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

Today's Daf Yomi

January 3, 2022 | 讗壮 讘砖讘讟 转砖驻状讘

This month鈥檚 shiurim are dedicated by Efrat Arnold in loving memory of Joshua Carr, Yehoshua Aryeh Leib ben Yonatan Chaim and Malka Esther HaCohen.

This month's shiurim are dedicated by Tova and David Kestenbaum in honor of their children and grandchildren.

This month's shiurim are dedicated by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria who is learning Masechet Megilla for her bat mitzvah.聽

  • 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 22

This month鈥檚 shiurim are dedicated by Efrat Arnold in loving memory of Joshua Carr, Yehoshua Aryeh Leib ben Yonatan Chaim and Malka Esther HaCohen. 鈥淎n inspiring young man who loved learning and had made his first siyum just a few weeks ago for Masechet Rosh Hashana.鈥

This month鈥檚 shiurim are dedicated by Tova and David Kestenbaum in honor of their children and grandchildren. 鈥淢ay Hashem bless them to continue in the path of Torah handed down from Hashem to Moshe Rabbeinu at Har Sinai, from generation to generation.鈥

How does one divide the Torah reading for Rosh Chodesh into four sections in a way that avoids issues such as ending an aliya while leaving less than three verses to the section? In order to answer the question, the Gemara brings a debate of Rav and Shmuel regarding how to divide the Torah readings for the maamadot. A difficulty on both approaches is brought from a braita with a debate between the tana kama and an anonymous tana about breaking up Torah portions for reading. However, the cases aren鈥檛 comparable. Is it more likely that people will show up late to shul, in the middle of the Torah reading, or that they will leave in the middle of the Torah reading? What relevance is there to this question? The Mishna did not mention how many aliyot there are on a fast day. Is it 3 like Mondays and Thursdays or four like Rosh Chodesh and Chol Hamoed? Several sources are brought to try to answer this question, including inferences from our Mishna, however, most are rejected. One of the sources related to an incident when Rav came to Bavel and read from the Torah and made a blessing before and not after. Also during the tachanun prayer he did not fall on his face. The Gemara tries to understand why acted in this way.

讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 诇讬拽专讬 转专讬 诪讛讗 讜转诇转讗 诪讛讱 驻砖讜 诇讛讜 转专讬

one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it. And if you say he should read two verses from this paragraph, i.e., the entire second paragraph, and then three verses from that final paragraph, only two verses will remain from the final paragraph. This is problematic because one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left until the end of a paragraph and because the fourth reader will not have a sufficient number of verses to read.

讗诪专 诇讜 讝讜 诇讗 砖诪注转讬 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讛 砖诪注转讬 讚转谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讘专讗砖讬转 讜讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讜转谞讬 注诇讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讘砖谞讬诐 讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讘讗讞讚

Rava said to him: I have not heard a solution for this problem from my teachers. However, with regard to a similar problem I heard a solution from them, as we learned in a mishna (Ta鈥檃nit 26a): On Sunday, the non-priestly watches would read two paragraphs from the Torah: 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 (Genesis 1:1鈥5) and 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 (Genesis 1:6鈥8). And it is taught in that regard that the paragraph 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 was read by two readers and the paragraph 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 by one reader.

讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 讘砖诇诪讗 讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讘讗讞讚 讚转诇转讗 驻住讜拽讬 讛讜讜 讗诇讗 讘专讗砖讬转 讘砖谞讬诐 讞诪砖讛 驻住讜拽讬 讛讜讜 讜转谞讬讗 讛拽讜专讗 讘转讜专讛 诇讗 讬驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

And we discussed this ruling and raised difficulties with it: Granted, the paragraph 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 was read by one reader, as it consists of three verses. But how was the paragraph 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 read by two? It consists of only five verses, and it was taught in a mishna (23b): One who reads from the Torah should not read fewer than three verses.

讜讗讬转诪专 注诇讛 专讘 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻讜住拽

And it was stated with regard to that mishna that the amora鈥檌m disagreed about how to divide the verses. Rav said: The second reader repeats the last verse that the first reader had recited, so that each of them reads three verses. And Shmuel said: The first reader divides the third verse and reads half of it, and the second reader begins with the second half of that verse, as though each half were its own verse.

专讘 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专 驻讜住拽 拽住讘专 讻诇 驻住讜拽讗 讚诇讗 驻住拽讬讛 诪砖讛 讗谞谉 诇讗 驻住拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛

The Gemara explains the opinions of Rav and Shmuel. Rav said that the second reader repeats the last verse that the first reader recited. What is the reason that he did not state that the first reader divides the third verse, in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel? The Gemara answers: He holds that any verse that Moses did not divide, we may not divide.

讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻住拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞谞讬讗 拽专讗 爪注专 讙讚讜诇 讛讬讛 诇讬 讗爪诇 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讛讙讚讜诇 讜诇讗 讛转讬专 诇讬 诇驻住讜拽 讗诇讗 诇转讬谞讜拽讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘谉 讛讜讗讬诇 讜诇讛转诇诪讚 注砖讜讬讬谉

The Gemara asks: Does Shmuel say that we may divide a verse into two parts? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi 岣nanya Kara, the Bible expert, say: I had great distress with Rabbi 岣nina the Great; there were many times I had to ask his permission to divide a verse, and he permitted me to divide it only for the benefit of schoolchildren, since they need to be taught in this manner, as it is difficult for children to learn long verses all at once? In other cases, however it is prohibited to divide a verse.

讛转诐 讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讗驻砖专 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讗 讗驻砖专

The Gemara answers: There, in the case of schoolchildren, what is the reason that it is permitted to divide a verse? Because it is not possible to teach the children without doing so. Here, too, when a paragraph of five verses must be divided between two readers, it is not possible to divide them without dividing the middle verse.

讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻讜住拽 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 讙讝讬专讛 诪砖讜诐 讛谞讻谞住讬谉 讜诪砖讜诐 讛讬讜爪讗讬谉

The Gemara now examines the opinion of Shmuel. And Shmuel said: The first reader divides the third verse and reads half of it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that he did not state that the second reader repeats the last verse recited by the first reader, in accordance with the opinion of Rav? The Gemara answers: It is because of a rabbinic decree that was instituted due to those who enter and those who leave the synagogue between the readings. These individuals might erroneously conclude that since the reading they heard consisted of three verses, the reading they missed consisted of only two verses. Therefore, the middle verse is divided into two parts, so that all will realize that no reader recites only two verses.

