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

Today's Daf Yomi

December 15, 2021 | 讬状讗 讘讟讘转 转砖驻状讘

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 shiurim are dedicated by the Hadran Women of Minneapolis in memory of the father of their organizer Shira Krebs, Jerry Katz, Gershon Pinya ben Yitzchak Lev haCohen z鈥漧 who will be greatly missed.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.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 3

Today’s daf is sponsored by Joel Silberstein in loving memory of Mazal Tov bat Shalom.

Several statements made in the name of either Rabbi Yirmia or Rabbi Chia bar Abba are brought. One related to the letters in the Hebrew alphabet that have a different form when they appear at the end of a word. Was that established by the Prophets? Or earlier? Another explained who first translated the Torah and the Prophets into Aramaic. Unkelos the covert translated the Torah and Yonatan ben Uziel did the Prophets. The earth shook when the Prophets were translated. Why? And why not when the Torah was translated?聽 Why weren’t the Writings translated? How could it be Unkelos was the first to translate the Torah when it appears already in a drasha on a verse from Nechemia that it was already translated then? Another statement from Rabbi Yirmia or Rabbi Chia bar Abba relates to a verse in Daniel where he saw something that other people with him did not and yet they were frightened and he was not. What exactly transpired there? What can we learn from it? From the words “mishpacha u’mishpacha” in the Megillah, we derive that families of kohanim, Levites and maamadot leave their jobs to hear Megillah. A hierarchy of mitzvot are discussed – what precedes what in terms of importance? A met mitzva, one who has died and there is no one to bury him/her. overrides everything, even a negative commandment, as human dignity overrides everything. Rabbi Yehushua ben Levi brings several statements defining what is considered a “big city” or “walled city.”

 

讘谞住 讛讬讜 注讜诪讚讬谉

stood by way of a miracle?

讗讬谉 诪讛讜讛 讛讜讜 讜诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 讛讬 讘讗诪爪注 转讬讘讛 讜讛讬 讘住讜祝 转讬讘讛 讜讗转讜 爪讜驻讬诐 讜转拽讬谞讜 驻转讜讞讬谉 讘讗诪爪注 转讬讘讛 讜住转讜诪讬谉 讘住讜祝 转讬讘讛

The Gemara answers: Yes, two forms of these letters did exist at that time, but the people did not know which one of them was to be used in the middle of the word and which at the end of the word, and the Seers came and established that the open forms are to used be in the middle of the word and the closed forms at the end of the word.

住讜祝 住讜祝 讗诇讛 讛诪爪讜转 砖讗讬谉 谞讘讬讗 注转讬讚 诇讞讚砖 讚讘专 诪注转讛 讗诇讗 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专讜 讜讬住讚讜诐

The Gemara asks: Ultimately, however, doesn鈥檛 the phrase 鈥渢hese are the commandments鈥 (Leviticus 27:34) indicate that a prophet is not permitted to initiate any matter of halakha from now on? Rather, it may be suggested that the final letters already existed at the time of the giving of the Torah, but over the course of time the people forgot them, and the prophets then came and reestablished them.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 转讜专讛 讗讜谞拽诇讜住 讛讙专 讗诪专讜 诪驻讬 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讬讜谞转谉 讘谉 注讜讝讬讗诇 讗诪专讜 诪驻讬 讞讙讬 讝讻专讬讛 讜诪诇讗讻讬 讜谞讝讚注讝注讛 讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 驻专住讛 注诇 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 驻专住讛 讬爪转讛 讘转 拽讜诇 讜讗诪专讛 诪讬 讛讜讗 讝讛 砖讙讬诇讛 住转专讬讬 诇讘谞讬 讗讚诐

搂 The Gemara cites another ruling of Rabbi Yirmeya or Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba. Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba who said: The Aramaic translation of the Torah used in the synagogues was composed by Onkelos the convert based on the teachings of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua. The Aramaic translation of the Prophets was composed by Yonatan ben Uzziel based on a tradition going back to the last prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Gemara relates that when Yonatan ben Uzziel wrote his translation, Eretz Yisrael quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs [parsa] by four hundred parasangs, and a Divine Voice emerged and said: Who is this who has revealed My secrets to mankind?

注诪讚 讬讜谞转谉 讘谉 注讜讝讬讗诇 注诇 专讙诇讬讜 讜讗诪专 讗谞讬 讛讜讗 砖讙诇讬转讬 住转专讬讱 诇讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讙诇讜讬 讜讬讚讜注 诇驻谞讬讱 砖诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚讬 注砖讬转讬 讜诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚 讘讬转 讗讘讗 讗诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚讱 注砖讬转讬 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 诪讞诇讜拽转 讘讬砖专讗诇

Yonatan ben Uzziel stood up on his feet and said: I am the one who has revealed Your secrets to mankind through my translation. However, it is revealed and known to You that I did this not for my own honor, and not for the honor of the house of my father, but rather it was for Your honor that I did this, so that discord not increase among the Jewish people. In the absence of an accepted translation, people will disagree about the meaning of obscure verses, but with a translation, the meaning will be clear.

讜注讜讚 讘讬拽砖 诇讙诇讜转 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 讻转讜讘讬诐 讬爪转讛 讘转 拽讜诇 讜讗诪专讛 诇讜 讚讬讬讱 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 拽抓 诪砖讬讞

And Yonatan ben Uzziel also sought to reveal a translation of the Writings, but a Divine Voice emerged and said to him: It is enough for you that you translated the Prophets. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that he was denied permission to translate the Writings? Because it has in it a revelation of the end, when the Messiah will arrive. The end is foretold in a cryptic manner in the book of Daniel, and were the book of Daniel translated, the end would become manifestly revealed to all.

讜转专讙讜诐 砖诇 转讜专讛 讗讜谞拽诇讜住 讛讙专 讗诪专讜 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬拽讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞谞讗诇 讗诪专 专讘 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗讜 讘住驻专 转讜专转 讛讗诇讛讬诐 诪驻讜专砖 讜砖讜诐 砖讻诇 讜讬讘讬谞讜 讘诪拽专讗 讜讬拽专讗讜 讘住驻专 转讜专转 讛讗诇讛讬诐 讝讛 诪拽专讗 诪驻讜专砖 讝讛 转专讙讜诐

The Gemara asks: Was the translation of the Torah really composed by Onkelos the convert? Didn鈥檛 Rav Ika bar Avin say that Rav 岣nanel said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written with respect to the days of Ezra: 鈥淎nd they read in the book, the Torah of God, distinctly; and they gave the sense, and they caused them to understand the reading鈥 (Nehemiah聽8:8)? The verse should be understood as follows: 鈥淎nd they read in the book, the Torah of God,鈥 this is the scriptural text; 鈥渄istinctly,鈥 this is the translation, indicating that they immediately translated the text into Aramaic, as was customary during public Torah readings.

