Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

July 29, 2014 | 讘壮 讘讗讘 转砖注状讚

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Megillah 18

Study Guide Megillah 18


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讗讞专 讬砖讜讘讜 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜讘拽砖讜 讗转 讛壮 讗诇讛讬讛诐 讜讗转 讚讜讚 诪诇讻诐 讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗 讚讜讚 讘讗转讛 转驻诇讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛讘讬讗讜转讬诐 讗诇 讛专 拽讚砖讬 讜砖诪讞转讬诐 讘讘讬转 转驻诇转讬

鈥淎fterward the children of Israel shall return, and seek the Lord their God and David their king鈥 (Hosea 3:5), and consequently, the blessing of the kingdom of David follows the blessing of the building of Jerusalem. And once the scion of David comes, the time for prayer will come, as it is stated: 鈥淚 will bring them to My sacred mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer鈥 (Isaiah 56:7). Therefore, the blessing of hearing prayer is recited after the blessing of the kingdom of David.

讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗转 转驻诇讛 讘讗转 注讘讜讚讛 砖谞讗诪专 注讜诇讜转讬讛诐 讜讝讘讞讬讛诐 诇专爪讜谉 注诇 诪讝讘讞讬 讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗转 注讘讜讚讛 讘讗转讛 转讜讚讛 砖谞讗诪专 讝讜讘讞 转讜讚讛 讬讻讘讚谞谞讬

And after prayer comes, the Temple service will arrive, as it is stated in the continuation of that verse: 鈥淭heir burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on My altar鈥 (Isaiah 56:7). The blessing of restoration of the Temple service follows the blessing of hearing prayer. And when the Temple service comes, with it will also come thanksgiving, as it is stated: 鈥淲hoever sacrifices a thanks-offering honors Me鈥 (Psalms 50:23), which teaches that thanksgiving follows sacrifice. Therefore, the blessing of thanksgiving follows the blessing of restoration of the Temple service.

讜诪讛 专讗讜 诇讜诪专 讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讗讞专 讛讜讚讗讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬砖讗 讗讛专谉 讗转 讬讚讬讜 讗诇 讛注诐 讜讬讘专讻诐 讜讬专讚 诪注砖讜转 讛讞讟讗转 讜讛注讜诇讛 讜讛砖诇诪讬诐

And why did they see fit to institute that one says the Priestly Benediction after the blessing of thanksgiving? As it is written: 鈥淎nd Aaron lifted up his hand toward the people and blessed them, and he came down from sacrificing the sin-offering, and the burnt-offering, and the peace-offerings鈥 (Leviticus 9:22), teaching that the Priestly Benediction follows the sacrificial service, which includes the thanks-offering.

讗讬诪讗 拽讜讚诐 注讘讜讚讛 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬专讚 诪注砖讜转 讛讞讟讗转 讜讙讜壮 诪讬 讻转讬讘 诇注砖讜转 诪注砖讜转 讻转讬讘

The Gemara asks: But the cited verse indicates that Aaron blessed the people and then sacrificed the offerings. Should we not then say the Priestly Benediction before the blessing of the Temple service? The Gemara answers: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it is written: 鈥淎nd he came down from sacrificing the sin-offering.鈥 Is it written that he came down to sacrifice the offerings, implying that after blessing the people Aaron came down and sacrificed the offerings? No, it is written, 鈥渇rom sacrificing,鈥 indicating that the offerings had already been sacrificed.

讜诇讬诪专讛 讗讞专 讛注讘讜讚讛 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讝讜讘讞 转讜讚讛

The Gemara asks: If, as derived from this verse, the Priestly Benediction follows the sacrificial service, the Priestly Benediction should be said immediately after the blessing of restoration of the Temple service, without the interruption of the blessing of thanksgiving. The Gemara rejects this argument: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it is written: 鈥淲hoever sacrifices a thanks-offering honors Me,鈥 from which we learn that thanksgiving follows sacrifice, as already explained.

诪讗讬 讞讝讬转 讚住诪讻转 讗讛讗讬 住诪讜讱 讗讛讗讬 诪住转讘专讗 注讘讜讚讛 讜讛讜讚讗讛 讞讚讗 诪讬诇转讗 讛讬讗

The Gemara asks: What did you see to rely on this verse and juxtapose thanksgiving with sacrifice? Rely rather on the other verse, which indicates that it is the Priestly Benediction that should be juxtaposed with the sacrificial service. The Gemara answers: It stands to reason to have the blessing of thanksgiving immediately following the blessing of the sacrificial service, since the sacrificial service and thanksgiving, which are closely related conceptually, are one matter.

讜诪讛 专讗讜 诇讜诪专 砖讬诐 砖诇讜诐 讗讞专 讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪讜 讗转 砖诪讬 注诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗谞讬 讗讘专讻诐 讘专讻讛 讚讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖诇讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 讬讘专讱 讗转 注诪讜 讘砖诇讜诐

And why did they see fit to institute that one says the blessing beginning with the words: Grant peace, after the Priestly Benediction? As it is written immediately following the Priestly Benediction: 鈥淎nd they shall put My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them鈥 (Numbers 6:27). The Priestly Benediction is followed by God鈥檚 blessing, and the blessing of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is peace, as it is stated: 鈥淭he Lord blesses His people with peace鈥 (Psalms 29:11).

讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 讚诪讗讛 讜注砖专讬诐 讝拽谞讬诐 讜诪讛诐 讻诪讛 谞讘讬讗讬诐 转拽谞讜 转驻诇讛 注诇 讛住讚专 砖诪注讜谉 讛驻拽讜诇讬 诪讗讬 讛住讚讬专 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专 讜住讚专讜诐

The Gemara returns to the baraita cited at the beginning of the discussion: Now, since the baraita teaches that a hundred and twenty Elders, including many prophets, established the Amida prayer in its fixed order, what is it that Shimon HaPakuli arranged in a much later period of time, as related by Rabbi Yo岣nan? The Gemara answers: Indeed, the blessings of the Amida prayer were originally arranged by the hundred and twenty members of the Great Assembly, but over the course of time the people forgot them, and Shimon HaPakuli then arranged them again.

诪讻讗谉 讜讗讬诇讱 讗住讜专 诇住驻专 讘砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诪讬 讬诪诇诇 讙讘讜专讜转 讛壮 讬砖诪讬注 讻诇 转讛诇转讜 诇诪讬 谞讗讛 诇诪诇诇 讙讘讜专讜转 讛壮 诇诪讬 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讛砖诪讬注 讻诇 转讛诇转讜

The Gemara comments: These nineteen blessings are a fixed number, and beyond this it is prohibited for one to declare the praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He, by adding additional blessings to the Amida. As Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淲ho can utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Who can declare all His praise?鈥 (Psalms 106:2)? It means: For whom is it fitting to utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Only for one who can declare all His praise. And since no one is capable of declaring all of God鈥檚 praises, we must suffice with the set formula established by the Sages.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛诪住驻专 讘砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬 谞注拽专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛讬住讜驻专 诇讜 讻讬 讗讚讘专 讗诐 讗诪专 讗讬砖 讻讬 讬讘诇注

Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: With regard to one who excessively declares the praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He, his fate is to be uprooted from the world, as it appears as if he had exhausted all of God鈥檚 praises. As it is stated: 鈥淪hall it be told to Him when I speak? If a man says it, he would be swallowed up鈥 (Job 37:20). The Gemara interprets the verse as saying: Can all of God鈥檚 praises be expressed when I speak? If a man would say such a thing, he would be 鈥渟wallowed up鈥 as punishment.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 讙讘讜专讬讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 讙讘讜专 讞讬诇 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诇讱 讚讜诪讬讛 转讛诇讛 住诪讗 讚讻讜诇讛 诪砖转讜拽讗 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 诪诇讛 讘住诇注 诪砖转讜拽讗 讘转专讬谉

The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehuda, a man of Kefar Gibboraya, and some say he was a man of Kefar Gibbor 膜ayil, taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淔or You silence is praise鈥 (Psalms 65:2)? The best remedy of all is silence, i.e., the optimum form of praising God is silence. The Gemara relates: When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Israel to Babylonia, he said: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say an adage: If a word is worth one sela, silence is worth two.

拽专讗讛 注诇 驻讛 诇讗 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 诪谞诇谉 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗转讬讗 讝讻讬专讛 讝讻讬专讛 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讜讛讬诪讬诐 讛讗诇讛 谞讝讻专讬诐 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 讻转讘 讝讗转 讝讻专讜谉 讘住驻专 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘住驻专 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘住驻专

搂 It is taught in the mishna: If one read the Megilla by heart he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rava said: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between one instance of the term remembrance and another instance of the term remembrance. It is written here, with regard to the Megilla: 鈥淭hat these days should be remembered鈥 (Esther 9:28), and it is written elsewhere: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Moses: Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: That I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens鈥 (Exodus 17:14). Just as there, with regard to Amalek, remembrance is referring specifically to something written in a book, as it is stated, 鈥渋n the book,鈥 so too here, the Megilla remembrance is through being written in a book.

