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

Today's Daf Yomi

July 16, 2014 | 讬状讞 讘转诪讜讝 转砖注状讚

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Megillah 5

Study Guide Megillah 5

PlayPlay

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

砖诪讞讛 讗讬谞讛 谞讜讛讙转 讗诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛

the rejoicing that takes place on Purim is practiced only in its designated time, the fourteenth of Adar.

讗诪专 专讘 诪讙讬诇讛 讘讝诪谞讛 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛 讘注砖专讛 专讘 讗住讬 讗诪专 讘讬谉 讘讝诪谞讛 讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛 讘注砖专讛 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讜讞砖 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讛讗 讚专讘 讗住讬

Rav said: One may read the Megilla in its proper time, i.e., on the fourteenth of Adar, even privately. However, when it is read not at its proper time, e.g., when the villages advance their reading to the day of assembly, it must be read with a quorum of ten, because the enactment allowing the Megilla to be read before its proper time was only made for a community. Rav Asi disagreed and said: Both at its proper time and not at its proper time, the Megilla must be read with a quorum of ten. The Gemara relates that there was an incident where Rav had to read the Megilla on Purim, and he was concerned for this opinion of Rav Asi and gathered ten men even though he was reading the Megilla in its proper time, on the fourteenth of Adar.

讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讜讛讗 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞诐 讻讝诪谞诐 诪讛 讝诪谞诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚 讗祝 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚

The Gemara asks: And did Rav actually say this, that when the Megilla is read not at its proper time, it can only be read with a quorum of ten? Didn鈥檛 Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, say in the name of Rav: If Purim occurs on Shabbat, Shabbat eve is the proper time for reading the Megilla? The Gemara expresses surprise with regard to the wording of Rav鈥檚 statement: Is Shabbat eve the proper time for reading the Megilla? Isn鈥檛 Shabbat itself its proper time? Rather, is it not true that this is what he said, i.e., that this is the way his statement should be understood: Reading the Megilla not at its proper time is like reading it at its proper time; just as at its proper time, it can be read even privately, so too, not at its proper time, it can be read even privately.

诇讗 诇注谞讬谉 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 讘注砖专讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪讚专讘讬 讚讗诪专 讛讜讗讬诇 讜谞讚讞讜 注讬讬专讜转 诪诪拽讜诪谉 讬讚讞讜 诇讬讜诐 讛讻谞讬住讛 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讛讜讗

The Gemara rejects this argument: Rav鈥檚 statement was not made with regard to reading the Megilla with a quorum of ten. Rather, what is the meaning of Rav鈥檚 statement that Shabbat eve is the proper time? It was meant to exclude the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said: Since the readings in the large towns were already deferred from their usual date and the Megilla was not read on the fourteenth, they are deferred to the day of assembly. This statement of Rav teaches us that Shabbat eve is the proper time for these towns to read the Megilla, as stated in the mishna.

诪转谞讬壮 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

MISHNA: What is considered a large city, where the Megilla is read on the fourteenth of Adar? Any city in which there are ten idlers. However, if there are fewer than that, it is considered a village, even if it has many inhabitants.

讘讗诇讜 讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 讗讘诇 讝诪谉 注爪讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜诇讗 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉

It was with regard to these times for reading the Megilla that the Sages said that one advances the reading of the Megilla before the fourteenth of Adar and one does not postpone the reading to after its proper time. However, with regard to the time when families of priests donate wood for the fire on the altar, which were times those families would treat as Festivals; as well as the fast of the Ninth of Av; the Festival peace-offering that was brought on the Festivals; and the commandment of assembly [hakhel] of the entire Jewish people in the Temple courtyard on Sukkot in the year following the Sabbatical year to hear the king read the book of Deuteronomy; one postpones their observance until after Shabbat and does not advance their observance to before Shabbat.

讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讘讛住驻讚 讜讘转注谞讬转 讜诪转谞讜转 诇讗讘讬讜谞讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讜诐 砖谞讻谞住讬谉 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讗讘诇 诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 谞讻谞住讬谉 诇讗 讘砖谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讬砖讬 讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讗诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛

The mishna continues: Even though the Sages said that one advances the time for reading the Megilla and one does not postpone the reading, one is permitted to eulogize and fast on these days, as they are not actually Purim; nevertheless, gifts for the poor are distributed on this day. Rabbi Yehuda said: When is the Megilla read on the day of assembly, before the fourteenth of Adar? In a place where the villagers generally enter town on Monday and Thursday. However, in a place where they do not generally enter town on Monday and Thursday, one may read the Megilla only in its designated time, the fourteenth of Adar.