讜砖讜诐 砖讻诇 讗诇讜 讛驻住讜拽讬谉 讜讬讘讬谞讜 讘诪拽专讗 讗诇讜 驻讬住拽讬 讟注诪讬诐 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诇讜 讛诪住讜专转 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专讜 讜讬住讚讜诐

鈥淎nd they gave the sense,鈥 these are the divisions of the text into separate verses. 鈥淎nd they caused them to understand the reading,鈥 these are the cantillation notes, through which the meaning of the text is further clarified. And some say that these are the Masoretic traditions with regard to the manner in which each word is to be written. This indicates that the Aramaic translation already existed at the beginning of the Second Temple period, well before the time of Onkelos. The Gemara answers: The ancient Aramaic translation was forgotten and then Onkelos came and reestablished it.

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 讚诇讗 讗讝讚注讝注讛 讜讗讚谞讘讬讗讬 讗讝讚注讝注讛 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 诪讬驻专砖讗 诪诇转讗 讚谞讘讬讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇讬 讚诪讬驻专砖谉 讜讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇讬 讚诪住转诪谉 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬讜诐 讛讛讜讗 讬讙讚诇 讛诪住驻讚 讘讬专讜砖诇诐 讻诪住驻讚 讛讚讚专讬诪讜谉 讘讘拽注转 诪讙讬讚讜谉

The Gemara asks: What is different about the translation of Prophets? Why is it that when Onkelos revealed the translation of the Torah, Eretz Yisrael did not quake, and when he revealed the translation of the Prophets, it quaked? The Gemara explains: The meaning of matters discussed in the Torah is clear, and therefore its Aramaic translation did not reveal the meaning of passages that had not been understood previously. Conversely, in the Prophets, there are matters that are clear and there are matters that are obscure, and the Aramaic translation revealed the meaning of obscure passages. The Gemara cites an example of an obscure verse that is clarified by the Aramaic translation: As it is written: 鈥淥n that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon鈥 (Zechariah 12:11).

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诇诪诇讗 转专讙讜诪讗 讚讛讗讬 拽专讗 诇讗 讬讚注谞讗 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讘讬讜诪讗 讛讛讜讗 讬住讙讬 诪住驻讚讗 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讻诪住驻讚讗 讚讗讞讗讘 讘专 注诪专讬 讚拽讟诇 讬转讬讛 讛讚讚专讬诪讜谉 讘谉 讟讘专讬诪讜谉 讘专诪讜转 讙诇注讚 讜讻诪住驻讚讗 讚讬讗砖讬讛 讘专 讗诪讜谉 讚拽讟诇 讬转讬讛 驻专注讛 讞讙讬专讗 讘讘拽注转 诪讙讬讚讜

And with regard to that verse, Rav Yosef said: Were it not for the Aramaic translation of this verse, we would not have known what it is saying, as the Bible does not mention any incident involving Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. The Aramaic translation reads as follows: On that day, the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Ahab, son of Omri, who was slain by Hadadrimmon, son of Tavrimon, in Ramoth-Gilead, and like the mourning for Josiah, son of Amon, who was slain by Pharaoh the lame in the valley of Megiddon. The translation clarifies that the verse is referring to two separate incidents of mourning, and thereby clarifies the meaning of this verse.

讜专讗讬转讬 讗谞讬 讚谞讬讗诇 诇讘讚讬 讗转 讛诪专讗讛 讜讛讗谞砖讬诐 讗砖专 讛讬讜 注诪讬 诇讗 专讗讜 讗转 讛诪专讗讛 讗讘诇 讞专讚讛 讙讚讜诇讛 谞驻诇讛 注诇讬讛诐 讜讬讘专讞讜 讘讛讞讘讗 诪讗谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讗谞砖讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讝讛 讞讙讬 讝讻专讬讛 讜诪诇讗讻讬

搂 The Gemara introduces another statement from the same line of tradition. The verse states: 鈥淎nd I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision; but a great trembling fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves鈥 (Daniel 10:7). Who were these men? The term 鈥渕en鈥 in the Bible indicates important people; who were they? Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba who said: These are the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.

讗讬谞讛讜 注讚讬驻讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讜讗讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬谞讛讜 注讚讬驻讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚讗讬谞讛讜 谞讘讬讗讬 讜讗讬讛讜 诇讗讜 谞讘讬讗 讗讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讗讬讛讜 讞讝讗 讜讗讬谞讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讜

The Gemara comments: In certain ways they, the prophets, were greater than him, Daniel, and in certain ways he, Daniel, was greater than them. They were greater than him, as they were prophets and he was not a prophet. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were sent to convey the word of God to the Jewish people, while Daniel was not sent to reveal his visions to others. In another way, however, he was greater than them, as he saw this vision, and they did not see this vision, indicating that his ability to perceive obscure and cryptic visions was greater than theirs.

讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 讚诇讗 讞讝讜 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬讘注讬转讜 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗讬谞讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讜 诪讝诇讬讬讛讜 讞讝讜

The Gemara asks: Since they did not see the vision, what is the reason that they were frightened? The Gemara answers: Even though they did not see the vision, their guardian angels saw it, and therefore they sensed that there was something fearful there and they fled.

讗诪专 专讘讬谞讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪讬讘注讬转 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗讬讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讬 诪讝诇讬讛 讞讝讬 诪讗讬 转拽谞转讬讛 诇讬拽专讬 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讜讗讬 拽讗讬诐 讘诪拽讜诐 讛讟谞讜驻转 诇讬谞砖讜祝 诪讚讜讻转讬讛 讗专讘注 讙专诪讬讚讬 讜讗讬 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 讛讻讬 注讬讝讗 讚讘讬 讟讘讞讬 砖诪讬谞讗 诪讬谞讗讬

Ravina said: Learn from this incident that with regard to one who is frightened for no apparent reason, although he does not see anything menacing, his guardian angel sees it, and therefore he should take steps in order to escape the danger. The Gemara asks: What is his remedy? He should recite Shema, which will afford him protection. And if he is standing in a place of filth, where it is prohibited to recite verses from the Torah, he should distance himself four cubits from his current location in order to escape the danger. And if he is not able to do so, let him say the following incantation: The goat of the slaughterhouse is fatter than I am, and if a calamity must fall upon something, it should fall upon it.

讜讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 诪讚讬谞讛 讜诪讚讬谞讛 讜注讬专 讜注讬专 诇讚专砖讛 诪砖驻讞讛 讜诪砖驻讞讛 诇诪讗讬 讗转讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讛讘讬讗 诪砖驻讞讜转 讻讛讜谞讛 讜诇讜讬讛 砖诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛

搂 After this digression, the Gemara returns to the exposition of a verse cited above. Now that you have said that the phrases 鈥渆very province鈥 and 鈥渆very city鈥 appear for the purposes of midrashic exposition, for what exposition do the words 鈥渆very family鈥 appear in that same verse (Esther 9:28)? Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina said: These words come to include the priestly and Levitical families, and indicate that they cancel their service in the Temple and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.

讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讬诐 讘注讘讜讚转谉 讜诇讜讬诐 讘讚讜讻谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 讘诪注诪讚谉 讻讜诇谉 诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛

As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The priests at their Temple service, the Levites on their platform in the Temple, where they sung the daily psalm, and the Israelites at their watches, i.e., the group of Israelites, corresponding to the priestly watches, who would come to Jerusalem and gather in other locations as representatives of the entire nation to observe or pray for the success of the Temple service, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讘注讘讜讚转谉 讜诇讜讬诐 讘讚讜讻谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 讘诪注诪讚谉 讻讜诇谉 诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪讻讗谉 住诪讻讜 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬 砖诪讘讟诇讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诪注讘讜讚讛 讜诪讛 注讘讜讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讞诪讜专讛 诪讘讟诇讬谞谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

This is also taught in a baraita: The priests at their service, the Levites on the platform, and the Israelites at their watches, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla. The Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi relied upon the halakha stated here and determined that one cancels his Torah study and comes to hear the reading of the Megilla. They derived this principle by means of an a fortiori inference from the Temple service: Just as one who is engaged in performing service in the Temple, which is very important, cancels his service in order to hear the Megilla, is it not all the more so obvious that one who is engaged in Torah study cancels his study to hear the Megilla?

讜注讘讜讚讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讘讛讬讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘讬专讬讞讜 讜讬砖讗 注讬谞讬讜 讜讬专讗 讜讛谞讛 讗讬砖 注讜诪讚 诇谞讙讚讜 [讜讙讜壮] 讜讬砖转讞讜 (诇讗驻讬讜)

The Gemara asks: Is the Temple service more important than Torah study? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass when Joshua was by Jericho that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, a man stood over against him with his sword drawn in his hand. And Joshua went over to him and said to him: Are you for us, or for our adversaries? And he said, No, but I am captain of the host of the Lord, I have come now. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down鈥 (Joshua 5:13鈥14).

讜讛讬讻讬 注讘讬讚 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讗住讜专 诇讗讚诐 砖讬转谉 砖诇讜诐 诇讞讘讬专讜 讘诇讬诇讛 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 砖诪讗 砖讚 讛讜讗 砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗谞讬 砖专 爪讘讗 讛壮

The Gemara first seeks to clarify the incident described in the verse. How did Joshua do this, i.e., how could he bow to a figure he did not recognize? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: It is prohibited for a person to greet his fellow at night if he does not recognize him, as we are concerned that perhaps it is a demon? How did Joshua know that it was not a demon? The Gemara answers: There it was different, as the visitor said to him: But I am captain of the host of the Lord.

讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖拽专讬 讙诪讬专讬 讚诇讗 诪驻拽讬 砖诐 砖诪讬诐 诇讘讟诇讛

The Gemara asks: Perhaps this was a demon and he lied? The Gemara answers: It is learned as a tradition that demons do not utter the name of Heaven for naught, and therefore since the visitor had mentioned the name of God, Joshua was certain that this was indeed an angel.

讗诪专 诇讜 讗诪砖 讘讟诇转诐 转诪讬讚 砖诇 讘讬谉 讛注专讘讬诐 讜注讻砖讬讜 讘讟诇转诐 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讗诪专 诇讜 注诇 讗讬讝讛 诪讛谉 讘讗转 讗诪专 诇讜 注转讛 讘讗转讬 诪讬讚 讜讬诇谉 讬讛讜砖注 讘诇讬诇讛 讛讛讜讗 讘转讜讱 讛注诪拽 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉

As for the angel鈥檚 mission, the Gemara explains that the angel said to Joshua: Yesterday, i.e., during the afternoon, you neglected the afternoon daily offering due to the impending battle, and now, at night, you have neglected Torah study, and I have come to rebuke you. Joshua said to him: For which of these sins have you come? He said to him: I have come now, indicating that neglecting Torah study is more severe than neglecting to sacrifice the daily offering. Joshua immediately determined to rectify the matter, as the verses states: 鈥淎nd Joshua lodged that night鈥 (Joshua 8:9) 鈥渋n the midst of the valley [ha鈥檈mek]鈥 (Joshua 8:13), and Rabbi Yo岣nan said:

诪诇诪讚 砖诇谉 讘注讜诪拽讛 砖诇 讛诇讻讛 讜讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 讗讜谞讬讗 讙讚讜诇 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讬讜转专 诪讛拽专讘转 转诪讬讚讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 注转讛 讘讗转讬

This teaches that he spent the night in the depths [be鈥檜meka] of halakha, i.e., that he spent the night studying Torah with the Jewish people. And Rav Shmuel bar Unya said: Torah study is greater than sacrificing the daily offerings, as it is stated: 鈥淚 have come now鈥 (Joshua 5:14), indicating that the angel came to rebuke Joshua for neglecting Torah study and not for neglecting the daily offering. Consequently, how did the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi determine that the Temple service is more important than Torah study?

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜讛讗 讚讬讞讬讚

The Gemara explains that it is not difficult. This statement, with regard to the story of Joshua, is referring to Torah study by the masses, which is greater than the Temple service. That statement of the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is referring to Torah study by an individual, which is less significant than the Temple service.

讜讚讬讞讬讚 拽诇 讜讛转谞谉 谞砖讬诐 讘诪讜注讚 诪注谞讜转 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讟驻讞讜转 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讛讬讜 住诪讜讻讜转 诇诪讟讛 诪讟驻讞讜转 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讘讞谞讜讻讛 讜讘驻讜专讬诐 诪注谞讜转 讜诪讟驻讞讜转 讘讝讛 讜讘讝讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪拽讜谞谞讜转

The Gemara asks: Is the Torah study of an individual a light matter? Didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna: On the intermediate days of a Festival, women may lament the demise of the deceased in unison, but they may not clap their hands in mourning? Rabbi Yishmael says: Those that are close to the bier may clap. On the New Moon, on Hanukkah, and on Purim, which are not mandated by Torah law, they may both lament and clap their hands in mourning. However, on both groups of days, they may not wail responsively, a form of wailing where one woman wails and the others repeat after her.

讜讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谉 诪讜注讚 讘驻谞讬 转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 讻诇 砖讻谉 讞谞讜讻讛 讜驻讜专讬诐

And Rabba bar Huna said: All these regulations were said with regard to an ordinary person, but there are no restrictions on expressions of mourning on the intermediate days of a Festival in the presence of a deceased Torah scholar. If a Torah scholar dies on the intermediate days of a Festival, the women may lament, clap, and wail responsively as on any other day, and all the more so on Hanukkah and Purim. This indicates that even the Torah study of an individual is of great importance.

讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 拽讗诪专转 讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 讚讬讞讬讚 讞诪讜专 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讚讬讞讬讚 拽诇

The Gemara rejects this argument: You speak of the honor that must be shown to the Torah, and indeed, the honor that must be shown to the Torah in the case of an individual Torah scholar is important; but the Torah study of an individual in itself is light and is less significant than the Temple service.

讗诪专 专讘讗 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬 注讘讜讚讛 讜诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚住诪讻讜 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬

Rava said: It is obvious to me that if one must choose between Temple service and reading the Megilla, reading the Megilla takes precedence, based upon the exposition of Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina with regard to the phrase 鈥渆very family鈥 (Esther 9:28). Similarly, if one must choose between Torah study and reading the Megilla, reading the Megilla takes precedence, based upon the fact that the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi relied on Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina鈥檚 exposition to rule that one interrupts Torah study to hear the reading of the Megilla.