讜诪诪讗讬 讚讛讗讬 讝讻讬专讛 拽专讬讗讛 讛讬讗 讚诇诪讗 注讬讜谉 讘注诇诪讗 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 (讚讻转讬讘) 讝讻讜专 讬讻讜诇 讘诇讘 讻砖讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 转砖讻讞 讛专讬 砖讻讞转 讛诇讘 讗诪讜专 讛讗 诪讛 讗谞讬 诪拽讬讬诐 讝讻讜专 讘驻讛

The Gemara raises a question: But from where do we know that this remembrance that is stated with regard to Amalek and to the Megilla involves reading it out loud from a book? Perhaps it requires merely looking into the book, reading it silently. The Gemara answers: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it was taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淩emember what Amalek did to you鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:17). One might have thought that it suffices for one to remember this silently, in his heart. But this cannot be, since when it says subsequently: 鈥淵ou shall not forget鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:19), it is already referring to forgetting from the heart. How, then, do I uphold the meaning of 鈥渞emember鈥? What does this command to remember add to the command to not forget? Therefore, it means that the remembrance must be expressed out loud, with the mouth.

拽专讗讛 转专讙讜诐 诇讗 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 诪拽专讗 讜拽专讬 诇讛 转专讙讜诐 讛讬讬谞讜 注诇 驻讛 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 转专讙讜诐 讜拽专讬 诇讛 转专讙讜诐

搂 It was taught further in the mishna: If one read the Megilla in Aramaic translation he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If we say that the Megilla was written in the original biblical text, i.e., in Hebrew, and he read it in Aramaic translation, then this is the same as reading it by heart, as he is not reading the words written in the text, and the mishna has already stated that one does not fulfill his obligation by reading the Megilla by heart. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to teach this case as well, as it is referring to a case in which the Megilla was written not in the original Hebrew but in Aramaic translation, and he read it as written, in Aramaic translation.

讗讘诇 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇诇讜注讝讜转 讘诇注讝 讜讻讜壮 讜讛讗 讗诪专转 拽专讗讛 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬

搂 The mishna continues: However, for those who speak a foreign language, one may read the Megilla in that foreign language. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But didn鈥檛 you say in the mishna: If he read it in any other language he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara cites the answer of Rav and Shmuel, who both say: When the mishna says: A foreign language, it is referring specifically to the Greek foreign language, which has a unique status with regard to biblical translation.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 讗砖讜专讬转 讜拽专讬 诇讛 讬讜讜谞讬转 讛讬讬谞讜 注诇 驻讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 砖讻转讜讘讛 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬转

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of the case? If we say that the Megilla was written in Ashurit, i.e., in Hebrew, and he read it in Greek, this is the same as reading it by heart, and the mishna teaches that one does not fulfill his obligation by reading by heart. The Gemara answers: Rabbi A岣 said that Rabbi Elazar said: The mishna is dealing with a case in which the Megilla was written in the Greek foreign language and was also read in that language.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪谞讬谉 砖拽专讗讜 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讬注拽讘 讗诇 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 讗诇 讗诇讛讬 讬砖专讗诇 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇诪讝讘讞 拽专讗 诇讬讛 讬注拽讘 讗诇 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 讬注拽讘 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 诇讬注拽讘 讗诇 讜诪讬 拽专讗讜 讗诇 讗诇讛讬 讬砖专讗诇

Apropos statements in this line of tradition, the Gemara adds: And Rabbi A岣 further said that Rabbi Elazar said: From where is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, called Jacob El, meaning God? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd he erected there an altar, and he called it El, God of Israel鈥 (Genesis 33:20). It is also possible to translate this as: And He, i.e., the God of Israel, called him, Jacob, El. Indeed, it must be understood this way, as if it enters your mind to say that the verse should be understood as saying that Jacob called the altar El, it should have specified the subject of the verb and written: And Jacob called it El. But since the verse is not written this way, the verse must be understood as follows: He called Jacob El; and who called him El? The God of Israel.

诪讬转讬讘讬 拽专讗讛 讙讬驻讟讬转 注讘专讬转 注讬诇诪讬转 诪讚讬转 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讗 讬爪讗

The Gemara returns to discussing languages for reading the Megilla and raises an objection against Rav and Shmuel, who said that one may read the Megilla in Greek but not in other foreign languages. It is taught in a baraita: If one read the Megilla in Coptic [Giptit], Ivrit, Elamite, Median, or Greek, he has not fulfilled his obligation, indicating that one cannot fulfill his obligation by reading the Megilla in Greek.

讛讗 诇讗 讚诪讬讗 讗诇讗 诇讛讗 讙讬驻讟讬转 诇讙讬驻讟讬诐 注讘专讬转 诇注讘专讬诐 注讬诇诪讬转 诇注讬诇诪讬诐 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讬讜讜谞讬诐 讬爪讗

The Gemara answers: The clause in the mishna that teaches that the Megilla may be read in a foreign language to one who speaks that foreign language is comparable only to that which was taught in a different baraita: If one reads the Megilla in Coptic to Copts, in Ivrit to Ivrim, in Elamite to Elamites, or in Greek to Greeks, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Megilla may be read in any language, provided the listener understands that language.

讗讬 讛讻讬 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪讗讬 诪讜拽诪讬 诇讛 诇诪转谞讬转讬谉 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讜拽诪讛 讘讻诇 诇注讝 [讗诇讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讻讘专讬讬转讗] 讜讻讬 讗讬转诪专 讚专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讘注诇诪讗 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬 诇讻诇 讻砖专

The Gemara asks: But if so, that one who reads the Megilla in a foreign language that he speaks fulfills his obligation, why did Rav and Shmuel establish the ruling of the mishna as referring specifically to Greek? Let them interpret it as referring to any foreign language that one speaks. The Gemara explains: Rather, the mishna is to be understood like the baraita, that one who reads the Megilla in a language that he speaks fulfills his obligation; and that which was stated in the name of Rav and Shmuel was said as a general statement, not relating to the mishna but as an independent ruling, as follows: Rav and Shmuel both say: The Greek language is acceptable for everyone, i.e., anyone who reads the Megilla in Greek has fulfilled his obligation, even if he does not understand Greek.

讜讛讗 拽转谞讬 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讬讜讜谞讬诐 讗讬谉 诇讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 讗讬谞讛讜 讚讗诪讜专 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讚转谞谉 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗祝 住驻专讬诐 诇讗 讛转讬专讜 砖讬讻转讘讜 讗诇讗 讬讜讜谞讬转

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But doesn鈥檛 the baraita cited above teach that if one reads the Megilla in Greek to Greeks he has fulfilled his obligation? This implies that reading in Greek, yes, this is acceptable for Greeks, but for everyone else, no, it is not. The Gemara answers: Rav and Shmuel disagree with this statement of the baraita, because they agree with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. As we learned in a mishna (Megilla 8b): Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even for books of the Bible, the Sages did not permit them to be written in any foreign language other than Greek, indicating that Greek has a special status, and is treated like the original Hebrew.

讜诇讬诪专讜 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讬 讗诪专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 砖讗专 住驻专讬诐 讗讘诇 诪讙讬诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讛 讻讻转讘诐 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

The Gemara asks: But if this was the intention of Rav and Shmuel, let them state explicitly: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Why did Rav and Shmuel formulate their statement as if they were issuing a new ruling? The Gemara answers: Had they said simply that the halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, I would have said that this applies only to the other books of the Bible, but with regard to the Megilla, of which it is written: 鈥淎ccording to their writing,鈥 I would say that one does not fulfill his obligation if he reads it in Greek. Therefore they stated their own opinion to teach us that even in the case of the Megilla one fulfills his obligation if he reads it in Greek.

讜讛诇讜注讝 砖砖诪注 讗砖讜专讬转 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讜讛讗 诇讗 讬讚注 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专讬 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗谞砖讬诐 讜注诪讬 讛讗专抓

搂 It was taught in the mishna: And one who speaks a foreign language who heard the Megilla being read in Ashurit, i.e., in Hebrew, has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it so that he does not understand what they are saying? Since he does not understand Hebrew, how does he fulfill his obligation? The Gemara answers: It is just as it is with women and uneducated people; they too understand little Hebrew, but nevertheless they fulfill their obligation when they hear the Megilla read in that language.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 讗讟讜 讗谞谉 讛讗讞砖转专谞讬诐 讘谞讬 讛专诪讻讬诐 诪讬 讬讚注讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诪爪讜转 拽专讬讗讛 讜驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诪爪讜转 拽专讬讗讛 讜驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗

Ravina strongly objects to the premise of the question raised above, i.e., that someone who does not understand the original, untranslated language of the Megilla cannot fulfill his obligation. Is that to say that even we, the Sages, who are very well acquainted with Hebrew, know for certain the meaning of the obscure words ha鈥檃岣shteranim benei haramakhim (Esther 8:10), often translated as: 鈥淯sed in the royal service, bred from the stud鈥? But nevertheless, we fulfill the mitzva of reading the Megilla and publicizing the miracle of Purim by reading these words as they appear in the original text. Here too, one who speaks a foreign language who hears the Megilla being read in Hebrew fulfills the mitzva of reading the Megilla and publicizing the Purim miracle, even if he does not understand the words themselves.