讙诪壮 转谞讗 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 砖讘讘讬转 讛讻谞住转

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that a large city is one that has ten idlers. It was taught in a baraita: The ten idlers that are mentioned here are ten idlers that are in the synagogue, i.e., men who do not have professional responsibilities other than to sit in the synagogue and attend to communal religious needs. The presence of ten such men establishes a location as a prominent city.

讘讗诇讜 讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜诇讗 讬注讘讜专

We learned in the mishna: It was with regard to these times for reading the Megilla that the Sages said that one advances the reading of the Megilla and one does not postpone it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: The verse states: 鈥淭he Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all who joined themselves to them, and it shall not pass, that they should keep these two days鈥 (Esther 9:27), which indicates that the designated time must not pass without the reading of the Megilla.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪讜谞讬谉 讬诪讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 诇讞讚砖讬 讛砖谞讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讗转讛 诪讜谞讛 诇砖谞讬诐 讜讗讬 讗转讛 诪讜谞讛 讬诪讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐

Having mentioned a teaching of Rabbi Abba in the name of Shmuel, the Gemara cites another of his statements: And Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: From where is it derived that one does not count days to make up years, i.e., a year is considered to be comprised of either twelve or thirteen lunar months, and not 365 days? As it is stated: 鈥淥f the months of the year鈥 (Exodus 12:2), which indicates that you count months to make up years, but you do not count days to make up years.

讜专讘谞谉 讚拽讬住专讬 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专讜 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪讞砖讘讬谉 砖注讜转 诇讞讚砖讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 注讚 讞讚砖 讬诪讬诐 讬诪讬诐 讗转讛 诪讞砖讘 诇讞讚砖讬诐 讜讗讬 讗转讛 诪讞砖讘 砖注讜转 诇讞讚砖讬诐

The Gemara adds: And the Sages of Caesarea said in the name of Rabbi Abba: From where is it derived that one does not calculate hours to reckon the months? A lunar cycle takes approximately twenty-nine and a half days, but a calendar month is considered to be twenty-nine or thirty full days and not precisely a lunar cycle. As it is stated: 鈥淯ntil a month of days鈥 (Numbers 11:20), which indicates that you calculate days to reckon the months, but you do not calculate hours to reckon the months.

讗讘诇 讝诪谉 注爪讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讜讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜诇讗 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讗拽讚讜诪讬 驻讜专注谞讜转 诇讗 诪拽讚诪讬 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讻转讬 诇讗 诪讟讗 讝诪谉 讞讬讜讘讬讬讛讜

搂 We learned in the mishna: However, with regard to the time when families of priests donate wood for the fire on the altar, the fast of the Ninth of Av, the Festival peace-offering, and the commandment of assembly [hakhel ], one postpones their observance until after Shabbat and does not advance their observance to before Shabbat. The Gemara explains the reason for this halakha with respect to each item mentioned in the mishna. The fast of the Ninth of Av is not advanced because one does not advance calamity; since the Ninth of Av is a tragic time, its observance is postponed as long as possible. The Festival peace-offering and the commandment of assembly [hakhel ] are not advanced because the time of their obligation has not yet arrived, and it is impossible to fulfill mitzvot before the designated time has arrived.

转谞讗 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讘砖诇诪讗 讞讙讬讙讛 讚讗讬 诪讬拽诇注 讘砖讘转讗 诪讗讞专讬谞谉 诇讛 诇讘转专 砖讘转讗 讗诇讗 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗

It was taught in a baraita: One postpones the Festival peace-offering and the entire time period of the Festival peace-offering. The Gemara attempts to clarify this statement: Granted that when the baraita says that the Festival peace-offering is postponed, it means that if a Festival occurs on Shabbat, when the Festival peace-offering cannot be sacrificed, one postpones it until after Shabbat and sacrifices the offering on the intermediate days of the Festival. However, what is the meaning of the phrase: The time period of the Festival peace-offering?