转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚转谞讬讗 诪讘讟诇讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 诇讛讜爪讗转 诪转 讜诇讛讻谞住转 讻诇讛 注讘讜讚讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪讜诇讗讞讜转讜

Furthermore, it is obvious that if one must choose between Torah study and tending to a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva], the task of burying the met mitzva takes precedence. This is derived from that which is taught in a baraita: One cancels his Torah study to bring out a corpse for burial, and to join a wedding procession and bring in the bride. Similarly, if one must choose between the Temple service and tending to a met mitzva, tending to the met mitzva takes precedence, based upon the halakha derived from the term 鈥渙r for his sister鈥 (Numbers 6:7).

讚转谞讬讗 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 诪讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 讛讜诇讱 诇砖讞讜讟 讗转 驻住讞讜 讜诇诪讜诇 讗转 讘谞讜 讜砖诪注 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 讬讻讜诇 讬讟诪讗

As it is taught in a baraita with regard to verses addressing the laws of a nazirite: 鈥淎ll the days that he consecrates himself to the Lord, he shall not come near to a dead body. For his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, he shall not make himself ritually impure for them when they die鈥 (Numbers 6:6鈥7). What is the meaning when the verse states 鈥渙r for his sister鈥? The previous verse, which states that the nazirite may not come near a dead body, already prohibits him from becoming impure through contact with his sister. Therefore, the second verse is understood to be teaching a different halakha: One who was going to slaughter his Paschal lamb or to circumcise his son, and he heard that a relative of his died, one might have thought that he should return and become ritually impure with the impurity imparted by a corpse.

讗诪专转 诇讗 讬讟诪讗 讬讻讜诇 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 诇讗讞讜转讜 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 诇诪转 诪爪讜讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 诇讗讞讜转讜 讛讜讗 讚讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 讗讘诇 诪讬讟诪讗 诇诪转 诪爪讜讛

You said: He shall not become impure; the death of his relative will not override so significant a mitzva from the Torah. One might have thought: Just as he does not become impure for his sister, so he does not become impure for a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva]. The verse states: 鈥淥r for his sister鈥; he may not become impure for his sister, as someone else can attend to her burial, but he does become impure for a met mitzva.

讘注讬 专讘讗 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪砖讜诐 驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 讘转专 讚讘注讬讗 讛讚专 驻砖讟讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 讚讗诪专 诪专 讙讚讜诇 讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 砖讚讜讞讛 讗转 诇讗 转注砖讛 砖讘转讜专讛

On the basis of these premises, Rava raised a dilemma: If one must choose between reading the Megilla and tending to a met mitzva, which of them takes precedence? Does reading the Megilla take precedence due to the value of publicizing the miracle, or perhaps burying the met mitzva takes precedence due to the value of preserving human dignity? After he raised the dilemma, Rava then resolved it on his own and ruled that attending to a met mitzva takes precedence, as the Master said: Great is human dignity, as it overrides a prohibition in the Torah. Consequently, it certainly overrides the duty to read the Megilla, despite the fact that reading the Megilla publicizes the miracle.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 讜讻诇 讛住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讻诇 讛谞专讗讛 注诪讜 谞讚讜谉 讻讻专讱 转谞讗 住诪讜讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 谞专讗讛 谞专讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 住诪讜讱

搂 The Gemara examines the matter itself cited in the course of the previous discussion. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city, and all settlements adjacent to it, and all settlements that can be seen with it, i.e., that can be seen from the walled city, are considered like the walled city, and the Megilla is read on the fifteenth. It was taught in the Tosefta: This is the halakha with regard to a settlement adjacent to a walled city, although it cannot be seen from it, and also a place that can be seen from the walled city, although it is not adjacent to it.

讘砖诇诪讗 谞专讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 住诪讜讱 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讻讙讜谉 讚讬转讘讛 讘专讗砖 讛讛专 讗诇讗 住诪讜讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 谞专讗讛 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 砖讬讜砖讘转 讘谞讞诇

The Gemara examines the Tosefta: Granted that with regard to a place that can be seen from the walled city, although it is not adjacent to it, you find it where the place is located on the top of a mountain, and therefore it can be seen from the walled city, although it is at some distance from it. However, with regard to a settlement that is adjacent to a walled city although it cannot be seen from it, how can you find these circumstances? Rabbi Yirmeya said: You find it, for example, where the place is located in a valley, and therefore it is possible that it cannot be seen from the walled city, although it is very close to it.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讬砖讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛讜拽祝 谞讚讜谉 讻讻驻专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讗讬砖 讻讬 讬诪讻讜专 讘讬转 诪讜砖讘 注讬专 讞讜诪讛 砖讛讜拽祝 讜诇讘住讜祝 讬砖讘 讜诇讗 砖讬砖讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛讜拽祝

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city that was initially settled and only later surrounded by a wall is considered a village rather than a walled city. What is the reason? As it is written: 鈥淎nd if a man sells a residential house in a walled city鈥 (Leviticus 25:29). The wording of the verse indicates that it is referring to a place that was first surrounded by a wall and only later settled, and not to a place that was first settled and only later surrounded by a wall.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 谞讚讜谉 讻讻驻专 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 转谞讬谞讗 讗讬讝讜 讛讬讗 注讬专 讙讚讜诇讛 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讛 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 驻讞讜转 诪讻讗谉 讛专讬 讝讛 讻驻专 讻专讱 讗讬爪讟专讬讱 诇讬讛 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诪讬拽诇注讬 诇讬讛 诪注诇诪讗

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city that does not have ten idlers, i.e., individuals who do not work and are available to attend to communal needs, is treated as a village. The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us? We already learned in a mishna (5a): What is a large city? Any city in which there are ten idlers; however, if there are fewer than that, it is a village. The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, it was necessary for Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to teach this halakha with regard to a large city, to indicate that even if idlers happen to come there from elsewhere, since they are not local residents, it is still considered a village.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讞专讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讬砖讘 谞讚讜谉 讻讻专讱 诪讗讬 讞专讘 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讞专讘讜 讞讜诪讜转讬讜 讬砖讘 讗讬谉 诇讗 讬砖讘 诇讗 讜讛讗 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗砖专 诇讜讗 讞讜诪讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 注讻砖讬讜 讜讛讬讛 诇讜 拽讜讚诐 诇讻谉

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi also said: A walled city that was destroyed and then later settled is considered a city. The Gemara asks: What is meant by the term destroyed? If we say that the city鈥檚 walls were destroyed, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi comes to teach us that if it was settled, yes it is treated as a walled city, but if it was not settled, it is not treated that way, there is a difficulty. Isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer bar Yosei says: The verse states: 鈥淲hich has [lo] a wall (Leviticus 25:30),鈥 and the word lo is written with an alef, which means no, but in context the word lo is used as thought it was written with a vav, meaning that it has a wall. This indicates that even though the city does not have a wall now, as the wall was destroyed, if it had a wall before, it retains its status as a walled city.

讗诇讗 诪讗讬 讞专讘 砖讞专讘 诪注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉

Rather, what is meant by the term destroyed? That it was destroyed in the sense that it no longer has ten idlers, and therefore it is treated like a village. However, once it has ten idlers again, it is treated like a city.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said:

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 shiurim are dedicated by the Hadran Women of Minneapolis in memory of the father of their organizer Shira Krebs, Jerry Katz, Gershon Pinya ben Yitzchak Lev haCohen z鈥漧 who will be greatly missed.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.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.