拽专讗讛 住讬专讜讙讬谉 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 住讬专讜讙讬谉 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚拽讗诪专讛 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚讛讜讬 注讬讬诇讬 驻住拽讬 驻住拽讬 诇讘讬 专讘讬 注讚 诪转讬 讗转诐 谞讻谞住讬谉 住讬专讜讙讬谉 住讬专讜讙讬谉

搂 The mishna continues: If one reads the Megilla at intervals [seirugin] he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara relates that the Sages did not know what is meant by the word seirugin. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to the Sages who were entering the house intermittently rather than in a single group: How long are you going to enter seirugin seirugin? As she lived in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house and certainly heard the most proper Hebrew being spoken, they understood from this that the word seirugin means at intervals.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讞诇讜讙诇讜讙讜转 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 诪讘讚专 驻专驻讞讬谞讬 注讚 诪转讬 讗转讛 诪驻讝专 讞诇讜讙诇讜讙讱

It is similarly related that the Sages did not know what is meant by the word 岣logelogot, which appears in various mishnayot and baraitot. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to a certain man who was scattering purslane: How long will you go on scattering your 岣logelogot? And from this they understood that 岣logelogot is purslane.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 住诇住诇讛 讜转专讜诪诪讱 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讛讜讜转 讗诪专讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 诪讛驻讱 讘诪讝讬讬讛 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 注讚 诪转讬 讗转讛 诪住诇住诇 讘砖注专讱

Likewise, the Sages did not know what is meant by salseleha in the verse: 鈥淕et wisdom鈥alseleha and it will exalt you鈥 (Proverbs 4:7鈥8). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house talking to a certain man who was twirling his hair, saying to him: How long will you go on twirling [mesalsel] your hair? And from this they understood that the verse is saying: Turn wisdom around and around, and it will exalt you.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讛砖诇讱 注诇 讛壮 讬讛讘讱 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讝讬诪谞讗 讞讚讗 讛讜讛 讗讝讬诇谞讗 讘讛讚讬 讛讛讜讗 讟讬讬注讗 讜拽讗 讚专讬谞讗 讟讜谞讗 讜讗诪专 诇讬 砖拽讜诇 讬讛讘讬讱 讜砖讚讬 讗讙诪诇讗讬

The Gemara relates additional examples: The Sages did not know what is meant by the word yehav in the verse: 鈥淐ast upon the Lord your yehav (Psalms 55:23). Rabba bar bar 岣na said: One time I was traveling with a certain Arab [Tayya鈥檃] and I was carrying a load, and he said to me: Take your yehav and throw it on my camel, and I understood that yehav means a load or burden.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讜讟讗讟讗转讬讛 讘诪讟讗讟讗 讛砖诪讚 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讛讜讜转 讗诪专讛 诇讞讘专转讛 砖拽讜诇讬 讟讗讟讬转讗 讜讟讗讟讬 讘讬转讗

And similarly, the Sages did not know what is meant by the word matatei in the verse: 鈥淎nd I will tatei it with the matatei of destruction鈥 (Isaiah 14:23). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to her friend: Take a tateita and tati the house, from which they understood that a matatei is a broom, and the verb tati means to sweep.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 拽专讗讛 住讬专讜讙讬谉 讬爪讗

On the matter of reading the Megilla with interruptions, the Sages taught the following baraita: If one reads the Megilla at intervals, pausing and resuming at intervals, he has fulfilled his obligation.

住讬专讜住讬谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗祝 讘住讬专讜讙讬谉 讗诐 砖讛讛 讻讚讬 诇讙诪讜专 讗转 讻讜诇讛 讞讜讝专 诇专讗砖 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 砖讗诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛

But if he reads it out of order, i.e., if he changes the order of the words or verses of the Megilla, he has not fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Mona said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: Even when he reads it at intervals, if he pauses and interrupts his reading long enough for one to finish reading the whole Megilla during that time, he must go back to the beginning and start again. Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, who stated his opinion in the name of Rabbi Yehuda.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讻讚讬 诇讙诪讜专 讗转 讻讜诇讛 诪讛讬讻讗 讚拽讗讬 诇住讬驻讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪专讬砖讗 诇住讬驻讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪专讬砖讗 诇住讬驻讗 讚讗诐 讻谉 谞转转 讚讘专讬讱 诇砖讬注讜专讬谉

Abaye said to Rav Yosef: When Rabbi Mona said: Long enough for one to finish reading the whole Megilla, did he mean from the verse where he is now until the end? Or perhaps he meant long enough to read the entire Megilla from the beginning until the end. He said to him: Rabbi Mona meant from the beginning until the end, as if it were so that he meant from where he paused until the end of the Megilla, you would be subjecting your statement to the varying circumstances of each case. There would be no standard principle to determine the length of a permitted pause; in each case, depending on where one stopped, it would take a different amount of time to finish the Megilla until the end. And the Sages did not institute measures that are not standardized.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讘住讜专讗 诪转谞讜 讛讻讬 讘驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 诪转谞讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 专讘 讘讬讘讬 诪转谞讬 讗讬驻讻讗 专讘 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗

Rabbi Abba said that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Rav said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona. The Gemara elaborates: This is how they taught the opinions of the Sages in Sura. However, in Pumbedita they taught it slightly differently, like this: Rav Kahana said that Rav said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona. Rav Beivai taught the opposite: Rav said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 谞拽讜讟 讚专讘 讘讬讘讬 讘讬讚讱 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讛讜讗 讚讞讬讬砖 诇讬讞讬讚讗讛 讚转谞谉 砖讜诪专转 讬讘诐 砖拽讬讚砖 讗讞讬讜 讗转 讗讞讜转讛 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讗诪专讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讜 讛诪转谉 注讚 砖讬注砖讛 讗讞讬讱 讛讙讚讜诇 诪注砖讛

Rav Yosef said: Grasp the version of Rav Beivai in your hand, i.e., accept it as the most authoritative one. It appears to be correct, as we know that Shmuel takes into consideration even an individual dissenting opinion when it is more stringent than the majority opinion. The Gemara proves its assertion about Shmuel: As we learned in a mishna (Yevamot 41a) with regard to a different matter, the case of a widow whose husband died childless and who was waiting for one of his surviving brothers to perform the required levirate marriage with her or, alternatively, to release her with the 岣litza ceremony: In a case where a woman was waiting for her brother-in-law and in the meantime one of her deceased husband鈥檚 brothers betrothed this woman鈥檚 sister, they said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: We say to this brother: Wait before marrying your betrothed until your older brother acts, performing the levirate marriage or 岣litza.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛

The reason for this is that before levirate marriage or 岣litza is performed, all the brothers are considered, by rabbinic decree, to have a quasi-marital connection with the widow. Consequently, just as one may not marry his wife鈥檚 sister, he may not marry the sister of a woman who is waiting for him to perform levirate marriage. The Sages, however, disagree with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira and maintain that only the oldest of the brothers is considered bound to the widow, as he is the primary candidate to perform these acts. Consequently, the widow has no connection at all with the other brothers. And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. This demonstrates that Shmuel takes into consideration the opinion of a single Sage against the majority when that minority opinion is more stringent than the majority opinion.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛砖诪讬讟 讘讛 住讜驻专 讗讜转讬讜转 讗讜 驻住讜拽讬谉 讜拽专讗谉 讛拽讜专讗 讻诪转讜专讙诪谉 讛诪转专讙诐 讬爪讗

The Sages taught in a baraita: If the scribe who wrote the Megilla omitted letters or even complete verses when he wrote it, and the reader read these missing items as a translator would do when translating, i.e., he recited the missing parts by heart, he has fulfilled his obligation. Missing material in a Megilla and reading words or verses by heart do not invalidate the reading.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讜 讘讛 讗讜转讬讜转 诪讟讜砖讟砖讜转 讗讜 诪拽讜专注讜转 讗诐 专砖讜诪谉 谞讬讻专 讻砖专讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 驻住讜诇讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘讻讜诇讛 讛讗 讘诪拽爪转讛

The Gemara raises an objection from another baraita: If a Megilla contains letters that are blurred or torn, the following distinction applies: If their imprint is still visible, the Megilla is fit for reading, but if not, it is unfit. This baraita indicates that even the omission of several letters invalidates the Megilla. The Gemara resolves the contradiction between the two baraitot: This is not difficult. This second baraita, which says that a Megilla with blurred or torn letters is unfit, is referring to a case where this is so throughout the whole of the Megilla; whereas this first baraita, which says that a Megilla is fit even if whole verses are missing, is referring to a case where the missing material is in only part of it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛砖诪讬讟 讘讛 讛拽讜专讗 驻住讜拽 讗讞讚 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗拽专讗 讗转 讻讜诇讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 讗拽专讗 讗讜转讜 驻住讜拽 讗诇讗 拽讜专讗 诪讗讜转讜 驻住讜拽 讜讗讬诇讱 谞讻谞住 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜诪爪讗 爪讘讜专 砖拽专讗讜 讞爪讬讛 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗拽专讗 讞爪讬讛 注诐 讛爪讘讜专 讜讗讞专 讻讱 讗拽专讗 讞爪讬讛 讗诇讗 拽讜专讗 讗讜转讛 诪转讞讬诇转讛 讜注讚 住讜驻讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: If the reader of the Megilla omitted one verse, he may not say: I will continue to read the whole of the Megilla in order, and afterward I will go back and read that verse that I omitted. Rather, he must go back and read from that verse that he omitted and continue from there to the end of the Megilla. Similarly, if one enters a synagogue and encounters a congregation that has already read half of the Megilla, he may not say: I will read the second half of the Megilla with the congregation, and afterward I will go back and read the first half. Rather, he must go back and read it in its proper order from the beginning until the end.