诪讬转讬讘讬 驻专砖讛 砖诇 砖砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讘砖谞讬诐 讜砖诇 讞诪砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 讘讬讞讬讚 拽专讗 专讗砖讜谉 砖诇砖讛 讛砖谞讬 拽讜专讗 砖谞讬诐 诪驻专砖讛 讝讜 讜讗讞讚 诪驻专砖讛 讗讞专转 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖诇砖讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinions of Rav and Shmuel from the following baraita: Two people may read a paragraph of six verses, but a paragraph of five verses may be read only by a single reader. If the first one read three verses, the second one reads the remaining two verses from this paragraph and then one verse from another, i.e., the following, paragraph. And some say that it does not suffice to read one verse from the next paragraph; rather, he must read three verses, as one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it.

讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 谞讚诇讜讙 讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻讜住拽 谞驻住讜拽

And if it is so, if it is permissible to do as Rav and Shmuel suggested, according to the one who said that the second reader repeats a verse that the previous reader recited, i.e., Rav, let him repeat the verse in this case as well. And according to the one who said that the second reader divides the verse, i.e., Shmuel, let him divide the verse in this case as well.

砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 讚讗驻砖专 讘讛讻讬

The Gemara answers: There, in the case of the baraita, it is different, as it is possible to solve the problem in this manner by reading additional verses. On the New Moon, however, the next paragraph deals with an entirely different subject, and consequently it cannot be included in the Torah reading. Therefore, Rav and Shmuel presented alternate solutions.

讗诪专 专讘讬 转谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讛诇讻讛 讻讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 转谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 讻讱 讗讬谉 诪砖讬讬专讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

With regard to the dispute cited in the baraita, Rabbi Tan岣m said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion introduced by the phrase: Some say, which maintains that at least three verses must be read from the next paragraph. And furthermore, Rabbi Tan岣m said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Just as one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it, so too, one may not leave fewer than three verses before the end of a paragraph at the conclusion of a reading.

驻砖讬讟讗 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讗转讞诇转讗 讚拽讗 诪拽讬诇 转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讞诪讬专讬 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖讬讜专 讚诪讞诪讬专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚诪讞诪讬专讬 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐

The Gemara challenges this statement: This is obvious. Now, if with regard to the beginning of a paragraph, where the first tanna is lenient and holds that it is sufficient to read one verse from the next paragraph, the opinion introduced with the phrase: Some say, is stringent, then with regard to leaving verses at the end of a paragraph, where even the first tanna is stringent and holds that one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses remaining until the end of a paragraph, is it not all the more so obvious that the opinion introduced with: Some say, is stringent?

诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 谞讻谞住讬谉 砖讻讬讞讬 讬讜爪讗讬谉 诇讗 砖讻讬讞讬 讚诪谞讞讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 讜谞驻拽讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

The Gemara answers: Lest you say: Entering in the middle of the Torah reading is common, and therefore one should not conclude a reading after having read fewer than three verses of a paragraph, but leaving in the middle of the Torah reading, whereby one abandons a Torah scroll and leaves, is not common, and therefore one may conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi teaches us that the second opinion cited in the mishna is also concerned that people may leave in the middle of the Torah reading, and consequently one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph.

讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 砖讬讜专讬 讚诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讗转讞讜诇讬 谞诪讬 讙讝讬专讛 诪砖讜诐 讛谞讻谞住讬谉 讗诪专讬 诪讗谉 讚注讬讬诇 砖讬讜诇讬 砖讬讬诇

The Gemara asks: And according to the first tanna, what is different about leaving fewer than three verses at the end of a paragraph, which is not permitted due to concern about those who leave the synagogue in the middle of the Torah reading? In the case of beginning a paragraph without reading at least three verses, he should also hold that there is a rabbinic decree due to those who enter, lest the latecomer think that the previous reader read fewer than three verses. The Gemara responds: Say in answer to this question that one who enters in the middle of the Torah reading asks how the Torah was read until then, and those present will explain to him that the reader started in the previous paragraph. Therefore, he will not erroneously think that the reader recited fewer than three verses.

砖诇讞 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻转讗 诪讗讬 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 讛诇讻转讗 讚讜诇讙 讜讗诪爪注讬 讚讜诇讙谉

Rabba, son of Rava, sent a messenger to ask Rav Yosef: What is the halakha with regard to dividing a small Torah portion? Rav Yosef sent him the following answer: The halakha is that one repeats a verse, in accordance with the opinion of Rav, and it is the middle reader who repeats it, and not the last reader, so that it will not be necessary to leave fewer than three verses until the end of the paragraph.

讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讜 诪讜住祝 讜讻讜壮 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讘讻诪讛 专讗砖 讞讚砖 讜诪讜注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 讗专讘注讛 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讚诇讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 诇讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 讗讬讻讗 诪讜住祝 转驻诇讛

搂 We learned in the mishna: This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and that is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: On a public fast, how many people read from the Torah? Does the mishna mean to say that only on the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four people read; but here, on a public fast day, when there is no additional offering, no, only three people read? Or perhaps here, too, there is an additional prayer, as on public fast days the prayer: Aneinu, is inserted into the Amida prayer, and so too an additional reader is called to read from the Torah.

转讗 砖诪注 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 讛讗 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 砖诇砖讛 讗讬诪讗 专讬砖讗 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讜讘砖讘转 讘诪谞讞讛 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讛讗 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讗专讘注讛 讗诇讗 诪讛讗 诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara attempts to adduce a proof: Come and hear that which we learned in the mishna: On the days of the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah. Doesn鈥檛 this indicate that on a public fast, only three people read? The Gemara responds: Say the first clause of the mishna: On Mondays and Thursdays during the morning service and on Shabbat during the afternoon service, three people read from the Torah. Doesn鈥檛 this indicate that on a public fast, four people read from the Torah? Rather, it must be concluded that nothing can be derived from this mishna with regard to a public fast day, as the mishna does not mean to indicate the halakha in every possible case.

转讗 砖诪注 讚专讘 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 拽诐 拽专讗 讘住讬驻专讗 驻转讞 讘专讬讱 讞转讬诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 谞驻讜诇 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讗讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讜专讘 诇讗 谞驻诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛

A different proof is now suggested. Come and hear the following incident: Rav once happened to come to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from a Torah scroll. When he began to read, he recited a blessing, but when he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone else fell on their faces, i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the Ta岣nun supplication, as was the custom, but Rav did not fall on his face.

诪讻讚讬 专讘 讘讬砖专讗诇 拽专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讞转诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬拽专讬 讗讞专讬谞讗 讘转专讬讛

The Gemara attempts to clarify the halakha based upon Rav鈥檚 conduct. Now, Rav must have read the portion that is designated for an Israelite, as he was neither a priest nor a Levite, and therefore he was the third person to read from the Torah. What, then, is the reason that when he concluded his reading he did not recite a blessing? Was it not because another person was to read after him, and since only the last reader recites a blessing, Rav did not recite a blessing upon completion of his portion? This would indicate that four readers are called to the Torah on public fasts.