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

Taanit: 2-6 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

The overarching theme of Masechet Taanit is Rain. Rain, especially in Israel, is integral to the health and growth of...
intro to taanit

Introduction to Ta’anit

诇讝讻讜转 诇专驻讜讗讛 砖诇诪讛 聽诇专讘拽讛 讘转 讞讬讛, 转诪讬诪讛 讘转 砖专讛 讗诪谞讜, 砖讜诇诪讬转 讘转 驻讬讬讙讗 诇讬讘讗 讜砖专讛 讘转 专讞诇 讘转讜讱 砖讗专 讞讜诇讬...
flashback here comes the rain

Here Comes the Rain Again

Rain, rain go away, come again another day. That ditty from childhood is much less resonant in Israel where we...

The Keys of Rain: An Introduction to Ta’anit

An introduction to Masechet Taanit with Dr. Ayelet Hoffmann Libson from Hadran's Siyum Masechet Rosh Hashanah https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDrM6bLZV18&feature=youtu.be

Megillah 3

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Megillah 3

讘谞住 讛讬讜 注讜诪讚讬谉

stood by way of a miracle?

讗讬谉 诪讛讜讛 讛讜讜 讜诇讗 讛讜讜 讬讚注讬 讛讬 讘讗诪爪注 转讬讘讛 讜讛讬 讘住讜祝 转讬讘讛 讜讗转讜 爪讜驻讬诐 讜转拽讬谞讜 驻转讜讞讬谉 讘讗诪爪注 转讬讘讛 讜住转讜诪讬谉 讘住讜祝 转讬讘讛

The Gemara answers: Yes, two forms of these letters did exist at that time, but the people did not know which one of them was to be used in the middle of the word and which at the end of the word, and the Seers came and established that the open forms are to used be in the middle of the word and the closed forms at the end of the word.

住讜祝 住讜祝 讗诇讛 讛诪爪讜转 砖讗讬谉 谞讘讬讗 注转讬讚 诇讞讚砖 讚讘专 诪注转讛 讗诇讗 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专讜 讜讬住讚讜诐

The Gemara asks: Ultimately, however, doesn鈥檛 the phrase 鈥渢hese are the commandments鈥 (Leviticus 27:34) indicate that a prophet is not permitted to initiate any matter of halakha from now on? Rather, it may be suggested that the final letters already existed at the time of the giving of the Torah, but over the course of time the people forgot them, and the prophets then came and reestablished them.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 转讜专讛 讗讜谞拽诇讜住 讛讙专 讗诪专讜 诪驻讬 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讬讜谞转谉 讘谉 注讜讝讬讗诇 讗诪专讜 诪驻讬 讞讙讬 讝讻专讬讛 讜诪诇讗讻讬 讜谞讝讚注讝注讛 讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 驻专住讛 注诇 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 驻专住讛 讬爪转讛 讘转 拽讜诇 讜讗诪专讛 诪讬 讛讜讗 讝讛 砖讙讬诇讛 住转专讬讬 诇讘谞讬 讗讚诐

搂 The Gemara cites another ruling of Rabbi Yirmeya or Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba. Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba who said: The Aramaic translation of the Torah used in the synagogues was composed by Onkelos the convert based on the teachings of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua. The Aramaic translation of the Prophets was composed by Yonatan ben Uzziel based on a tradition going back to the last prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Gemara relates that when Yonatan ben Uzziel wrote his translation, Eretz Yisrael quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs [parsa] by four hundred parasangs, and a Divine Voice emerged and said: Who is this who has revealed My secrets to mankind?

注诪讚 讬讜谞转谉 讘谉 注讜讝讬讗诇 注诇 专讙诇讬讜 讜讗诪专 讗谞讬 讛讜讗 砖讙诇讬转讬 住转专讬讱 诇讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讙诇讜讬 讜讬讚讜注 诇驻谞讬讱 砖诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚讬 注砖讬转讬 讜诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚 讘讬转 讗讘讗 讗诇讗 诇讻讘讜讚讱 注砖讬转讬 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 诪讞诇讜拽转 讘讬砖专讗诇

Yonatan ben Uzziel stood up on his feet and said: I am the one who has revealed Your secrets to mankind through my translation. However, it is revealed and known to You that I did this not for my own honor, and not for the honor of the house of my father, but rather it was for Your honor that I did this, so that discord not increase among the Jewish people. In the absence of an accepted translation, people will disagree about the meaning of obscure verses, but with a translation, the meaning will be clear.

讜注讜讚 讘讬拽砖 诇讙诇讜转 转专讙讜诐 砖诇 讻转讜讘讬诐 讬爪转讛 讘转 拽讜诇 讜讗诪专讛 诇讜 讚讬讬讱 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 拽抓 诪砖讬讞

And Yonatan ben Uzziel also sought to reveal a translation of the Writings, but a Divine Voice emerged and said to him: It is enough for you that you translated the Prophets. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that he was denied permission to translate the Writings? Because it has in it a revelation of the end, when the Messiah will arrive. The end is foretold in a cryptic manner in the book of Daniel, and were the book of Daniel translated, the end would become manifestly revealed to all.

讜转专讙讜诐 砖诇 转讜专讛 讗讜谞拽诇讜住 讛讙专 讗诪专讜 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬拽讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞谞讗诇 讗诪专 专讘 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗讜 讘住驻专 转讜专转 讛讗诇讛讬诐 诪驻讜专砖 讜砖讜诐 砖讻诇 讜讬讘讬谞讜 讘诪拽专讗 讜讬拽专讗讜 讘住驻专 转讜专转 讛讗诇讛讬诐 讝讛 诪拽专讗 诪驻讜专砖 讝讛 转专讙讜诐

The Gemara asks: Was the translation of the Torah really composed by Onkelos the convert? Didn鈥檛 Rav Ika bar Avin say that Rav 岣nanel said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written with respect to the days of Ezra: 鈥淎nd they read in the book, the Torah of God, distinctly; and they gave the sense, and they caused them to understand the reading鈥 (Nehemiah聽8:8)? The verse should be understood as follows: 鈥淎nd they read in the book, the Torah of God,鈥 this is the scriptural text; 鈥渄istinctly,鈥 this is the translation, indicating that they immediately translated the text into Aramaic, as was customary during public Torah readings.

讜砖讜诐 砖讻诇 讗诇讜 讛驻住讜拽讬谉 讜讬讘讬谞讜 讘诪拽专讗 讗诇讜 驻讬住拽讬 讟注诪讬诐 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诇讜 讛诪住讜专转 砖讻讞讜诐 讜讞讝专讜 讜讬住讚讜诐

鈥淎nd they gave the sense,鈥 these are the divisions of the text into separate verses. 鈥淎nd they caused them to understand the reading,鈥 these are the cantillation notes, through which the meaning of the text is further clarified. And some say that these are the Masoretic traditions with regard to the manner in which each word is to be written. This indicates that the Aramaic translation already existed at the beginning of the Second Temple period, well before the time of Onkelos. The Gemara answers: The ancient Aramaic translation was forgotten and then Onkelos came and reestablished it.