诪转谞诪谞诐 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 诪转谞诪谞诐 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 谞讬诐 讜诇讗 谞讬诐 转讬专 讜诇讗 转讬专 讚拽专讜 诇讬讛 讜注谞讬 讜诇讗 讬讚注 诇讗讛讚讜专讬 住讘专讗 讜讻讬 诪讚讻专讜 诇讬讛 诪讬讚讻专

搂 It is taught in the mishna: If one read the Megilla while he is dozing off, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of the case of dozing off? Rav Ashi said: It is referring to a situation in which one is asleep yet not fully asleep, awake yet not fully awake. If someone calls him he answers. And he is in a mental state in which he does not know how to provide an answer that requires logical reasoning, but when people remind him about something that has happened, he remembers it.

讛讬讛 讻讜转讘讛 讚讜专砖讛 讜诪讙讬讛讛 讗诐 讻讜讜谉 诇讘讜 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬 讚拽讗 诪住讚专 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜讻转讘 诇讛 讻讬 讻讜讜谉 诇讘讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇 驻讛 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讚讻转讘 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜拽专讬 诇讬讛

搂 The mishna continues: If one was writing a Megilla, or expounding upon it, or correcting it, and he read all its words as he was doing so, if he had intent to fulfill his obligation with that reading he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If he was articulating each verse of the Megilla and then writing it down, what of it that he intended to fulfill his obligation with that reading, since he recited those words by heart? Rather, it must be that he first wrote each verse in the Megilla and then read it out.

讜诪讬 讬爪讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 讻讜诇讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪讗讬砖 讬讛讜讚讬 爪专讬讻讛 砖转讛讗 讻转讜讘讛 讻讜诇讛

The Gemara asks: But does one really fulfill his obligation in this way? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi 岣lbo say that Rav 岣ma bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the statement of the one who says that the Megilla must be read in its entirety in order to fulfill one鈥檚 obligation. And moreover, he said that even according to the one who said that one need not read the entire Megilla, but only from 鈥淭here was a certain Jew鈥 (Esther 2:5) and onward, the Megilla itself must nevertheless be written in its entirety. How, then, can it be suggested that one who is reading each verse as he writes it can fulfill his obligation by reading from a Megilla that is not yet written to the end?

讗诇讗 讚诪谞讞讛 诪讙讬诇讛 拽诪讬讛 讜拽专讬 诇讛 诪讬谞讛 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜讻转讘 诇讛 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讚诇诪讗 讚讗转专诪讬 诇讬讛 讗转专诪讜讬讬

The Gemara answers: Rather, this is a case in which a complete Megilla is lying before him and he is copying from it, and he was reading from that complete Megilla verse by verse and then writing each verse in his new copy. The Gemara proposes: Let us say that this supports the opinion of Rabba bar bar 岣na, as Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. Since it was necessary to explain the mishna as addressing a case in which one was copying a Megilla out of a written text lying before him, this supports Rabbi Yo岣nan鈥檚 ruling. The Gemara rejects this: This is not a proof, as perhaps the mishna is merely dealing with a case where this is what happened to be what occurred, that one happened to be copying the text from an existing Megilla, but it is not a requirement to do this.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 诪讗讬专 砖讛诇讱 诇注讘专 砖谞讛 讘注住讬讗 讜诇讗 讛讬讛 砖诐 诪讙讬诇讛 讜讻转讘讛 诪诇讘讜 讜拽专讗讛

The Gemara examines Rabba bar bar 岣na鈥檚 statement. With regard to the matter itself, Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: One Adar there was an incident involving Rabbi Meir, who went to intercalate the year in Asia Minor, as, owing to persecutory decrees, he could not do this in Eretz Yisrael. And there was no Megilla there when Purim arrived, so he wrote a Megilla by heart and read from it.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 砖讗谞讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚诪讬拽讬讬诐 讘讬讛 讜注驻注驻讬讱 讬讬砖讬专讜 谞讙讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪讚驻转讬 诪讗讬 讜注驻注驻讬讱 讬讬砖讬专讜 谞讙讚讱 讗诪专 诇讜 讗诇讜 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讛讜 讛转注讬祝 注讬谞讬讱 讘讜 讜讗讬谞谞讜 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 诪讬讜砖专讬谉 讛谉 讗爪诇 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Meir is different, as in him is fulfilled the verse: 鈥淎nd let your eyelids look straight before you鈥 (Proverbs 4:25), and with regard to this verse, Rami bar 岣ma said to Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti: What is the meaning of the phrase 鈥渁nd let your eyelids [afapekha],鈥 from the root a-p-p, 鈥渓ook straight [yaishiru] before you鈥? He said to him: This is referring to the words of the Torah, which are difficult to remember exactly, and with regard to which it is written: 鈥淲ill you glance upon it fleetingly [hata鈥檌f ], from the root a-p-p, with your eyes? It is already gone鈥 (Proverbs 23:5), but nevertheless they remain exact [meyusharin] in the memory of Rabbi Meir, since he knows them all by heart.

专讘 讞住讚讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讞谞谞讗诇 讚讛讜讛 讻转讘 住驻专讬诐 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讗讜讬讛 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讻讜诇讛 诇讬讻转讘 注诇 驻讬讱 讗诇讗 讻讱 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讚拽讗诪专 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讻讜诇讛 专讗讜讬讛 砖转讬讻转讘 注诇 驻讬讱 诪讻诇诇 讚诪讬讜砖专讬谉 讛谉 讗爪诇讜 讜讛讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻转讘 砖注转 讛讚讞拽 砖讗谞讬

It was related that Rav 岣sda once found Rav 岣nanel writing Torah scrolls, but he was not copying them from a written text, as he knew it all by heart. He said to him: It is fitting for the entire Torah to be written by your mouth, i.e., relying on your memory, but this is what the Sages said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. The Gemara asks: Since Rav 岣sda said to him: The entire Torah is fitting to be written by your mouth, it may be concluded by inference that the words of the Torah were exact in his memory, i.e., that Rav 岣nanel enjoyed total mastery of the text. But didn鈥檛 we say that Rabbi Meir wrote a Megilla without copying from a text due to similar proficiency? The Gemara answers: A time of exigent circumstances is different; since there was no other option available, he was permitted to rely on his expertise, but otherwise this must not be done.

讗讘讬讬 砖专讗 诇讚讘讬 讘专 讞讘讜 诇诪讬讻转讘 转驻诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讻诪讗谉 讻讬 讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬谞讜 转驻诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 谞讻转讘讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讜转 砖专讟讜讟

It was further related that Abaye permitted the scribes of the house of ben 岣vu to write phylacteries and mezuzot when they were not copying from a pre-existing text. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did he issue this allowance? The Gemara explains: In accordance with the opinion of the following tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of our master, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Phylacteries and mezuzot may be written when they are not copied from a written text, and they do not require scoring, i.e., the parchment is not required to have lines etched in it.

讜讛诇讻转讗 转驻诇讬谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 砖专讟讜讟 诪讝讜讝讜转 爪专讬讻讬谉 砖专讟讜讟 讗讬讚讬 讜讗讬讚讬 谞讻转讘讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪讬讙专住 讙专讬住讬谉

The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is as follows: Phylacteries do not require scoring, whereas mezuzot require scoring. And unlike biblical books, both these and those, phylacteries and mezuzot, may be written when the scribe is not copying from a written text. What is the reason for this exception? These short texts are well known to all scribes, and therefore it is permitted to write them by heart.

讛讬转讛 讻转讜讘讛 讘住诐 讻讜壮 住诐 住诪讗 住拽专讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 住拽专转讗 砖诪讛 拽讜诪讜住 拽讜诪讗

搂 The mishna teaches: If one reads from a Megilla that was written with sam or with sikra or with komos or with kankantom, he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara identifies these writing materials: Sam is what is called in Aramaic samma. With regard to sikra, Rabba bar bar 岣na said: Its name in Aramaic is sikreta, a type of red paint. Komos is what is called koma, a tree resin.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Megillah: 17-23 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will learn the entire second chapter of Masechet Megillah. This chapter deals with the laws of reading...
greek hamat tverya

Greek Chorus

Is Hebrew the only language of the Jewish people? Throughout history, Hebrew remained the language of prayer and study, as...