诇讗 专讘 讘讻讛谞讬 拽专讗 讚讛讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专讬 讘讻讛谞讬

The Gemara rejects this proof: No, Rav read the first reading, which is generally designated for priests. He was the leading Torah authority of his generation, and one who holds this position is called to read from the Torah even before a priest, as Rav Huna would read the first reading, which is generally designated for priests, and Rav would do the same.

讘砖诇诪讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专讬 讘讻讛谞讬 讚讛讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘 讗诪讬 讜专讘 讗住讬 讚讻讛谞讬 讞砖讬讘讬 讚讗专注讗 讬砖专讗诇 诪讬讻祝 讻讬讬驻讜 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诇讗 专讘 讛讗 讗讬讻讗 砖诪讜讗诇 讚讻讛谞讗 讛讜讛 讜讚讘专 注诇讬讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: Granted, Rav Huna read the portion designated for priests, as even Rav Ami and Rav Asi, who were the most esteemed priests in Eretz Yisrael, were subordinate to Rav Huna, and he was considered the undisputed rabbinic leader of the Jewish people. However, in the case of Rav, there was Shmuel, who was a priest, and Rav had elevated him above himself, showing Shmuel deference in all matters of honor. Consequently, Rav was not the singular leader of his generation and would not have read the first reading in place of a priest.

砖诪讜讗诇 谞诪讬 诪讬讻祝 讛讜讛 讻讬讬祝 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讜专讘 讛讜讗 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讻讘讜讚 讜讻讬 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讘驻谞讬讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 诇讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: In fact, Shmuel was also subordinate to Rav, as Rav was indeed the leading authority in Babylonia, and it was Rav who showed Shmuel honor of his own volition, in order to appease him for having cursed him. And he did this only when Shmuel was in his presence, but when he was not in his presence, Rav did not do this, and therefore Rav would read first from the Torah when Shmuel was not present.

讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 讚专讘 讘讻讛谞讬 拽专讗 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讘讬砖专讗诇 拽专讗 诇驻谞讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘专讬讱 诇讗讞专 转拽谞讛

The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to assume that Rav read first from the portion that is generally designated for priests, because if it enters your mind to say that he read third, from the portion designated for an ordinary Israelite, what is the reason he recited a blessing before reading his portion? Only the first reader recites a blessing before reading from the Torah. The Gemara rejects this argument: This incident took place after it was instituted that all those called to read from the Torah recite a blessing.

讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讗讞专讬讛 谞诪讬 诇讘专讬讱 砖讗谞讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讬转讬讘 专讘 讚诪讬注诇 注讬讬诇讬

The Gemara asks: If so, he should also have recited a blessing after his reading, as the rabbinic enactment requires those who read from the Torah to recite blessings both before and after their reading. The Gemara answers: The reason that the Sages required all the readers to recite blessings both before and after their readings was to prevent misunderstandings on the part of both those who enter the synagogue in the middle of the reading and those who leave early. But it was different where Rav was present, as people would enter the synagogue in the middle of the reading,

诪讬驻拽 诇讗 谞驻拽讬

but they would not leave early, out of deference to Rav, and therefore it was not necessary for him to recite a blessing after he finished his portion. In any event, the incident with Rav does not provide conclusive proof as to the number of readers on a public fast day.

转讗 砖诪注 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讜 讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛 诇注诐 讻讙讜谉 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛

The Gemara tries to adduce another proof: Come and hear the following baraita: This is the general principle: Any day on which labor is permitted and prolonging the prayer service would constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, a public fast day and the Ninth of Av, only three people read from the Torah, so as not to lengthen the prayer service unnecessarily.

讜砖讗讬谉 讘讜 讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛 诇注诐 讻讙讜谉 专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

But any day on which prolonging the prayer service would not constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, the days of the New Moon, when it is customary for women to refrain from work, and on the intermediate days of a Festival, when one may not perform labor unless refraining from labor will cause him to lose money, four people read from the Torah. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here that on a public fast day three people read from the Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 讗谞谉 诇讗 转谞谉 讛讻讬 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 讬讜诐 砖讬砖 讘讜 诪讜住祝 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 诇讗转讜讬讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 诇讗转讜讬讬 转注谞讬转 爪讬讘讜专 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘

Rav Ashi said: Didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna as follows: This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and it is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah? What is added by the formulation of this principle? Does it not come to add a public fast and the Ninth of Av, when there is an addition to the prayer service, and therefore four people read from the Torah?

讜诇专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 诇讗 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讜诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讚转谞讬讗 讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚 讘砖诇讬砖讬 讜讘专讘讬注讬 拽讜专讗 讗讞讚 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 诇注讜诇诐 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚

The Gemara asks: But according to Rav Ashi, who is the tanna of the mishna? It is not the first tanna of the following baraita and not Rabbi Yosei. As it is taught in a baraita: If the Ninth of Av occurs on a Monday or a Thursday, days on which there is always a Torah reading, three people read from the Torah. And the last one of them concludes with a reading from the Prophets [haftara]. If it falls on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, one person reads from the Torah, and the same one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei said: Three people always read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av, and the last one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. All agree that no more than three people read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av and other public fast days.

讜讗诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 诇讗 诇讗转讜讬讬 专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜诪讜注讚

The Gemara responds: However, if only three people read from the Torah on these days, the statement: This is the principle, is difficult, as the mishna has already specifically mentioned every case included in the principle. The Gemara explains: No, it is not difficult; it comes to add the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival.

讛讗 讘讛讚讬讗 拽转谞讬 诇讛 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛

The Gemara challenges this explanation: Aren鈥檛 these days taught explicitly in the mishna: On the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah?

住讬诪谞讗 讘注诇诪讗 讬讛讬讘 讚诇讗 转讬诪讗 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 谞拽讜讟 讛讗讬 讻诇诇讗 讘讬讚讱 讻诇 讚讟驻讬 诇讬讛 诪讬诇转讗 诪讞讘专讬讛 讟驻讬 诇讬讛 讙讘专讗 讬转讬专讗

The Gemara answers: The principle was not intended to add to what is stated explicitly in the mishna. The mishna merely gives a mnemonic by which to remember the number of readers on each day. It expresses the following: Do not say that a Festival and the intermediate days of the Festival are the same with regard to their sanctity, and therefore the same numbers of readers are called to the Torah on these days. Rather, hold this rule firmly in your hand: On any day when there is an additional element of the laws of the day, an extra person is added to the number of those who read from the Torah.