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 讚诇讗 讗讝讚注讝注讛 讜讗讚谞讘讬讗讬 讗讝讚注讝注讛 讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 诪讬驻专砖讗 诪诇转讗 讚谞讘讬讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇讬 讚诪讬驻专砖谉 讜讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇讬 讚诪住转诪谉 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬讜诐 讛讛讜讗 讬讙讚诇 讛诪住驻讚 讘讬专讜砖诇诐 讻诪住驻讚 讛讚讚专讬诪讜谉 讘讘拽注转 诪讙讬讚讜谉

The Gemara asks: What is different about the translation of Prophets? Why is it that when Onkelos revealed the translation of the Torah, Eretz Yisrael did not quake, and when he revealed the translation of the Prophets, it quaked? The Gemara explains: The meaning of matters discussed in the Torah is clear, and therefore its Aramaic translation did not reveal the meaning of passages that had not been understood previously. Conversely, in the Prophets, there are matters that are clear and there are matters that are obscure, and the Aramaic translation revealed the meaning of obscure passages. The Gemara cites an example of an obscure verse that is clarified by the Aramaic translation: As it is written: 鈥淥n that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon鈥 (Zechariah 12:11).

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诇诪诇讗 转专讙讜诪讗 讚讛讗讬 拽专讗 诇讗 讬讚注谞讗 诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讘讬讜诪讗 讛讛讜讗 讬住讙讬 诪住驻讚讗 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讻诪住驻讚讗 讚讗讞讗讘 讘专 注诪专讬 讚拽讟诇 讬转讬讛 讛讚讚专讬诪讜谉 讘谉 讟讘专讬诪讜谉 讘专诪讜转 讙诇注讚 讜讻诪住驻讚讗 讚讬讗砖讬讛 讘专 讗诪讜谉 讚拽讟诇 讬转讬讛 驻专注讛 讞讙讬专讗 讘讘拽注转 诪讙讬讚讜

And with regard to that verse, Rav Yosef said: Were it not for the Aramaic translation of this verse, we would not have known what it is saying, as the Bible does not mention any incident involving Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. The Aramaic translation reads as follows: On that day, the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Ahab, son of Omri, who was slain by Hadadrimmon, son of Tavrimon, in Ramoth-Gilead, and like the mourning for Josiah, son of Amon, who was slain by Pharaoh the lame in the valley of Megiddon. The translation clarifies that the verse is referring to two separate incidents of mourning, and thereby clarifies the meaning of this verse.

讜专讗讬转讬 讗谞讬 讚谞讬讗诇 诇讘讚讬 讗转 讛诪专讗讛 讜讛讗谞砖讬诐 讗砖专 讛讬讜 注诪讬 诇讗 专讗讜 讗转 讛诪专讗讛 讗讘诇 讞专讚讛 讙讚讜诇讛 谞驻诇讛 注诇讬讛诐 讜讬讘专讞讜 讘讛讞讘讗 诪讗谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讗谞砖讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讝讛 讞讙讬 讝讻专讬讛 讜诪诇讗讻讬

搂 The Gemara introduces another statement from the same line of tradition. The verse states: 鈥淎nd I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, for the men who were with me did not see the vision; but a great trembling fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves鈥 (Daniel 10:7). Who were these men? The term 鈥渕en鈥 in the Bible indicates important people; who were they? Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say that it was Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba who said: These are the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.

讗讬谞讛讜 注讚讬驻讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讜讗讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬谞讛讜 注讚讬驻讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚讗讬谞讛讜 谞讘讬讗讬 讜讗讬讛讜 诇讗讜 谞讘讬讗 讗讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讗讬讛讜 讞讝讗 讜讗讬谞讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讜

The Gemara comments: In certain ways they, the prophets, were greater than him, Daniel, and in certain ways he, Daniel, was greater than them. They were greater than him, as they were prophets and he was not a prophet. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were sent to convey the word of God to the Jewish people, while Daniel was not sent to reveal his visions to others. In another way, however, he was greater than them, as he saw this vision, and they did not see this vision, indicating that his ability to perceive obscure and cryptic visions was greater than theirs.

讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 讚诇讗 讞讝讜 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬讘注讬转讜 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗讬谞讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讜 诪讝诇讬讬讛讜 讞讝讜

The Gemara asks: Since they did not see the vision, what is the reason that they were frightened? The Gemara answers: Even though they did not see the vision, their guardian angels saw it, and therefore they sensed that there was something fearful there and they fled.

讗诪专 专讘讬谞讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪讬讘注讬转 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗讬讛讜 诇讗 讞讝讬 诪讝诇讬讛 讞讝讬 诪讗讬 转拽谞转讬讛 诇讬拽专讬 拽专讬讗转 砖诪注 讜讗讬 拽讗讬诐 讘诪拽讜诐 讛讟谞讜驻转 诇讬谞砖讜祝 诪讚讜讻转讬讛 讗专讘注 讙专诪讬讚讬 讜讗讬 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 讛讻讬 注讬讝讗 讚讘讬 讟讘讞讬 砖诪讬谞讗 诪讬谞讗讬

Ravina said: Learn from this incident that with regard to one who is frightened for no apparent reason, although he does not see anything menacing, his guardian angel sees it, and therefore he should take steps in order to escape the danger. The Gemara asks: What is his remedy? He should recite Shema, which will afford him protection. And if he is standing in a place of filth, where it is prohibited to recite verses from the Torah, he should distance himself four cubits from his current location in order to escape the danger. And if he is not able to do so, let him say the following incantation: The goat of the slaughterhouse is fatter than I am, and if a calamity must fall upon something, it should fall upon it.

讜讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 诪讚讬谞讛 讜诪讚讬谞讛 讜注讬专 讜注讬专 诇讚专砖讛 诪砖驻讞讛 讜诪砖驻讞讛 诇诪讗讬 讗转讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讛讘讬讗 诪砖驻讞讜转 讻讛讜谞讛 讜诇讜讬讛 砖诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛

搂 After this digression, the Gemara returns to the exposition of a verse cited above. Now that you have said that the phrases 鈥渆very province鈥 and 鈥渆very city鈥 appear for the purposes of midrashic exposition, for what exposition do the words 鈥渆very family鈥 appear in that same verse (Esther 9:28)? Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina said: These words come to include the priestly and Levitical families, and indicate that they cancel their service in the Temple and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.

讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讬诐 讘注讘讜讚转谉 讜诇讜讬诐 讘讚讜讻谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 讘诪注诪讚谉 讻讜诇谉 诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛

As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The priests at their Temple service, the Levites on their platform in the Temple, where they sung the daily psalm, and the Israelites at their watches, i.e., the group of Israelites, corresponding to the priestly watches, who would come to Jerusalem and gather in other locations as representatives of the entire nation to observe or pray for the success of the Temple service, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla.

转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讘注讘讜讚转谉 讜诇讜讬诐 讘讚讜讻谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 讘诪注诪讚谉 讻讜诇谉 诪讘讟诇讬谉 注讘讜讚转谉 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪讻讗谉 住诪讻讜 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬 砖诪讘讟诇讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜讘讗讬谉 诇砖诪讜注 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诪注讘讜讚讛 讜诪讛 注讘讜讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讞诪讜专讛 诪讘讟诇讬谞谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

This is also taught in a baraita: The priests at their service, the Levites on the platform, and the Israelites at their watches, all cancel their service and come to hear the reading of the Megilla. The Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi relied upon the halakha stated here and determined that one cancels his Torah study and comes to hear the reading of the Megilla. They derived this principle by means of an a fortiori inference from the Temple service: Just as one who is engaged in performing service in the Temple, which is very important, cancels his service in order to hear the Megilla, is it not all the more so obvious that one who is engaged in Torah study cancels his study to hear the Megilla?