Megillah 18

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Megillah 18

讗讞专 讬砖讜讘讜 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜讘拽砖讜 讗转 讛壮 讗诇讛讬讛诐 讜讗转 讚讜讚 诪诇讻诐 讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗 讚讜讚 讘讗转讛 转驻诇讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛讘讬讗讜转讬诐 讗诇 讛专 拽讚砖讬 讜砖诪讞转讬诐 讘讘讬转 转驻诇转讬

鈥淎fterward the children of Israel shall return, and seek the Lord their God and David their king鈥 (Hosea 3:5), and consequently, the blessing of the kingdom of David follows the blessing of the building of Jerusalem. And once the scion of David comes, the time for prayer will come, as it is stated: 鈥淚 will bring them to My sacred mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer鈥 (Isaiah 56:7). Therefore, the blessing of hearing prayer is recited after the blessing of the kingdom of David.

讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗转 转驻诇讛 讘讗转 注讘讜讚讛 砖谞讗诪专 注讜诇讜转讬讛诐 讜讝讘讞讬讛诐 诇专爪讜谉 注诇 诪讝讘讞讬 讜讻讬讜谉 砖讘讗转 注讘讜讚讛 讘讗转讛 转讜讚讛 砖谞讗诪专 讝讜讘讞 转讜讚讛 讬讻讘讚谞谞讬

And after prayer comes, the Temple service will arrive, as it is stated in the continuation of that verse: 鈥淭heir burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on My altar鈥 (Isaiah 56:7). The blessing of restoration of the Temple service follows the blessing of hearing prayer. And when the Temple service comes, with it will also come thanksgiving, as it is stated: 鈥淲hoever sacrifices a thanks-offering honors Me鈥 (Psalms 50:23), which teaches that thanksgiving follows sacrifice. Therefore, the blessing of thanksgiving follows the blessing of restoration of the Temple service.

讜诪讛 专讗讜 诇讜诪专 讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讗讞专 讛讜讚讗讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬砖讗 讗讛专谉 讗转 讬讚讬讜 讗诇 讛注诐 讜讬讘专讻诐 讜讬专讚 诪注砖讜转 讛讞讟讗转 讜讛注讜诇讛 讜讛砖诇诪讬诐

And why did they see fit to institute that one says the Priestly Benediction after the blessing of thanksgiving? As it is written: 鈥淎nd Aaron lifted up his hand toward the people and blessed them, and he came down from sacrificing the sin-offering, and the burnt-offering, and the peace-offerings鈥 (Leviticus 9:22), teaching that the Priestly Benediction follows the sacrificial service, which includes the thanks-offering.

讗讬诪讗 拽讜讚诐 注讘讜讚讛 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬专讚 诪注砖讜转 讛讞讟讗转 讜讙讜壮 诪讬 讻转讬讘 诇注砖讜转 诪注砖讜转 讻转讬讘

The Gemara asks: But the cited verse indicates that Aaron blessed the people and then sacrificed the offerings. Should we not then say the Priestly Benediction before the blessing of the Temple service? The Gemara answers: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it is written: 鈥淎nd he came down from sacrificing the sin-offering.鈥 Is it written that he came down to sacrifice the offerings, implying that after blessing the people Aaron came down and sacrificed the offerings? No, it is written, 鈥渇rom sacrificing,鈥 indicating that the offerings had already been sacrificed.

讜诇讬诪专讛 讗讞专 讛注讘讜讚讛 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讝讜讘讞 转讜讚讛

The Gemara asks: If, as derived from this verse, the Priestly Benediction follows the sacrificial service, the Priestly Benediction should be said immediately after the blessing of restoration of the Temple service, without the interruption of the blessing of thanksgiving. The Gemara rejects this argument: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it is written: 鈥淲hoever sacrifices a thanks-offering honors Me,鈥 from which we learn that thanksgiving follows sacrifice, as already explained.

诪讗讬 讞讝讬转 讚住诪讻转 讗讛讗讬 住诪讜讱 讗讛讗讬 诪住转讘专讗 注讘讜讚讛 讜讛讜讚讗讛 讞讚讗 诪讬诇转讗 讛讬讗

The Gemara asks: What did you see to rely on this verse and juxtapose thanksgiving with sacrifice? Rely rather on the other verse, which indicates that it is the Priestly Benediction that should be juxtaposed with the sacrificial service. The Gemara answers: It stands to reason to have the blessing of thanksgiving immediately following the blessing of the sacrificial service, since the sacrificial service and thanksgiving, which are closely related conceptually, are one matter.

讜诪讛 专讗讜 诇讜诪专 砖讬诐 砖诇讜诐 讗讞专 讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讚讻转讬讘 讜砖诪讜 讗转 砖诪讬 注诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗谞讬 讗讘专讻诐 讘专讻讛 讚讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖诇讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 讬讘专讱 讗转 注诪讜 讘砖诇讜诐

And why did they see fit to institute that one says the blessing beginning with the words: Grant peace, after the Priestly Benediction? As it is written immediately following the Priestly Benediction: 鈥淎nd they shall put My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them鈥 (Numbers 6:27). The Priestly Benediction is followed by God鈥檚 blessing, and the blessing of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is peace, as it is stated: 鈥淭he Lord blesses His people with peace鈥 (Psalms 29:11).

讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 讚诪讗讛 讜注砖专讬诐 讝拽谞讬诐 讜诪讛诐 讻诪讛 谞讘讬讗讬诐 转拽谞讜 转驻诇讛 注诇 讛住讚专 砖诪注讜谉 讛驻拽讜诇讬 诪讗讬 讛住讚讬专 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专 讜住讚专讜诐

The Gemara returns to the baraita cited at the beginning of the discussion: Now, since the baraita teaches that a hundred and twenty Elders, including many prophets, established the Amida prayer in its fixed order, what is it that Shimon HaPakuli arranged in a much later period of time, as related by Rabbi Yo岣nan? The Gemara answers: Indeed, the blessings of the Amida prayer were originally arranged by the hundred and twenty members of the Great Assembly, but over the course of time the people forgot them, and Shimon HaPakuli then arranged them again.

诪讻讗谉 讜讗讬诇讱 讗住讜专 诇住驻专 讘砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诪讬 讬诪诇诇 讙讘讜专讜转 讛壮 讬砖诪讬注 讻诇 转讛诇转讜 诇诪讬 谞讗讛 诇诪诇诇 讙讘讜专讜转 讛壮 诇诪讬 砖讬讻讜诇 诇讛砖诪讬注 讻诇 转讛诇转讜

The Gemara comments: These nineteen blessings are a fixed number, and beyond this it is prohibited for one to declare the praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He, by adding additional blessings to the Amida. As Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淲ho can utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Who can declare all His praise?鈥 (Psalms 106:2)? It means: For whom is it fitting to utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Only for one who can declare all His praise. And since no one is capable of declaring all of God鈥檚 praises, we must suffice with the set formula established by the Sages.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛诪住驻专 讘砖讘讞讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬 谞注拽专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛讬住讜驻专 诇讜 讻讬 讗讚讘专 讗诐 讗诪专 讗讬砖 讻讬 讬讘诇注

Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: With regard to one who excessively declares the praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He, his fate is to be uprooted from the world, as it appears as if he had exhausted all of God鈥檚 praises. As it is stated: 鈥淪hall it be told to Him when I speak? If a man says it, he would be swallowed up鈥 (Job 37:20). The Gemara interprets the verse as saying: Can all of God鈥檚 praises be expressed when I speak? If a man would say such a thing, he would be 鈥渟wallowed up鈥 as punishment.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 讙讘讜专讬讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 讙讘讜专 讞讬诇 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诇讱 讚讜诪讬讛 转讛诇讛 住诪讗 讚讻讜诇讛 诪砖转讜拽讗 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 讗诪专讬 讘诪注专讘讗 诪诇讛 讘住诇注 诪砖转讜拽讗 讘转专讬谉

The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehuda, a man of Kefar Gibboraya, and some say he was a man of Kefar Gibbor 膜ayil, taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淔or You silence is praise鈥 (Psalms 65:2)? The best remedy of all is silence, i.e., the optimum form of praising God is silence. The Gemara relates: When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Israel to Babylonia, he said: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say an adage: If a word is worth one sela, silence is worth two.

拽专讗讛 注诇 驻讛 诇讗 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 诪谞诇谉 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗转讬讗 讝讻讬专讛 讝讻讬专讛 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讜讛讬诪讬诐 讛讗诇讛 谞讝讻专讬诐 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 讻转讘 讝讗转 讝讻专讜谉 讘住驻专 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘住驻专 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘住驻专

搂 It is taught in the mishna: If one read the Megilla by heart he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rava said: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between one instance of the term remembrance and another instance of the term remembrance. It is written here, with regard to the Megilla: 鈥淭hat these days should be remembered鈥 (Esther 9:28), and it is written elsewhere: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Moses: Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: That I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens鈥 (Exodus 17:14). Just as there, with regard to Amalek, remembrance is referring specifically to something written in a book, as it is stated, 鈥渋n the book,鈥 so too here, the Megilla remembrance is through being written in a book.