讛诇讻讱 讘专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜诪讜注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚讗住讜专 讘注砖讬讬转 诪诇讗讻讛 讞诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讚注谞讜砖 讻专转 砖砖讛 砖讘转 讚讗讬讻讗 讗讬住讜专 住拽讬诇讛 砖讘注讛

Therefore, on the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four people read from the Torah. On a Festival, when it is prohibited to perform labor, five people read from the Torah. On Yom Kippur, when performance of prohibited labor is punishable by karet, six people read from the Torah. On Shabbat, when there is a prohibition to perform labor that is punishable by stoning, seven people read.

讙讜驻讗 专讘 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 拽诐 拽专讗 讘住驻专讗 驻转讞 讘专讬讱 讞转诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 谞驻讜诇 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讗讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讜专讘 诇讗 谞驻诇 注诇 讗谞驻讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 专讘 诇讗 谞驻讬诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛

The Gemara cited an incident involving Rav, and now it returns to examine the matter itself. Rav once happened to come to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from a Torah scroll. When he began to read, he recited a blessing, but when he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone else fell on their faces, i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the ta岣nun supplication, as was the custom, but Rav did not fall on his face. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rav did not fall on his face?

专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讛讬转讛 讜转谞讬讗 讜讗讘谉 诪砖讻讬转 诇讗 转转谞讜 讘讗专爪讻诐 诇讛砖转讞讜转 注诇讬讛 注诇讬讛 讗讬 讗转讛 诪砖转讞讜讛 讘讗专爪讻诐 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪砖转讞讜讛 注诇 讗讘谞讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讻讚注讜诇讗 讚讗诪专 注讜诇讗 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara answers: It was a stone floor, and it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: 鈥淣or shall you install any figured stone in your land, to bow down upon it鈥 (Leviticus 26:1), that, upon it, i.e., any type of figured stone, you shall not bow down in your land, i.e., anywhere in your land other than in the Temple; but you shall bow down upon the stones of the Temple. This is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down only upon a stone floor.

讗讬 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 专讘 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讜诇讛讜 谞诪讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜讗讬

The Gemara asks: If so, why was it specifically Rav who did not bow down? All of the other people present were also prohibited from bowing down on the stone floor. The Gemara answers: The stone section of the floor was only in front of Rav, as the rest of the floor was not paved.

讜诇讬讝讬诇 诇讙讘讬 爪讬讘讜专讗 讜诇讬谞驻讜诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛 诇讗 讘注讬 诇诪讬讟专讞 爪讬讘讜专讗 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讘 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 讛讜讛 注讘讬讚 讜讻讚注讜诇讗 讚讗诪专 注讜诇讗 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara comments: If so, Rav should have gone to where the rest of the congregation was standing and fallen on his face there. The Gemara responds: He did not want to trouble the congregation to make room for him. And if you wish, say the following: Rav would stretch out his arms and legs and fully prostrate himself on the ground, whereas the others would merely bend their bodies as a symbolic gesture but would not prostrate themselves on the ground. And this is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down upon a stone floor only when it is done with outstretched arms and legs.

讜诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛 讜诇讗 诇讬注讘讬讚 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 诇讗 诪砖谞讬 诪诪谞讛讙讬讛

The Gemara challenges this response: Rav should have fallen on his face without stretching out his arms and legs. The Gemara answers: He did not want to change his usual custom of full prostration, and where he was standing he could not fully prostrate himself in his usual manner because there the floor was of stone.

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 砖讗谞讬 讻讚专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 驻谞讬讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 讛壮 讗诇 讬讛讜砖注 拽讜诐 诇讱 [讜讙讜壮]

And if you wish, say a different reason as to why Rav did not fall on his face: An important person is different, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is not permitted to fall on his face in public unless he knows that he will be answered like Joshua bin Nun in his time, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Joshua: Get up; why do you lie upon your face?鈥 (Joshua 7:10). It is a disgrace for a distinguished person to fall on his face and have his prayers unanswered. Consequently, Rav did not prostrate himself in public.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 拽讬讚讛 注诇 讗驻讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜转拽讚 讘转 砖讘注 讗驻讬诐 讗专抓 讻专讬注讛 注诇 讘专讻讬诐 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诪讻专讜注 注诇 讘专讻讬讜 讛砖转讞讜讗讛 讝讜 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛讘讜讗 谞讘讜讗 讗谞讬 讜讗诪讱 讜讗讞讬讱 诇讛砖转讞讜转 诇讱 讗专爪讛

Apropos Rav鈥檚 practice of prostrating himself, the Gemara continues with a discussion of different forms of bowing. The Sages taught in a baraita: The term kidda indicates falling upon one鈥檚 face, with one鈥檚 face toward the ground, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen Bathsheba bowed [vatikod] with her face to the ground鈥 (I聽Kings 1:31). Keria means bowing upon one鈥檚 knees, as it is stated with regard to Solomon: He finished praying and 鈥渉e rose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling [mikkeroa] upon his knees鈥 (I聽Kings 8:54). Finally, hishta岣va鈥檃, that is bowing with one鈥檚 arms and legs spread in total submission, as it is stated that Jacob asked, in response to Joseph鈥檚 dream: 鈥淪hall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow down [lehishta岣vot] to you to the ground?鈥 (Genesis 37:10).

诇讜讬 讗讞讜讬 拽讬讚讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讜讗讬讟诇注

The Gemara relates that Levi once demonstrated the form of kidda that was performed by the High Priest before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. This bowing was especially difficult, as it involved bending from the waist until his head reached the ground, supporting his body with his thumbs, and then rising at once. In the course of his demonstration, Levi dislocated his hip and became lame.

讜讛讗 拽讗 讙专诪讗 诇讬讛 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇注讜诇诐 讗诇 讬讟讬讞 讗讚诐 讚讘专讬诐 讻诇驻讬 诪注诇讛 砖讛专讬 讗讚诐 讙讚讜诇 讛讟讬讞 讚讘专讬诐 讻诇驻讬 诪注诇讛 讜讗讬讟诇注 讜诪谞讜 诇讜讬 讛讗 讜讛讗 讙专诪讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: Was it this that caused Levi to become lame? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Elazar say: A person should never speak impertinently toward God on High, as a great man once spoke impertinently toward God on High and he became lame? And who was he? Levi. The reason Levi became lame was because of the way he spoke to God (see Ta鈥檃nit 25a), not due to having performed kidda. The Gemara answers: Both this and that caused Levi to become lame. Since he spoke impertinently toward God, he was worthy of punishment, and he therefore suffered an injury while exerting himself to perform kidda.

讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讞讝讬谞讗 诇讛讜 诇讗讘讬讬

On the topic of bowing, Rav 岣yya bar Avin said: I saw Abaye

This month鈥檚 shiurim are dedicated by Efrat Arnold in loving memory of Joshua Carr, Yehoshua Aryeh Leib ben Yonatan Chaim and Malka Esther HaCohen.

And by Tova and David Kestenbaum in honor of their children and grandchildren.

This month's shiurim are dedicated聽by Jordana and Kalman Schoor on behalf of their daughter Daria who is learning Masechet Megilla for her bat mitzvah. Mazal tov Daria!

  • 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...
alon shvut women

Megillah 22

Megillah, Daf 22, Teacher Tamara Spitz https://youtu.be/2P3GD-nDtvc

Megillah 22

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Megillah 22

讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 诇讬拽专讬 转专讬 诪讛讗 讜转诇转讗 诪讛讱 驻砖讜 诇讛讜 转专讬

one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it. And if you say he should read two verses from this paragraph, i.e., the entire second paragraph, and then three verses from that final paragraph, only two verses will remain from the final paragraph. This is problematic because one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left until the end of a paragraph and because the fourth reader will not have a sufficient number of verses to read.

讗诪专 诇讜 讝讜 诇讗 砖诪注转讬 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讛 砖诪注转讬 讚转谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛专讗砖讜谉 讘专讗砖讬转 讜讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讜转谞讬 注诇讛 讘专讗砖讬转 讘砖谞讬诐 讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讘讗讞讚

Rava said to him: I have not heard a solution for this problem from my teachers. However, with regard to a similar problem I heard a solution from them, as we learned in a mishna (Ta鈥檃nit 26a): On Sunday, the non-priestly watches would read two paragraphs from the Torah: 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 (Genesis 1:1鈥5) and 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 (Genesis 1:6鈥8). And it is taught in that regard that the paragraph 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 was read by two readers and the paragraph 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 by one reader.

讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 讘砖诇诪讗 讬讛讬 专拽讬注 讘讗讞讚 讚转诇转讗 驻住讜拽讬 讛讜讜 讗诇讗 讘专讗砖讬转 讘砖谞讬诐 讞诪砖讛 驻住讜拽讬 讛讜讜 讜转谞讬讗 讛拽讜专讗 讘转讜专讛 诇讗 讬驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

And we discussed this ruling and raised difficulties with it: Granted, the paragraph 鈥淟et there be a firmament鈥 was read by one reader, as it consists of three verses. But how was the paragraph 鈥淚n the beginning鈥 read by two? It consists of only five verses, and it was taught in a mishna (23b): One who reads from the Torah should not read fewer than three verses.

讜讗讬转诪专 注诇讛 专讘 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻讜住拽

And it was stated with regard to that mishna that the amora鈥檌m disagreed about how to divide the verses. Rav said: The second reader repeats the last verse that the first reader had recited, so that each of them reads three verses. And Shmuel said: The first reader divides the third verse and reads half of it, and the second reader begins with the second half of that verse, as though each half were its own verse.

专讘 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专 驻讜住拽 拽住讘专 讻诇 驻住讜拽讗 讚诇讗 驻住拽讬讛 诪砖讛 讗谞谉 诇讗 驻住拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛

The Gemara explains the opinions of Rav and Shmuel. Rav said that the second reader repeats the last verse that the first reader recited. What is the reason that he did not state that the first reader divides the third verse, in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel? The Gemara answers: He holds that any verse that Moses did not divide, we may not divide.

讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻住拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞谞讬讗 拽专讗 爪注专 讙讚讜诇 讛讬讛 诇讬 讗爪诇 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讛讙讚讜诇 讜诇讗 讛转讬专 诇讬 诇驻住讜拽 讗诇讗 诇转讬谞讜拽讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘谉 讛讜讗讬诇 讜诇讛转诇诪讚 注砖讜讬讬谉

The Gemara asks: Does Shmuel say that we may divide a verse into two parts? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi 岣nanya Kara, the Bible expert, say: I had great distress with Rabbi 岣nina the Great; there were many times I had to ask his permission to divide a verse, and he permitted me to divide it only for the benefit of schoolchildren, since they need to be taught in this manner, as it is difficult for children to learn long verses all at once? In other cases, however it is prohibited to divide a verse.

讛转诐 讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讗驻砖专 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讗 讗驻砖专

The Gemara answers: There, in the case of schoolchildren, what is the reason that it is permitted to divide a verse? Because it is not possible to teach the children without doing so. Here, too, when a paragraph of five verses must be divided between two readers, it is not possible to divide them without dividing the middle verse.

讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 驻讜住拽 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 讙讝讬专讛 诪砖讜诐 讛谞讻谞住讬谉 讜诪砖讜诐 讛讬讜爪讗讬谉

The Gemara now examines the opinion of Shmuel. And Shmuel said: The first reader divides the third verse and reads half of it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that he did not state that the second reader repeats the last verse recited by the first reader, in accordance with the opinion of Rav? The Gemara answers: It is because of a rabbinic decree that was instituted due to those who enter and those who leave the synagogue between the readings. These individuals might erroneously conclude that since the reading they heard consisted of three verses, the reading they missed consisted of only two verses. Therefore, the middle verse is divided into two parts, so that all will realize that no reader recites only two verses.

诪讬转讬讘讬 驻专砖讛 砖诇 砖砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讘砖谞讬诐 讜砖诇 讞诪砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 讘讬讞讬讚 拽专讗 专讗砖讜谉 砖诇砖讛 讛砖谞讬 拽讜专讗 砖谞讬诐 诪驻专砖讛 讝讜 讜讗讞讚 诪驻专砖讛 讗讞专转 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖诇砖讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinions of Rav and Shmuel from the following baraita: Two people may read a paragraph of six verses, but a paragraph of five verses may be read only by a single reader. If the first one read three verses, the second one reads the remaining two verses from this paragraph and then one verse from another, i.e., the following, paragraph. And some say that it does not suffice to read one verse from the next paragraph; rather, he must read three verses, as one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it.

讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讚讜诇讙 谞讚诇讜讙 讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 驻讜住拽 谞驻住讜拽

And if it is so, if it is permissible to do as Rav and Shmuel suggested, according to the one who said that the second reader repeats a verse that the previous reader recited, i.e., Rav, let him repeat the verse in this case as well. And according to the one who said that the second reader divides the verse, i.e., Shmuel, let him divide the verse in this case as well.

砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 讚讗驻砖专 讘讛讻讬

The Gemara answers: There, in the case of the baraita, it is different, as it is possible to solve the problem in this manner by reading additional verses. On the New Moon, however, the next paragraph deals with an entirely different subject, and consequently it cannot be included in the Torah reading. Therefore, Rav and Shmuel presented alternate solutions.