讜注讘讜讚讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讘讛讬讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘讬专讬讞讜 讜讬砖讗 注讬谞讬讜 讜讬专讗 讜讛谞讛 讗讬砖 注讜诪讚 诇谞讙讚讜 [讜讙讜壮] 讜讬砖转讞讜 (诇讗驻讬讜)

The Gemara asks: Is the Temple service more important than Torah study? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass when Joshua was by Jericho that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, a man stood over against him with his sword drawn in his hand. And Joshua went over to him and said to him: Are you for us, or for our adversaries? And he said, No, but I am captain of the host of the Lord, I have come now. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down鈥 (Joshua 5:13鈥14).

讜讛讬讻讬 注讘讬讚 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讗住讜专 诇讗讚诐 砖讬转谉 砖诇讜诐 诇讞讘讬专讜 讘诇讬诇讛 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 砖诪讗 砖讚 讛讜讗 砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗谞讬 砖专 爪讘讗 讛壮

The Gemara first seeks to clarify the incident described in the verse. How did Joshua do this, i.e., how could he bow to a figure he did not recognize? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: It is prohibited for a person to greet his fellow at night if he does not recognize him, as we are concerned that perhaps it is a demon? How did Joshua know that it was not a demon? The Gemara answers: There it was different, as the visitor said to him: But I am captain of the host of the Lord.

讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖拽专讬 讙诪讬专讬 讚诇讗 诪驻拽讬 砖诐 砖诪讬诐 诇讘讟诇讛

The Gemara asks: Perhaps this was a demon and he lied? The Gemara answers: It is learned as a tradition that demons do not utter the name of Heaven for naught, and therefore since the visitor had mentioned the name of God, Joshua was certain that this was indeed an angel.

讗诪专 诇讜 讗诪砖 讘讟诇转诐 转诪讬讚 砖诇 讘讬谉 讛注专讘讬诐 讜注讻砖讬讜 讘讟诇转诐 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讗诪专 诇讜 注诇 讗讬讝讛 诪讛谉 讘讗转 讗诪专 诇讜 注转讛 讘讗转讬 诪讬讚 讜讬诇谉 讬讛讜砖注 讘诇讬诇讛 讛讛讜讗 讘转讜讱 讛注诪拽 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉

As for the angel鈥檚 mission, the Gemara explains that the angel said to Joshua: Yesterday, i.e., during the afternoon, you neglected the afternoon daily offering due to the impending battle, and now, at night, you have neglected Torah study, and I have come to rebuke you. Joshua said to him: For which of these sins have you come? He said to him: I have come now, indicating that neglecting Torah study is more severe than neglecting to sacrifice the daily offering. Joshua immediately determined to rectify the matter, as the verses states: 鈥淎nd Joshua lodged that night鈥 (Joshua 8:9) 鈥渋n the midst of the valley [ha鈥檈mek]鈥 (Joshua 8:13), and Rabbi Yo岣nan said:

诪诇诪讚 砖诇谉 讘注讜诪拽讛 砖诇 讛诇讻讛 讜讗诪专 专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 讗讜谞讬讗 讙讚讜诇 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讬讜转专 诪讛拽专讘转 转诪讬讚讬谉 砖谞讗诪专 注转讛 讘讗转讬

This teaches that he spent the night in the depths [be鈥檜meka] of halakha, i.e., that he spent the night studying Torah with the Jewish people. And Rav Shmuel bar Unya said: Torah study is greater than sacrificing the daily offerings, as it is stated: 鈥淚 have come now鈥 (Joshua 5:14), indicating that the angel came to rebuke Joshua for neglecting Torah study and not for neglecting the daily offering. Consequently, how did the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi determine that the Temple service is more important than Torah study?

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚专讘讬诐 讜讛讗 讚讬讞讬讚

The Gemara explains that it is not difficult. This statement, with regard to the story of Joshua, is referring to Torah study by the masses, which is greater than the Temple service. That statement of the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is referring to Torah study by an individual, which is less significant than the Temple service.

讜讚讬讞讬讚 拽诇 讜讛转谞谉 谞砖讬诐 讘诪讜注讚 诪注谞讜转 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讟驻讞讜转 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讛讬讜 住诪讜讻讜转 诇诪讟讛 诪讟驻讞讜转 讘专讗砖讬 讞讚砖讬诐 讘讞谞讜讻讛 讜讘驻讜专讬诐 诪注谞讜转 讜诪讟驻讞讜转 讘讝讛 讜讘讝讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪拽讜谞谞讜转

The Gemara asks: Is the Torah study of an individual a light matter? Didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna: On the intermediate days of a Festival, women may lament the demise of the deceased in unison, but they may not clap their hands in mourning? Rabbi Yishmael says: Those that are close to the bier may clap. On the New Moon, on Hanukkah, and on Purim, which are not mandated by Torah law, they may both lament and clap their hands in mourning. However, on both groups of days, they may not wail responsively, a form of wailing where one woman wails and the others repeat after her.

讜讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谉 诪讜注讚 讘驻谞讬 转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 讻诇 砖讻谉 讞谞讜讻讛 讜驻讜专讬诐

And Rabba bar Huna said: All these regulations were said with regard to an ordinary person, but there are no restrictions on expressions of mourning on the intermediate days of a Festival in the presence of a deceased Torah scholar. If a Torah scholar dies on the intermediate days of a Festival, the women may lament, clap, and wail responsively as on any other day, and all the more so on Hanukkah and Purim. This indicates that even the Torah study of an individual is of great importance.

讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 拽讗诪专转 讻讘讜讚 转讜专讛 讚讬讞讬讚 讞诪讜专 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讚讬讞讬讚 拽诇

The Gemara rejects this argument: You speak of the honor that must be shown to the Torah, and indeed, the honor that must be shown to the Torah in the case of an individual Torah scholar is important; but the Torah study of an individual in itself is light and is less significant than the Temple service.

讗诪专 专讘讗 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬 注讘讜讚讛 讜诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚住诪讻讜 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬

Rava said: It is obvious to me that if one must choose between Temple service and reading the Megilla, reading the Megilla takes precedence, based upon the exposition of Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina with regard to the phrase 鈥渆very family鈥 (Esther 9:28). Similarly, if one must choose between Torah study and reading the Megilla, reading the Megilla takes precedence, based upon the fact that the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi relied on Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina鈥檚 exposition to rule that one interrupts Torah study to hear the reading of the Megilla.

转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪讚转谞讬讗 诪讘讟诇讬谉 转诇诪讜讚 转讜专讛 诇讛讜爪讗转 诪转 讜诇讛讻谞住转 讻诇讛 注讘讜讚讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪讜诇讗讞讜转讜

Furthermore, it is obvious that if one must choose between Torah study and tending to a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva], the task of burying the met mitzva takes precedence. This is derived from that which is taught in a baraita: One cancels his Torah study to bring out a corpse for burial, and to join a wedding procession and bring in the bride. Similarly, if one must choose between the Temple service and tending to a met mitzva, tending to the met mitzva takes precedence, based upon the halakha derived from the term 鈥渙r for his sister鈥 (Numbers 6:7).