讜诪诪讗讬 讚讛讗讬 讝讻讬专讛 拽专讬讗讛 讛讬讗 讚诇诪讗 注讬讜谉 讘注诇诪讗 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 (讚讻转讬讘) 讝讻讜专 讬讻讜诇 讘诇讘 讻砖讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 转砖讻讞 讛专讬 砖讻讞转 讛诇讘 讗诪讜专 讛讗 诪讛 讗谞讬 诪拽讬讬诐 讝讻讜专 讘驻讛

The Gemara raises a question: But from where do we know that this remembrance that is stated with regard to Amalek and to the Megilla involves reading it out loud from a book? Perhaps it requires merely looking into the book, reading it silently. The Gemara answers: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it was taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淩emember what Amalek did to you鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:17). One might have thought that it suffices for one to remember this silently, in his heart. But this cannot be, since when it says subsequently: 鈥淵ou shall not forget鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:19), it is already referring to forgetting from the heart. How, then, do I uphold the meaning of 鈥渞emember鈥? What does this command to remember add to the command to not forget? Therefore, it means that the remembrance must be expressed out loud, with the mouth.

拽专讗讛 转专讙讜诐 诇讗 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 诪拽专讗 讜拽专讬 诇讛 转专讙讜诐 讛讬讬谞讜 注诇 驻讛 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 转专讙讜诐 讜拽专讬 诇讛 转专讙讜诐

搂 It was taught further in the mishna: If one read the Megilla in Aramaic translation he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If we say that the Megilla was written in the original biblical text, i.e., in Hebrew, and he read it in Aramaic translation, then this is the same as reading it by heart, as he is not reading the words written in the text, and the mishna has already stated that one does not fulfill his obligation by reading the Megilla by heart. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to teach this case as well, as it is referring to a case in which the Megilla was written not in the original Hebrew but in Aramaic translation, and he read it as written, in Aramaic translation.

讗讘诇 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇诇讜注讝讜转 讘诇注讝 讜讻讜壮 讜讛讗 讗诪专转 拽专讗讛 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬

搂 The mishna continues: However, for those who speak a foreign language, one may read the Megilla in that foreign language. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But didn鈥檛 you say in the mishna: If he read it in any other language he has not fulfilled his obligation? The Gemara cites the answer of Rav and Shmuel, who both say: When the mishna says: A foreign language, it is referring specifically to the Greek foreign language, which has a unique status with regard to biblical translation.

讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚讻转讬讘讛 讗砖讜专讬转 讜拽专讬 诇讛 讬讜讜谞讬转 讛讬讬谞讜 注诇 驻讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 砖讻转讜讘讛 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬转

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of the case? If we say that the Megilla was written in Ashurit, i.e., in Hebrew, and he read it in Greek, this is the same as reading it by heart, and the mishna teaches that one does not fulfill his obligation by reading by heart. The Gemara answers: Rabbi A岣 said that Rabbi Elazar said: The mishna is dealing with a case in which the Megilla was written in the Greek foreign language and was also read in that language.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诪谞讬谉 砖拽专讗讜 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇讬注拽讘 讗诇 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 讗诇 讗诇讛讬 讬砖专讗诇 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇诪讝讘讞 拽专讗 诇讬讛 讬注拽讘 讗诇 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 讬注拽讘 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讜讬拽专讗 诇讜 诇讬注拽讘 讗诇 讜诪讬 拽专讗讜 讗诇 讗诇讛讬 讬砖专讗诇

Apropos statements in this line of tradition, the Gemara adds: And Rabbi A岣 further said that Rabbi Elazar said: From where is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, called Jacob El, meaning God? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd he erected there an altar, and he called it El, God of Israel鈥 (Genesis 33:20). It is also possible to translate this as: And He, i.e., the God of Israel, called him, Jacob, El. Indeed, it must be understood this way, as if it enters your mind to say that the verse should be understood as saying that Jacob called the altar El, it should have specified the subject of the verb and written: And Jacob called it El. But since the verse is not written this way, the verse must be understood as follows: He called Jacob El; and who called him El? The God of Israel.

诪讬转讬讘讬 拽专讗讛 讙讬驻讟讬转 注讘专讬转 注讬诇诪讬转 诪讚讬转 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讗 讬爪讗

The Gemara returns to discussing languages for reading the Megilla and raises an objection against Rav and Shmuel, who said that one may read the Megilla in Greek but not in other foreign languages. It is taught in a baraita: If one read the Megilla in Coptic [Giptit], Ivrit, Elamite, Median, or Greek, he has not fulfilled his obligation, indicating that one cannot fulfill his obligation by reading the Megilla in Greek.

讛讗 诇讗 讚诪讬讗 讗诇讗 诇讛讗 讙讬驻讟讬转 诇讙讬驻讟讬诐 注讘专讬转 诇注讘专讬诐 注讬诇诪讬转 诇注讬诇诪讬诐 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讬讜讜谞讬诐 讬爪讗

The Gemara answers: The clause in the mishna that teaches that the Megilla may be read in a foreign language to one who speaks that foreign language is comparable only to that which was taught in a different baraita: If one reads the Megilla in Coptic to Copts, in Ivrit to Ivrim, in Elamite to Elamites, or in Greek to Greeks, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Megilla may be read in any language, provided the listener understands that language.

讗讬 讛讻讬 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪讗讬 诪讜拽诪讬 诇讛 诇诪转谞讬转讬谉 讘诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讜拽诪讛 讘讻诇 诇注讝 [讗诇讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讻讘专讬讬转讗] 讜讻讬 讗讬转诪专 讚专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讘注诇诪讗 讗讬转诪专 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇注讝 讬讜讜谞讬 诇讻诇 讻砖专

The Gemara asks: But if so, that one who reads the Megilla in a foreign language that he speaks fulfills his obligation, why did Rav and Shmuel establish the ruling of the mishna as referring specifically to Greek? Let them interpret it as referring to any foreign language that one speaks. The Gemara explains: Rather, the mishna is to be understood like the baraita, that one who reads the Megilla in a language that he speaks fulfills his obligation; and that which was stated in the name of Rav and Shmuel was said as a general statement, not relating to the mishna but as an independent ruling, as follows: Rav and Shmuel both say: The Greek language is acceptable for everyone, i.e., anyone who reads the Megilla in Greek has fulfilled his obligation, even if he does not understand Greek.

讜讛讗 拽转谞讬 讬讜讜谞讬转 诇讬讜讜谞讬诐 讗讬谉 诇讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 讗讬谞讛讜 讚讗诪讜专 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讚转谞谉 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗祝 住驻专讬诐 诇讗 讛转讬专讜 砖讬讻转讘讜 讗诇讗 讬讜讜谞讬转

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But doesn鈥檛 the baraita cited above teach that if one reads the Megilla in Greek to Greeks he has fulfilled his obligation? This implies that reading in Greek, yes, this is acceptable for Greeks, but for everyone else, no, it is not. The Gemara answers: Rav and Shmuel disagree with this statement of the baraita, because they agree with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. As we learned in a mishna (Megilla 8b): Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even for books of the Bible, the Sages did not permit them to be written in any foreign language other than Greek, indicating that Greek has a special status, and is treated like the original Hebrew.

讜诇讬诪专讜 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讬 讗诪专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 砖讗专 住驻专讬诐 讗讘诇 诪讙讬诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讛 讻讻转讘诐 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

The Gemara asks: But if this was the intention of Rav and Shmuel, let them state explicitly: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Why did Rav and Shmuel formulate their statement as if they were issuing a new ruling? The Gemara answers: Had they said simply that the halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, I would have said that this applies only to the other books of the Bible, but with regard to the Megilla, of which it is written: 鈥淎ccording to their writing,鈥 I would say that one does not fulfill his obligation if he reads it in Greek. Therefore they stated their own opinion to teach us that even in the case of the Megilla one fulfills his obligation if he reads it in Greek.

讜讛诇讜注讝 砖砖诪注 讗砖讜专讬转 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讜讛讗 诇讗 讬讚注 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专讬 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗谞砖讬诐 讜注诪讬 讛讗专抓

搂 It was taught in the mishna: And one who speaks a foreign language who heard the Megilla being read in Ashurit, i.e., in Hebrew, has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it so that he does not understand what they are saying? Since he does not understand Hebrew, how does he fulfill his obligation? The Gemara answers: It is just as it is with women and uneducated people; they too understand little Hebrew, but nevertheless they fulfill their obligation when they hear the Megilla read in that language.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 讗讟讜 讗谞谉 讛讗讞砖转专谞讬诐 讘谞讬 讛专诪讻讬诐 诪讬 讬讚注讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诪爪讜转 拽专讬讗讛 讜驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诪爪讜转 拽专讬讗讛 讜驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗

Ravina strongly objects to the premise of the question raised above, i.e., that someone who does not understand the original, untranslated language of the Megilla cannot fulfill his obligation. Is that to say that even we, the Sages, who are very well acquainted with Hebrew, know for certain the meaning of the obscure words ha鈥檃岣shteranim benei haramakhim (Esther 8:10), often translated as: 鈥淯sed in the royal service, bred from the stud鈥? But nevertheless, we fulfill the mitzva of reading the Megilla and publicizing the miracle of Purim by reading these words as they appear in the original text. Here too, one who speaks a foreign language who hears the Megilla being read in Hebrew fulfills the mitzva of reading the Megilla and publicizing the Purim miracle, even if he does not understand the words themselves.