讗诪专 专讘讬 转谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讛诇讻讛 讻讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 转谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谉 诪转讞讬诇讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐 讻讱 讗讬谉 诪砖讬讬专讬谉 讘驻专砖讛 驻讞讜转 诪砖诇砖讛 驻住讜拽讬诐

With regard to the dispute cited in the baraita, Rabbi Tan岣m said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion introduced by the phrase: Some say, which maintains that at least three verses must be read from the next paragraph. And furthermore, Rabbi Tan岣m said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Just as one may not begin a new paragraph and read fewer than three verses from it, so too, one may not leave fewer than three verses before the end of a paragraph at the conclusion of a reading.

驻砖讬讟讗 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讗转讞诇转讗 讚拽讗 诪拽讬诇 转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讞诪讬专讬 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖讬讜专 讚诪讞诪讬专 转谞讗 拽诪讗 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚诪讞诪讬专讬 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐

The Gemara challenges this statement: This is obvious. Now, if with regard to the beginning of a paragraph, where the first tanna is lenient and holds that it is sufficient to read one verse from the next paragraph, the opinion introduced with the phrase: Some say, is stringent, then with regard to leaving verses at the end of a paragraph, where even the first tanna is stringent and holds that one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses remaining until the end of a paragraph, is it not all the more so obvious that the opinion introduced with: Some say, is stringent?

诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 谞讻谞住讬谉 砖讻讬讞讬 讬讜爪讗讬谉 诇讗 砖讻讬讞讬 讚诪谞讞讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 讜谞驻拽讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

The Gemara answers: Lest you say: Entering in the middle of the Torah reading is common, and therefore one should not conclude a reading after having read fewer than three verses of a paragraph, but leaving in the middle of the Torah reading, whereby one abandons a Torah scroll and leaves, is not common, and therefore one may conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi teaches us that the second opinion cited in the mishna is also concerned that people may leave in the middle of the Torah reading, and consequently one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph.

讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 砖讬讜专讬 讚诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讗转讞讜诇讬 谞诪讬 讙讝讬专讛 诪砖讜诐 讛谞讻谞住讬谉 讗诪专讬 诪讗谉 讚注讬讬诇 砖讬讜诇讬 砖讬讬诇

The Gemara asks: And according to the first tanna, what is different about leaving fewer than three verses at the end of a paragraph, which is not permitted due to concern about those who leave the synagogue in the middle of the Torah reading? In the case of beginning a paragraph without reading at least three verses, he should also hold that there is a rabbinic decree due to those who enter, lest the latecomer think that the previous reader read fewer than three verses. The Gemara responds: Say in answer to this question that one who enters in the middle of the Torah reading asks how the Torah was read until then, and those present will explain to him that the reader started in the previous paragraph. Therefore, he will not erroneously think that the reader recited fewer than three verses.

砖诇讞 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻转讗 诪讗讬 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 讛诇讻转讗 讚讜诇讙 讜讗诪爪注讬 讚讜诇讙谉

Rabba, son of Rava, sent a messenger to ask Rav Yosef: What is the halakha with regard to dividing a small Torah portion? Rav Yosef sent him the following answer: The halakha is that one repeats a verse, in accordance with the opinion of Rav, and it is the middle reader who repeats it, and not the last reader, so that it will not be necessary to leave fewer than three verses until the end of the paragraph.

讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讜 诪讜住祝 讜讻讜壮 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讘讻诪讛 专讗砖 讞讚砖 讜诪讜注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 讗专讘注讛 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讚诇讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 诇讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 讗讬讻讗 诪讜住祝 转驻诇讛

搂 We learned in the mishna: This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and that is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: On a public fast, how many people read from the Torah? Does the mishna mean to say that only on the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four people read; but here, on a public fast day, when there is no additional offering, no, only three people read? Or perhaps here, too, there is an additional prayer, as on public fast days the prayer: Aneinu, is inserted into the Amida prayer, and so too an additional reader is called to read from the Torah.

转讗 砖诪注 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 讛讗 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 砖诇砖讛 讗讬诪讗 专讬砖讗 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讜讘砖讘转 讘诪谞讞讛 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讛讗 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讗专讘注讛 讗诇讗 诪讛讗 诇讬讻讗 诇诪讬砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara attempts to adduce a proof: Come and hear that which we learned in the mishna: On the days of the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah. Doesn鈥檛 this indicate that on a public fast, only three people read? The Gemara responds: Say the first clause of the mishna: On Mondays and Thursdays during the morning service and on Shabbat during the afternoon service, three people read from the Torah. Doesn鈥檛 this indicate that on a public fast, four people read from the Torah? Rather, it must be concluded that nothing can be derived from this mishna with regard to a public fast day, as the mishna does not mean to indicate the halakha in every possible case.

转讗 砖诪注 讚专讘 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 拽诐 拽专讗 讘住讬驻专讗 驻转讞 讘专讬讱 讞转讬诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 谞驻讜诇 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讗讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讜专讘 诇讗 谞驻诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛

A different proof is now suggested. Come and hear the following incident: Rav once happened to come to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from a Torah scroll. When he began to read, he recited a blessing, but when he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone else fell on their faces, i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the Ta岣nun supplication, as was the custom, but Rav did not fall on his face.

诪讻讚讬 专讘 讘讬砖专讗诇 拽专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讞转诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬拽专讬 讗讞专讬谞讗 讘转专讬讛

The Gemara attempts to clarify the halakha based upon Rav鈥檚 conduct. Now, Rav must have read the portion that is designated for an Israelite, as he was neither a priest nor a Levite, and therefore he was the third person to read from the Torah. What, then, is the reason that when he concluded his reading he did not recite a blessing? Was it not because another person was to read after him, and since only the last reader recites a blessing, Rav did not recite a blessing upon completion of his portion? This would indicate that four readers are called to the Torah on public fasts.

诇讗 专讘 讘讻讛谞讬 拽专讗 讚讛讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专讬 讘讻讛谞讬

The Gemara rejects this proof: No, Rav read the first reading, which is generally designated for priests. He was the leading Torah authority of his generation, and one who holds this position is called to read from the Torah even before a priest, as Rav Huna would read the first reading, which is generally designated for priests, and Rav would do the same.