讚转谞讬讗 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 诪讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 讛讜诇讱 诇砖讞讜讟 讗转 驻住讞讜 讜诇诪讜诇 讗转 讘谞讜 讜砖诪注 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 讬讻讜诇 讬讟诪讗

As it is taught in a baraita with regard to verses addressing the laws of a nazirite: 鈥淎ll the days that he consecrates himself to the Lord, he shall not come near to a dead body. For his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, he shall not make himself ritually impure for them when they die鈥 (Numbers 6:6鈥7). What is the meaning when the verse states 鈥渙r for his sister鈥? The previous verse, which states that the nazirite may not come near a dead body, already prohibits him from becoming impure through contact with his sister. Therefore, the second verse is understood to be teaching a different halakha: One who was going to slaughter his Paschal lamb or to circumcise his son, and he heard that a relative of his died, one might have thought that he should return and become ritually impure with the impurity imparted by a corpse.

讗诪专转 诇讗 讬讟诪讗 讬讻讜诇 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 诇讗讞讜转讜 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 诇诪转 诪爪讜讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 诇讗讞讜转讜 讛讜讗 讚讗讬谞讜 诪讬讟诪讗 讗讘诇 诪讬讟诪讗 诇诪转 诪爪讜讛

You said: He shall not become impure; the death of his relative will not override so significant a mitzva from the Torah. One might have thought: Just as he does not become impure for his sister, so he does not become impure for a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva]. The verse states: 鈥淥r for his sister鈥; he may not become impure for his sister, as someone else can attend to her burial, but he does become impure for a met mitzva.

讘注讬 专讘讗 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 讜诪转 诪爪讜讛 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 注讚讬祝 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 注讚讬祝 诪砖讜诐 驻专住讜诪讬 谞讬住讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 讘转专 讚讘注讬讗 讛讚专 驻砖讟讛 诪转 诪爪讜讛 注讚讬祝 讚讗诪专 诪专 讙讚讜诇 讻讘讜讚 讛讘专讬讜转 砖讚讜讞讛 讗转 诇讗 转注砖讛 砖讘转讜专讛

On the basis of these premises, Rava raised a dilemma: If one must choose between reading the Megilla and tending to a met mitzva, which of them takes precedence? Does reading the Megilla take precedence due to the value of publicizing the miracle, or perhaps burying the met mitzva takes precedence due to the value of preserving human dignity? After he raised the dilemma, Rava then resolved it on his own and ruled that attending to a met mitzva takes precedence, as the Master said: Great is human dignity, as it overrides a prohibition in the Torah. Consequently, it certainly overrides the duty to read the Megilla, despite the fact that reading the Megilla publicizes the miracle.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 讜讻诇 讛住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讻诇 讛谞专讗讛 注诪讜 谞讚讜谉 讻讻专讱 转谞讗 住诪讜讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 谞专讗讛 谞专讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 住诪讜讱

搂 The Gemara examines the matter itself cited in the course of the previous discussion. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city, and all settlements adjacent to it, and all settlements that can be seen with it, i.e., that can be seen from the walled city, are considered like the walled city, and the Megilla is read on the fifteenth. It was taught in the Tosefta: This is the halakha with regard to a settlement adjacent to a walled city, although it cannot be seen from it, and also a place that can be seen from the walled city, although it is not adjacent to it.

讘砖诇诪讗 谞专讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 住诪讜讱 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讻讙讜谉 讚讬转讘讛 讘专讗砖 讛讛专 讗诇讗 住诪讜讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 谞专讗讛 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 砖讬讜砖讘转 讘谞讞诇

The Gemara examines the Tosefta: Granted that with regard to a place that can be seen from the walled city, although it is not adjacent to it, you find it where the place is located on the top of a mountain, and therefore it can be seen from the walled city, although it is at some distance from it. However, with regard to a settlement that is adjacent to a walled city although it cannot be seen from it, how can you find these circumstances? Rabbi Yirmeya said: You find it, for example, where the place is located in a valley, and therefore it is possible that it cannot be seen from the walled city, although it is very close to it.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讬砖讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛讜拽祝 谞讚讜谉 讻讻驻专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讗讬砖 讻讬 讬诪讻讜专 讘讬转 诪讜砖讘 注讬专 讞讜诪讛 砖讛讜拽祝 讜诇讘住讜祝 讬砖讘 讜诇讗 砖讬砖讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛讜拽祝

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city that was initially settled and only later surrounded by a wall is considered a village rather than a walled city. What is the reason? As it is written: 鈥淎nd if a man sells a residential house in a walled city鈥 (Leviticus 25:29). The wording of the verse indicates that it is referring to a place that was first surrounded by a wall and only later settled, and not to a place that was first settled and only later surrounded by a wall.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 谞讚讜谉 讻讻驻专 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 转谞讬谞讗 讗讬讝讜 讛讬讗 注讬专 讙讚讜诇讛 讻诇 砖讬砖 讘讛 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 驻讞讜转 诪讻讗谉 讛专讬 讝讛 讻驻专 讻专讱 讗讬爪讟专讬讱 诇讬讛 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诪讬拽诇注讬 诇讬讛 诪注诇诪讗

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A walled city that does not have ten idlers, i.e., individuals who do not work and are available to attend to communal needs, is treated as a village. The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us? We already learned in a mishna (5a): What is a large city? Any city in which there are ten idlers; however, if there are fewer than that, it is a village. The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, it was necessary for Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to teach this halakha with regard to a large city, to indicate that even if idlers happen to come there from elsewhere, since they are not local residents, it is still considered a village.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讻专讱 砖讞专讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讬砖讘 谞讚讜谉 讻讻专讱 诪讗讬 讞专讘 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讞专讘讜 讞讜诪讜转讬讜 讬砖讘 讗讬谉 诇讗 讬砖讘 诇讗 讜讛讗 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗砖专 诇讜讗 讞讜诪讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 注讻砖讬讜 讜讛讬讛 诇讜 拽讜讚诐 诇讻谉

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi also said: A walled city that was destroyed and then later settled is considered a city. The Gemara asks: What is meant by the term destroyed? If we say that the city鈥檚 walls were destroyed, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi comes to teach us that if it was settled, yes it is treated as a walled city, but if it was not settled, it is not treated that way, there is a difficulty. Isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer bar Yosei says: The verse states: 鈥淲hich has [lo] a wall (Leviticus 25:30),鈥 and the word lo is written with an alef, which means no, but in context the word lo is used as thought it was written with a vav, meaning that it has a wall. This indicates that even though the city does not have a wall now, as the wall was destroyed, if it had a wall before, it retains its status as a walled city.

讗诇讗 诪讗讬 讞专讘 砖讞专讘 诪注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉

Rather, what is meant by the term destroyed? That it was destroyed in the sense that it no longer has ten idlers, and therefore it is treated like a village. However, once it has ten idlers again, it is treated like a city.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said:

Scroll To Top