拽专讗讛 住讬专讜讙讬谉 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 住讬专讜讙讬谉 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚拽讗诪专讛 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚讛讜讬 注讬讬诇讬 驻住拽讬 驻住拽讬 诇讘讬 专讘讬 注讚 诪转讬 讗转诐 谞讻谞住讬谉 住讬专讜讙讬谉 住讬专讜讙讬谉

搂 The mishna continues: If one reads the Megilla at intervals [seirugin] he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara relates that the Sages did not know what is meant by the word seirugin. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to the Sages who were entering the house intermittently rather than in a single group: How long are you going to enter seirugin seirugin? As she lived in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house and certainly heard the most proper Hebrew being spoken, they understood from this that the word seirugin means at intervals.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讞诇讜讙诇讜讙讜转 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 诪讘讚专 驻专驻讞讬谞讬 注讚 诪转讬 讗转讛 诪驻讝专 讞诇讜讙诇讜讙讱

It is similarly related that the Sages did not know what is meant by the word 岣logelogot, which appears in various mishnayot and baraitot. One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to a certain man who was scattering purslane: How long will you go on scattering your 岣logelogot? And from this they understood that 岣logelogot is purslane.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 住诇住诇讛 讜转专讜诪诪讱 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讛讜讜转 讗诪专讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 诪讛驻讱 讘诪讝讬讬讛 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 注讚 诪转讬 讗转讛 诪住诇住诇 讘砖注专讱

Likewise, the Sages did not know what is meant by salseleha in the verse: 鈥淕et wisdom鈥alseleha and it will exalt you鈥 (Proverbs 4:7鈥8). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house talking to a certain man who was twirling his hair, saying to him: How long will you go on twirling [mesalsel] your hair? And from this they understood that the verse is saying: Turn wisdom around and around, and it will exalt you.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讛砖诇讱 注诇 讛壮 讬讛讘讱 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讝讬诪谞讗 讞讚讗 讛讜讛 讗讝讬诇谞讗 讘讛讚讬 讛讛讜讗 讟讬讬注讗 讜拽讗 讚专讬谞讗 讟讜谞讗 讜讗诪专 诇讬 砖拽讜诇 讬讛讘讬讱 讜砖讚讬 讗讙诪诇讗讬

The Gemara relates additional examples: The Sages did not know what is meant by the word yehav in the verse: 鈥淐ast upon the Lord your yehav (Psalms 55:23). Rabba bar bar 岣na said: One time I was traveling with a certain Arab [Tayya鈥檃] and I was carrying a load, and he said to me: Take your yehav and throw it on my camel, and I understood that yehav means a load or burden.

诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 专讘谞谉 诪讗讬 讜讟讗讟讗转讬讛 讘诪讟讗讟讗 讛砖诪讚 砖诪注讜讛 诇讗诪转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讚讛讜讜转 讗诪专讛 诇讞讘专转讛 砖拽讜诇讬 讟讗讟讬转讗 讜讟讗讟讬 讘讬转讗

And similarly, the Sages did not know what is meant by the word matatei in the verse: 鈥淎nd I will tatei it with the matatei of destruction鈥 (Isaiah 14:23). One day they heard the maidservant in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 house saying to her friend: Take a tateita and tati the house, from which they understood that a matatei is a broom, and the verb tati means to sweep.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 拽专讗讛 住讬专讜讙讬谉 讬爪讗

On the matter of reading the Megilla with interruptions, the Sages taught the following baraita: If one reads the Megilla at intervals, pausing and resuming at intervals, he has fulfilled his obligation.

住讬专讜住讬谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗祝 讘住讬专讜讙讬谉 讗诐 砖讛讛 讻讚讬 诇讙诪讜专 讗转 讻讜诇讛 讞讜讝专 诇专讗砖 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 砖讗诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛

But if he reads it out of order, i.e., if he changes the order of the words or verses of the Megilla, he has not fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Mona said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: Even when he reads it at intervals, if he pauses and interrupts his reading long enough for one to finish reading the whole Megilla during that time, he must go back to the beginning and start again. Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, who stated his opinion in the name of Rabbi Yehuda.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讻讚讬 诇讙诪讜专 讗转 讻讜诇讛 诪讛讬讻讗 讚拽讗讬 诇住讬驻讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪专讬砖讗 诇住讬驻讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪专讬砖讗 诇住讬驻讗 讚讗诐 讻谉 谞转转 讚讘专讬讱 诇砖讬注讜专讬谉

Abaye said to Rav Yosef: When Rabbi Mona said: Long enough for one to finish reading the whole Megilla, did he mean from the verse where he is now until the end? Or perhaps he meant long enough to read the entire Megilla from the beginning until the end. He said to him: Rabbi Mona meant from the beginning until the end, as if it were so that he meant from where he paused until the end of the Megilla, you would be subjecting your statement to the varying circumstances of each case. There would be no standard principle to determine the length of a permitted pause; in each case, depending on where one stopped, it would take a different amount of time to finish the Megilla until the end. And the Sages did not institute measures that are not standardized.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讘住讜专讗 诪转谞讜 讛讻讬 讘驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 诪转谞讜 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 专讘 讘讬讘讬 诪转谞讬 讗讬驻讻讗 专讘 讗诪专 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讜谞讗

Rabbi Abba said that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Rav said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona. The Gemara elaborates: This is how they taught the opinions of the Sages in Sura. However, in Pumbedita they taught it slightly differently, like this: Rav Kahana said that Rav said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona. Rav Beivai taught the opposite: Rav said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona, but Shmuel said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Mona.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 谞拽讜讟 讚专讘 讘讬讘讬 讘讬讚讱 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讛讜讗 讚讞讬讬砖 诇讬讞讬讚讗讛 讚转谞谉 砖讜诪专转 讬讘诐 砖拽讬讚砖 讗讞讬讜 讗转 讗讞讜转讛 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讗诪专讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讜 讛诪转谉 注讚 砖讬注砖讛 讗讞讬讱 讛讙讚讜诇 诪注砖讛

Rav Yosef said: Grasp the version of Rav Beivai in your hand, i.e., accept it as the most authoritative one. It appears to be correct, as we know that Shmuel takes into consideration even an individual dissenting opinion when it is more stringent than the majority opinion. The Gemara proves its assertion about Shmuel: As we learned in a mishna (Yevamot 41a) with regard to a different matter, the case of a widow whose husband died childless and who was waiting for one of his surviving brothers to perform the required levirate marriage with her or, alternatively, to release her with the 岣litza ceremony: In a case where a woman was waiting for her brother-in-law and in the meantime one of her deceased husband鈥檚 brothers betrothed this woman鈥檚 sister, they said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: We say to this brother: Wait before marrying your betrothed until your older brother acts, performing the levirate marriage or 岣litza.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛

The reason for this is that before levirate marriage or 岣litza is performed, all the brothers are considered, by rabbinic decree, to have a quasi-marital connection with the widow. Consequently, just as one may not marry his wife鈥檚 sister, he may not marry the sister of a woman who is waiting for him to perform levirate marriage. The Sages, however, disagree with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira and maintain that only the oldest of the brothers is considered bound to the widow, as he is the primary candidate to perform these acts. Consequently, the widow has no connection at all with the other brothers. And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. This demonstrates that Shmuel takes into consideration the opinion of a single Sage against the majority when that minority opinion is more stringent than the majority opinion.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛砖诪讬讟 讘讛 住讜驻专 讗讜转讬讜转 讗讜 驻住讜拽讬谉 讜拽专讗谉 讛拽讜专讗 讻诪转讜专讙诪谉 讛诪转专讙诐 讬爪讗

The Sages taught in a baraita: If the scribe who wrote the Megilla omitted letters or even complete verses when he wrote it, and the reader read these missing items as a translator would do when translating, i.e., he recited the missing parts by heart, he has fulfilled his obligation. Missing material in a Megilla and reading words or verses by heart do not invalidate the reading.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讜 讘讛 讗讜转讬讜转 诪讟讜砖讟砖讜转 讗讜 诪拽讜专注讜转 讗诐 专砖讜诪谉 谞讬讻专 讻砖专讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 驻住讜诇讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘讻讜诇讛 讛讗 讘诪拽爪转讛

The Gemara raises an objection from another baraita: If a Megilla contains letters that are blurred or torn, the following distinction applies: If their imprint is still visible, the Megilla is fit for reading, but if not, it is unfit. This baraita indicates that even the omission of several letters invalidates the Megilla. The Gemara resolves the contradiction between the two baraitot: This is not difficult. This second baraita, which says that a Megilla with blurred or torn letters is unfit, is referring to a case where this is so throughout the whole of the Megilla; whereas this first baraita, which says that a Megilla is fit even if whole verses are missing, is referring to a case where the missing material is in only part of it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛砖诪讬讟 讘讛 讛拽讜专讗 驻住讜拽 讗讞讚 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗拽专讗 讗转 讻讜诇讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 讗拽专讗 讗讜转讜 驻住讜拽 讗诇讗 拽讜专讗 诪讗讜转讜 驻住讜拽 讜讗讬诇讱 谞讻谞住 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜诪爪讗 爪讘讜专 砖拽专讗讜 讞爪讬讛 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗拽专讗 讞爪讬讛 注诐 讛爪讘讜专 讜讗讞专 讻讱 讗拽专讗 讞爪讬讛 讗诇讗 拽讜专讗 讗讜转讛 诪转讞讬诇转讛 讜注讚 住讜驻讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: If the reader of the Megilla omitted one verse, he may not say: I will continue to read the whole of the Megilla in order, and afterward I will go back and read that verse that I omitted. Rather, he must go back and read from that verse that he omitted and continue from there to the end of the Megilla. Similarly, if one enters a synagogue and encounters a congregation that has already read half of the Megilla, he may not say: I will read the second half of the Megilla with the congregation, and afterward I will go back and read the first half. Rather, he must go back and read it in its proper order from the beginning until the end.

