא אִגְּרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת לֹא נִשְׁתַּיֵּיר מִשּׂוֹנְאֵיהֶן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל שָׂרִיד וּפָלִיט.
The king sent out letters to the people of all his provinces, in which it was written: “That every man shall wield authority in his own house and speak according to the language of his people” (Esther 1:22). Rava said: Were it not for the first letters sent by Ahasuerus, which everybody discounted, there would not have been left among the enemies of the Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves, a remnant or a refugee. Since these first letters were the subject of ridicule, people didn’t take the king seriously and did not immediately act upon the directive of the later letters, calling for the Jewish people’s destruction.
אָמְרִי: מַאי הַאי דְּשַׁדַּיר לַן ״לִהְיוֹת כׇּל אִישׁ שׂוֹרֵר בְּבֵיתוֹ״? פְּשִׁיטָא, אֲפִילּוּ קָרָחָה — בְּבֵיתֵיהּ פַּרְדַּשְׁכָּא לֶיהֱוֵי!
The Gemara continues. The reason that the first letters were not taken seriously is that they who received them would say: What is this that he has sent us: “That every man shall wield authority in his own house”? This is obvious; even a lowly weaver is commander [paredashekha] in his house. If so, why then did the king find it necessary to make such a proclamation?
״וְיַפְקֵד הַמֶּלֶךְ פְּקִידִים״. אָמַר רַבִּי, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כׇּל עָרוּם יַעֲשֶׂה בְדָעַת וּכְסִיל יִפְרֹשׂ אִוֶּלֶת״ —
The verse describes Ahasuerus’s search for a new wife by stating: “And let the king appoint officers in all the provinces of his kingdom, that they may gather together all the fair young virgins unto Shushan the castle” (Esther 2:3). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “In everything a prudent man acts with knowledge, but a fool unfolds his folly” (Proverbs 13:16)? The verse highlights the difference between two kings’ approaches to finding a wife.
״כׇּל עָרוּם יַעֲשֶׂה בְדָעַת״ — זֶה דָּוִד, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ עֲבָדָיו יְבַקְשׁוּ לַאדֹנִי הַמֶּלֶךְ נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה״; כֹּל מַאן דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ בְּרַתָּא — אַיָּיתַהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ. ״וּכְסִיל יִפְרוֹשׁ אִוֶּלֶת״ — זֶה אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְיַפְקֵד הַמֶּלֶךְ פְּקִידִים״; כֹּל מַאן דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ בְּרַתָּא — אַיטְמְרַהּ מִינֵּיהּ.
“In everything a prudent man acts with knowledge”; this statement is referring to David, who also sought a wife for himself, as it is written: “And his servants said to him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin” (I Kings 1:2). Since he sought one maiden, whoever had a daughter brought her to him, for everyone wanted his daughter to be the king’s wife. With regard to the continuation of the verse: “But a fool unfolds his folly” (Proverbs 13:16), this statement is referring to Ahasuerus, as it is written: “And let the king appoint officers” to seek out many maidens. Since it became clear that the king would have relations with all of them, but in the end he would choose only one as his bride, whoever had a daughter hid her from him.
״אִישׁ יְהוּדִי הָיָה בְּשׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה וְגוֹ׳ אִישׁ יְמִינִי״. מַאי קָאָמַר: אִי לְיַחוֹסֵיהּ קָאָתֵי — לְיַחֲסֵיהּ וְלֵיזִיל עַד בִּנְיָמִין! אֶלָּא מַאי שְׁנָא הָנֵי?
The verse that initially describes Mordecai states: “There was a certain Jew in Shushan the castle, whose name was Mordecai the son of Jair the son of Shimei the son of Kish, a Benjamite” (Esther 2:5). The Gemara asks: What is it conveying in the verse by saying the names of Mordecai’s ancestors? If the verse in fact comes to trace his ancestry, it should continue tracing his lineage back all the way to Benjamin, the founder of his tribe. Rather, what is different about these names that they deserve special mention?
תָּנָא: כּוּלָּן עַל שְׁמוֹ נִקְרְאוּ. ״בֶּן יָאִיר״ — בֵּן שֶׁהֵאִיר עֵינֵיהֶם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּתְפִלָּתוֹ. ״בֶּן שִׁמְעִי״ — בֵּן שֶׁשָּׁמַע אֵל תְּפִלָּתוֹ. ״בֶּן קִישׁ״ — שֶׁהִקִּישׁ עַל שַׁעֲרֵי רַחֲמִים וְנִפְתְּחוּ לוֹ.
The Gemara answers: A Sage taught the following baraita: All of them are names by which Mordecai was called. He was called “the son of Jair” because he was the son who enlightened [heir] the eyes of all of the Jewish people with his prayers; “the son of Shimei” because he was the son whom God heard [shama] his prayers; “the son of Kish” because he knocked [hikish] on the gates of mercy and they were opened to him.
קָרֵי לֵיהּ ״יְהוּדִי״ — אַלְמָא מִיהוּדָה קָאָתֵי, וְקָרֵי לֵיהּ ״יְמִינִי״ — אַלְמָא מִבִּנְיָמִין קָאָתֵי! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מָרְדֳּכַי מוּכְתָּר בְּנִימוּסוֹ הָיָה.
The Gemara points out a contradiction: Mordecai is referred to as a “Jew [Yehudi],” apparently indicating that he came from the tribe of Judah, but in the continuation of the verse he is called “Benjamite” [Yemini], which indicates that he came from the tribe of Benjamin. Rav Naḥman said: Mordecai was crowned with honorary names. Yehudi is one such honorary epithet, due to its allusion to the royal tribe of Judah, but it is not referring to Mordecai’s tribal affiliation.
אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: אָבִיו מִבִּנְיָמִין, וְאִמּוֹ מִיהוּדָה. וְרַבָּנַן אָמְרִי: מִשְׁפָּחוֹת מִתְגָּרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ. מִשְׁפַּחַת יְהוּדָה אוֹמֶרֶת: אֲנָא גְּרַמִי דְּמִתְיְלִיד מָרְדֳּכַי, דְּלָא קַטְלֵיהּ דָּוִד לְשִׁמְעִי בֶּן גֵּרָא. וּמִשְׁפַּחַת בִּנְיָמִין אָמְרָה: מִינַּאי קָאָתֵי.
Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said an alternative explanation: Mordecai’s father was from the tribe of Benjamin, and his mother was from the tribe of Judah. Therefore, he was both a Yemini, a Benjamite, and a Yehudi, from the tribe of Judah. And the Rabbis say that the dual lineage is due to a dispute: The families competed with each other over which tribe could take credit for Mordecai. The family of Judah would say: I caused the birth of Mordecai, as only because David did not kill Shimei, the son of Gera, when he cursed him (see II Samuel 16) was it possible for Mordecai to be born later from his descendants. And the family of Benjamin said in response: In the end he came from me, as he in fact was from Benjamin’s tribe.
רָבָא אָמַר: כְּנֶסֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל אָמְרָה לְאִידַּךְ גִּיסָא: רְאוּ מָה עָשָׂה לִי יְהוּדִי וּמָה שִׁילֵּם לִי יְמִינִי. מָה עָשָׂה לִי יְהוּדִי —
Rava said: The Congregation of Israel at the time said this from the opposite perspective, not as a boast, but as a complaint, remarking: See what a Judean has done to me and how a Benjamite has repaid me. What a Judean has done to me is referring to