讘砖诇诪讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽专讬 讘讻讛谞讬 讚讛讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘 讗诪讬 讜专讘 讗住讬 讚讻讛谞讬 讞砖讬讘讬 讚讗专注讗 讬砖专讗诇 诪讬讻祝 讻讬讬驻讜 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诇讗 专讘 讛讗 讗讬讻讗 砖诪讜讗诇 讚讻讛谞讗 讛讜讛 讜讚讘专 注诇讬讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: Granted, Rav Huna read the portion designated for priests, as even Rav Ami and Rav Asi, who were the most esteemed priests in Eretz Yisrael, were subordinate to Rav Huna, and he was considered the undisputed rabbinic leader of the Jewish people. However, in the case of Rav, there was Shmuel, who was a priest, and Rav had elevated him above himself, showing Shmuel deference in all matters of honor. Consequently, Rav was not the singular leader of his generation and would not have read the first reading in place of a priest.

砖诪讜讗诇 谞诪讬 诪讬讻祝 讛讜讛 讻讬讬祝 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讜专讘 讛讜讗 讚注讘讚 诇讬讛 讻讘讜讚 讜讻讬 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 讘驻谞讬讜 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 诇讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: In fact, Shmuel was also subordinate to Rav, as Rav was indeed the leading authority in Babylonia, and it was Rav who showed Shmuel honor of his own volition, in order to appease him for having cursed him. And he did this only when Shmuel was in his presence, but when he was not in his presence, Rav did not do this, and therefore Rav would read first from the Torah when Shmuel was not present.

讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 讚专讘 讘讻讛谞讬 拽专讗 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讘讬砖专讗诇 拽专讗 诇驻谞讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘专讬讱 诇讗讞专 转拽谞讛

The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to assume that Rav read first from the portion that is generally designated for priests, because if it enters your mind to say that he read third, from the portion designated for an ordinary Israelite, what is the reason he recited a blessing before reading his portion? Only the first reader recites a blessing before reading from the Torah. The Gemara rejects this argument: This incident took place after it was instituted that all those called to read from the Torah recite a blessing.

讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讗讞专讬讛 谞诪讬 诇讘专讬讱 砖讗谞讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讬转讬讘 专讘 讚诪讬注诇 注讬讬诇讬

The Gemara asks: If so, he should also have recited a blessing after his reading, as the rabbinic enactment requires those who read from the Torah to recite blessings both before and after their reading. The Gemara answers: The reason that the Sages required all the readers to recite blessings both before and after their readings was to prevent misunderstandings on the part of both those who enter the synagogue in the middle of the reading and those who leave early. But it was different where Rav was present, as people would enter the synagogue in the middle of the reading,

诪讬驻拽 诇讗 谞驻拽讬

but they would not leave early, out of deference to Rav, and therefore it was not necessary for him to recite a blessing after he finished his portion. In any event, the incident with Rav does not provide conclusive proof as to the number of readers on a public fast day.

转讗 砖诪注 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讜 讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛 诇注诐 讻讙讜谉 转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛

The Gemara tries to adduce another proof: Come and hear the following baraita: This is the general principle: Any day on which labor is permitted and prolonging the prayer service would constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, a public fast day and the Ninth of Av, only three people read from the Torah, so as not to lengthen the prayer service unnecessarily.

讜砖讗讬谉 讘讜 讘讬讟讜诇 诪诇讗讻讛 诇注诐 讻讙讜谉 专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

But any day on which prolonging the prayer service would not constitute a deprivation of labor for the masses, for example, the days of the New Moon, when it is customary for women to refrain from work, and on the intermediate days of a Festival, when one may not perform labor unless refraining from labor will cause him to lose money, four people read from the Torah. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here that on a public fast day three people read from the Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讜讛讗 讗谞谉 诇讗 转谞谉 讛讻讬 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 讻诇 讬讜诐 砖讬砖 讘讜 诪讜住祝 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 诇讗转讜讬讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 诇讗转讜讬讬 转注谞讬转 爪讬讘讜专 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘

Rav Ashi said: Didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna as follows: This is the principle: Any day on which there is an additional offering sacrificed in the Temple and it is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah? What is added by the formulation of this principle? Does it not come to add a public fast and the Ninth of Av, when there is an addition to the prayer service, and therefore four people read from the Torah?

讜诇专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 诇讗 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讜诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讚转谞讬讗 讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚 讘砖诇讬砖讬 讜讘专讘讬注讬 拽讜专讗 讗讞讚 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 诇注讜诇诐 拽讜专讬谉 砖诇砖讛 讜诪驻讟讬专 讗讞讚

The Gemara asks: But according to Rav Ashi, who is the tanna of the mishna? It is not the first tanna of the following baraita and not Rabbi Yosei. As it is taught in a baraita: If the Ninth of Av occurs on a Monday or a Thursday, days on which there is always a Torah reading, three people read from the Torah. And the last one of them concludes with a reading from the Prophets [haftara]. If it falls on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, one person reads from the Torah, and the same one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. Rabbi Yosei said: Three people always read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av, and the last one concludes with a reading from the Prophets. All agree that no more than three people read from the Torah on the Ninth of Av and other public fast days.

讜讗诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讝讛 讛讻诇诇 诇讗 诇讗转讜讬讬 专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜诪讜注讚

The Gemara responds: However, if only three people read from the Torah on these days, the statement: This is the principle, is difficult, as the mishna has already specifically mentioned every case included in the principle. The Gemara explains: No, it is not difficult; it comes to add the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival.

讛讗 讘讛讚讬讗 拽转谞讬 诇讛 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讜诪讜注讚 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛

The Gemara challenges this explanation: Aren鈥檛 these days taught explicitly in the mishna: On the New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four people read from the Torah?

住讬诪谞讗 讘注诇诪讗 讬讛讬讘 讚诇讗 转讬诪讗 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讻讬 讛讚讚讬 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 谞拽讜讟 讛讗讬 讻诇诇讗 讘讬讚讱 讻诇 讚讟驻讬 诇讬讛 诪讬诇转讗 诪讞讘专讬讛 讟驻讬 诇讬讛 讙讘专讗 讬转讬专讗

The Gemara answers: The principle was not intended to add to what is stated explicitly in the mishna. The mishna merely gives a mnemonic by which to remember the number of readers on each day. It expresses the following: Do not say that a Festival and the intermediate days of the Festival are the same with regard to their sanctity, and therefore the same numbers of readers are called to the Torah on these days. Rather, hold this rule firmly in your hand: On any day when there is an additional element of the laws of the day, an extra person is added to the number of those who read from the Torah.

讛诇讻讱 讘专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜诪讜注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 拽专讘谉 诪讜住祝 拽讜专讬谉 讗专讘注讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚讗住讜专 讘注砖讬讬转 诪诇讗讻讛 讞诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讚注谞讜砖 讻专转 砖砖讛 砖讘转 讚讗讬讻讗 讗讬住讜专 住拽讬诇讛 砖讘注讛

Therefore, on the New Moon and the intermediate days of a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four people read from the Torah. On a Festival, when it is prohibited to perform labor, five people read from the Torah. On Yom Kippur, when performance of prohibited labor is punishable by karet, six people read from the Torah. On Shabbat, when there is a prohibition to perform labor that is punishable by stoning, seven people read.