诪转谞诪谞诐 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 诪转谞诪谞诐 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 谞讬诐 讜诇讗 谞讬诐 转讬专 讜诇讗 转讬专 讚拽专讜 诇讬讛 讜注谞讬 讜诇讗 讬讚注 诇讗讛讚讜专讬 住讘专讗 讜讻讬 诪讚讻专讜 诇讬讛 诪讬讚讻专

搂 It is taught in the mishna: If one read the Megilla while he is dozing off, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of the case of dozing off? Rav Ashi said: It is referring to a situation in which one is asleep yet not fully asleep, awake yet not fully awake. If someone calls him he answers. And he is in a mental state in which he does not know how to provide an answer that requires logical reasoning, but when people remind him about something that has happened, he remembers it.

讛讬讛 讻讜转讘讛 讚讜专砖讛 讜诪讙讬讛讛 讗诐 讻讜讜谉 诇讘讜 讬爪讗 讜讻讜壮 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬 讚拽讗 诪住讚专 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜讻转讘 诇讛 讻讬 讻讜讜谉 诇讘讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇 驻讛 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讚讻转讘 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜拽专讬 诇讬讛

搂 The mishna continues: If one was writing a Megilla, or expounding upon it, or correcting it, and he read all its words as he was doing so, if he had intent to fulfill his obligation with that reading he has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If he was articulating each verse of the Megilla and then writing it down, what of it that he intended to fulfill his obligation with that reading, since he recited those words by heart? Rather, it must be that he first wrote each verse in the Megilla and then read it out.

讜诪讬 讬爪讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻讚讘专讬 讛讗讜诪专 讻讜诇讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪讗讬砖 讬讛讜讚讬 爪专讬讻讛 砖转讛讗 讻转讜讘讛 讻讜诇讛

The Gemara asks: But does one really fulfill his obligation in this way? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi 岣lbo say that Rav 岣ma bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the statement of the one who says that the Megilla must be read in its entirety in order to fulfill one鈥檚 obligation. And moreover, he said that even according to the one who said that one need not read the entire Megilla, but only from 鈥淭here was a certain Jew鈥 (Esther 2:5) and onward, the Megilla itself must nevertheless be written in its entirety. How, then, can it be suggested that one who is reading each verse as he writes it can fulfill his obligation by reading from a Megilla that is not yet written to the end?

讗诇讗 讚诪谞讞讛 诪讙讬诇讛 拽诪讬讛 讜拽专讬 诇讛 诪讬谞讛 驻住讜拽讗 驻住讜拽讗 讜讻转讘 诇讛 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讚诇诪讗 讚讗转专诪讬 诇讬讛 讗转专诪讜讬讬

The Gemara answers: Rather, this is a case in which a complete Megilla is lying before him and he is copying from it, and he was reading from that complete Megilla verse by verse and then writing each verse in his new copy. The Gemara proposes: Let us say that this supports the opinion of Rabba bar bar 岣na, as Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. Since it was necessary to explain the mishna as addressing a case in which one was copying a Megilla out of a written text lying before him, this supports Rabbi Yo岣nan鈥檚 ruling. The Gemara rejects this: This is not a proof, as perhaps the mishna is merely dealing with a case where this is what happened to be what occurred, that one happened to be copying the text from an existing Megilla, but it is not a requirement to do this.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 诪注砖讛 讘专讘讬 诪讗讬专 砖讛诇讱 诇注讘专 砖谞讛 讘注住讬讗 讜诇讗 讛讬讛 砖诐 诪讙讬诇讛 讜讻转讘讛 诪诇讘讜 讜拽专讗讛

The Gemara examines Rabba bar bar 岣na鈥檚 statement. With regard to the matter itself, Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: One Adar there was an incident involving Rabbi Meir, who went to intercalate the year in Asia Minor, as, owing to persecutory decrees, he could not do this in Eretz Yisrael. And there was no Megilla there when Purim arrived, so he wrote a Megilla by heart and read from it.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 砖讗谞讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚诪讬拽讬讬诐 讘讬讛 讜注驻注驻讬讱 讬讬砖讬专讜 谞讙讚讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪讚驻转讬 诪讗讬 讜注驻注驻讬讱 讬讬砖讬专讜 谞讙讚讱 讗诪专 诇讜 讗诇讜 讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 讚讻转讬讘 讘讛讜 讛转注讬祝 注讬谞讬讱 讘讜 讜讗讬谞谞讜 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 诪讬讜砖专讬谉 讛谉 讗爪诇 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Meir is different, as in him is fulfilled the verse: 鈥淎nd let your eyelids look straight before you鈥 (Proverbs 4:25), and with regard to this verse, Rami bar 岣ma said to Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti: What is the meaning of the phrase 鈥渁nd let your eyelids [afapekha],鈥 from the root a-p-p, 鈥渓ook straight [yaishiru] before you鈥? He said to him: This is referring to the words of the Torah, which are difficult to remember exactly, and with regard to which it is written: 鈥淲ill you glance upon it fleetingly [hata鈥檌f ], from the root a-p-p, with your eyes? It is already gone鈥 (Proverbs 23:5), but nevertheless they remain exact [meyusharin] in the memory of Rabbi Meir, since he knows them all by heart.

专讘 讞住讚讗 讗砖讻讞讬讛 诇专讘 讞谞谞讗诇 讚讛讜讛 讻转讘 住驻专讬诐 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讗讜讬讛 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讻讜诇讛 诇讬讻转讘 注诇 驻讬讱 讗诇讗 讻讱 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗住讜专 诇讻转讜讘 讗讜转 讗讞转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讚拽讗诪专 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讻讜诇讛 专讗讜讬讛 砖转讬讻转讘 注诇 驻讬讱 诪讻诇诇 讚诪讬讜砖专讬谉 讛谉 讗爪诇讜 讜讛讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讻转讘 砖注转 讛讚讞拽 砖讗谞讬

It was related that Rav 岣sda once found Rav 岣nanel writing Torah scrolls, but he was not copying them from a written text, as he knew it all by heart. He said to him: It is fitting for the entire Torah to be written by your mouth, i.e., relying on your memory, but this is what the Sages said: It is prohibited to write even a single letter of the Bible when not copying from a written text. The Gemara asks: Since Rav 岣sda said to him: The entire Torah is fitting to be written by your mouth, it may be concluded by inference that the words of the Torah were exact in his memory, i.e., that Rav 岣nanel enjoyed total mastery of the text. But didn鈥檛 we say that Rabbi Meir wrote a Megilla without copying from a text due to similar proficiency? The Gemara answers: A time of exigent circumstances is different; since there was no other option available, he was permitted to rely on his expertise, but otherwise this must not be done.

讗讘讬讬 砖专讗 诇讚讘讬 讘专 讞讘讜 诇诪讬讻转讘 转驻诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讻诪讗谉 讻讬 讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬谞讜 转驻诇讬谉 讜诪讝讜讝讜转 谞讻转讘讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讜转 砖专讟讜讟

It was further related that Abaye permitted the scribes of the house of ben 岣vu to write phylacteries and mezuzot when they were not copying from a pre-existing text. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did he issue this allowance? The Gemara explains: In accordance with the opinion of the following tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of our master, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Phylacteries and mezuzot may be written when they are not copied from a written text, and they do not require scoring, i.e., the parchment is not required to have lines etched in it.

讜讛诇讻转讗 转驻诇讬谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 砖专讟讜讟 诪讝讜讝讜转 爪专讬讻讬谉 砖专讟讜讟 讗讬讚讬 讜讗讬讚讬 谞讻转讘讜转 砖诇讗 诪谉 讛讻转讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪讬讙专住 讙专讬住讬谉

The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is as follows: Phylacteries do not require scoring, whereas mezuzot require scoring. And unlike biblical books, both these and those, phylacteries and mezuzot, may be written when the scribe is not copying from a written text. What is the reason for this exception? These short texts are well known to all scribes, and therefore it is permitted to write them by heart.

讛讬转讛 讻转讜讘讛 讘住诐 讻讜壮 住诐 住诪讗 住拽专讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 住拽专转讗 砖诪讛 拽讜诪讜住 拽讜诪讗

搂 The mishna teaches: If one reads from a Megilla that was written with sam or with sikra or with komos or with kankantom, he has not fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara identifies these writing materials: Sam is what is called in Aramaic samma. With regard to sikra, Rabba bar bar 岣na said: Its name in Aramaic is sikreta, a type of red paint. Komos is what is called koma, a tree resin.

Scroll To Top