讙讜驻讗 专讘 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘转注谞讬转 爪讘讜专 拽诐 拽专讗 讘住驻专讗 驻转讞 讘专讬讱 讞转诐 讜诇讗 讘专讬讱 谞驻讜诇 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讗讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讜专讘 诇讗 谞驻诇 注诇 讗谞驻讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 专讘 诇讗 谞驻讬诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛

The Gemara cited an incident involving Rav, and now it returns to examine the matter itself. Rav once happened to come to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from a Torah scroll. When he began to read, he recited a blessing, but when he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone else fell on their faces, i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the ta岣nun supplication, as was the custom, but Rav did not fall on his face. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rav did not fall on his face?

专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讛讬转讛 讜转谞讬讗 讜讗讘谉 诪砖讻讬转 诇讗 转转谞讜 讘讗专爪讻诐 诇讛砖转讞讜转 注诇讬讛 注诇讬讛 讗讬 讗转讛 诪砖转讞讜讛 讘讗专爪讻诐 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪砖转讞讜讛 注诇 讗讘谞讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讻讚注讜诇讗 讚讗诪专 注讜诇讗 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara answers: It was a stone floor, and it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: 鈥淣or shall you install any figured stone in your land, to bow down upon it鈥 (Leviticus 26:1), that, upon it, i.e., any type of figured stone, you shall not bow down in your land, i.e., anywhere in your land other than in the Temple; but you shall bow down upon the stones of the Temple. This is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down only upon a stone floor.

讗讬 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 专讘 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讜诇讛讜 谞诪讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜讗讬

The Gemara asks: If so, why was it specifically Rav who did not bow down? All of the other people present were also prohibited from bowing down on the stone floor. The Gemara answers: The stone section of the floor was only in front of Rav, as the rest of the floor was not paved.

讜诇讬讝讬诇 诇讙讘讬 爪讬讘讜专讗 讜诇讬谞驻讜诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛 诇讗 讘注讬 诇诪讬讟专讞 爪讬讘讜专讗 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讘 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 讛讜讛 注讘讬讚 讜讻讚注讜诇讗 讚讗诪专 注讜诇讗 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讗诇讗 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara comments: If so, Rav should have gone to where the rest of the congregation was standing and fallen on his face there. The Gemara responds: He did not want to trouble the congregation to make room for him. And if you wish, say the following: Rav would stretch out his arms and legs and fully prostrate himself on the ground, whereas the others would merely bend their bodies as a symbolic gesture but would not prostrate themselves on the ground. And this is in accordance with the opinion of Ulla, as Ulla said: The Torah prohibited bowing down upon a stone floor only when it is done with outstretched arms and legs.

讜诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 讗驻讬讛 讜诇讗 诇讬注讘讬讚 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 诇讗 诪砖谞讬 诪诪谞讛讙讬讛

The Gemara challenges this response: Rav should have fallen on his face without stretching out his arms and legs. The Gemara answers: He did not want to change his usual custom of full prostration, and where he was standing he could not fully prostrate himself in his usual manner because there the floor was of stone.

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 砖讗谞讬 讻讚专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 驻谞讬讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 讛壮 讗诇 讬讛讜砖注 拽讜诐 诇讱 [讜讙讜壮]

And if you wish, say a different reason as to why Rav did not fall on his face: An important person is different, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is not permitted to fall on his face in public unless he knows that he will be answered like Joshua bin Nun in his time, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Joshua: Get up; why do you lie upon your face?鈥 (Joshua 7:10). It is a disgrace for a distinguished person to fall on his face and have his prayers unanswered. Consequently, Rav did not prostrate himself in public.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 拽讬讚讛 注诇 讗驻讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜转拽讚 讘转 砖讘注 讗驻讬诐 讗专抓 讻专讬注讛 注诇 讘专讻讬诐 讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诪讻专讜注 注诇 讘专讻讬讜 讛砖转讞讜讗讛 讝讜 驻讬砖讜讟 讬讚讬诐 讜专讙诇讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讛讘讜讗 谞讘讜讗 讗谞讬 讜讗诪讱 讜讗讞讬讱 诇讛砖转讞讜转 诇讱 讗专爪讛

Apropos Rav鈥檚 practice of prostrating himself, the Gemara continues with a discussion of different forms of bowing. The Sages taught in a baraita: The term kidda indicates falling upon one鈥檚 face, with one鈥檚 face toward the ground, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen Bathsheba bowed [vatikod] with her face to the ground鈥 (I聽Kings 1:31). Keria means bowing upon one鈥檚 knees, as it is stated with regard to Solomon: He finished praying and 鈥渉e rose from before the altar of the Lord, from kneeling [mikkeroa] upon his knees鈥 (I聽Kings 8:54). Finally, hishta岣va鈥檃, that is bowing with one鈥檚 arms and legs spread in total submission, as it is stated that Jacob asked, in response to Joseph鈥檚 dream: 鈥淪hall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow down [lehishta岣vot] to you to the ground?鈥 (Genesis 37:10).

诇讜讬 讗讞讜讬 拽讬讚讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讜讗讬讟诇注

The Gemara relates that Levi once demonstrated the form of kidda that was performed by the High Priest before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. This bowing was especially difficult, as it involved bending from the waist until his head reached the ground, supporting his body with his thumbs, and then rising at once. In the course of his demonstration, Levi dislocated his hip and became lame.

讜讛讗 拽讗 讙专诪讗 诇讬讛 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇注讜诇诐 讗诇 讬讟讬讞 讗讚诐 讚讘专讬诐 讻诇驻讬 诪注诇讛 砖讛专讬 讗讚诐 讙讚讜诇 讛讟讬讞 讚讘专讬诐 讻诇驻讬 诪注诇讛 讜讗讬讟诇注 讜诪谞讜 诇讜讬 讛讗 讜讛讗 讙专诪讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: Was it this that caused Levi to become lame? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Elazar say: A person should never speak impertinently toward God on High, as a great man once spoke impertinently toward God on High and he became lame? And who was he? Levi. The reason Levi became lame was because of the way he spoke to God (see Ta鈥檃nit 25a), not due to having performed kidda. The Gemara answers: Both this and that caused Levi to become lame. Since he spoke impertinently toward God, he was worthy of punishment, and he therefore suffered an injury while exerting himself to perform kidda.

讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讞讝讬谞讗 诇讛讜 诇讗讘讬讬

On the topic of bowing, Rav 岣yya bar Avin said: I saw Abaye

Scroll To Top