讗诪专 专讘 讗讜砖注讬讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讘砖讘转 讜注讜诇转 专讗讬讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉

Rav Oshaya said: This is what the baraita is saying: One postpones the Festival peace-offering if the Festival occurs on Shabbat, and one postpones the burnt-offering of appearance even due to the Festival itself. Despite the fact that a Festival day is the time for sacrificing a Festival peace-offering, the burnt-offering of appearance may not be sacrificed until after the Festival day.

诪谞讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 [讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专讬诐] 诪讘讬讗讬谉 砖诇诪讬诐 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

The Gemara adds: Whose opinion is reflected in the mishna according to Rav Oshaya鈥檚 explanation? It is the opinion of Beit Shammai, as we learned in a mishna (Beitza 19a) that Beit Shammai say: One may bring peace-offerings on a Festival day to be sacrificed in the Temple. Most portions of a peace-offering are eaten by the priests and the individual who brought the offering. Consequently, its slaughter is considered food preparation, which is permitted on a Festival day. And one may not place his hands on the head of the offering, as that includes leaning with all one鈥檚 might upon the animal, which is prohibited on a Festival.

讗讘诇 诇讗 注讜诇讜转 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讘讬讗讬谉 砖诇诪讬诐 讜注讜诇讜转 讜住讜诪讻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

However, burnt-offerings may not be brought at all on the Festival. Since they are not eaten, their slaughter is not considered food preparation, and it therefore constitutes a prohibited labor on the Festival. Beit Hillel disagree and say: One may bring both peace-offerings and burnt-offerings on a Festival day, and one may even place his hands on them.

专讘讗 讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讟驻讬 诇讗 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖诇讗 讞讙 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖诇 讞讙 讞讜讙讙 讜讛讜诇讱 讗转 讻诇 讛专讙诇 讻讜诇讜 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛讗讞专讜谉 砖诇 讞讙 注讘专 讛专讙诇 讜诇讗 讞讙 讗讬谞讜 讞讬讬讘 讘讗讞专讬讜转讜

Rava said that the baraita should be understood as follows: One postpones the Festival peace-offering for the entire time period of the Festival peace-offering, i.e., for the entire duration of the Festival. However, it may not be postponed for longer than this. As we learned in a mishna (岣giga 9a): One who did not offer the Festival peace-offering on the first Festival day of the festival of Sukkot may offer the Festival peace-offering for the duration of the entire pilgrimage Festival, including the intermediate days and the last day of the Festival. If the pilgrimage Festival has passed and he did not yet bring the Festival peace-offering, he is not obligated to pay restitution for it. The obligation is no longer in force, and he therefore is not liable to bring another offering as compensation.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 注爪专转 讚讞讚 讬讜诪讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 讚转谞谉 诪讜讚讬诐 砖讗诐 讞诇 注爪专转 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 砖讬讜诐 讟讘讜讞 讗讞专 讛砖讘转

Rav Ashi said that the baraita should be understood as follows: The Festival peace-offering may be postponed for the entire time period of a Festival peace-offering. This indicates that even if Shavuot, which is one day, occurs on Shabbat, one postpones the Festival peace-offering and offers it on one of the six days after Shavuot. As we learned in a mishna (岣giga 17a): Beit Hillel concede that if Shavuot occurs on Shabbat, the day of slaughter is after Shabbat. Since the Festival peace-offering and the burnt-offering of appearance cannot be sacrificed on Shabbat, they are slaughtered after Shabbat. This indicates that the Festival peace-offering may be slaughtered after the Festival day of Shavuot, as is the case on the other Festivals.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 专讘讬 谞讟注 谞讟讬注讛 讘驻讜专讬诐

Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi 岣nina said: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did several unusual things: He planted a sapling on Purim, and was not concerned about performing labor and thereby possibly denigrating the day.

讜专讞抓 讘拽专讜谞讛 砖诇 爪驻讜专讬 讘砖讘注讛 注砖专 讘转诪讜讝 讜讘拽砖 诇注拽讜专 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 诇讜

And he bathed at the time when the wagons [kerona] were traveling through Tzippori, i.e., on the market day, when the public would know about it, on the seventeenth of Tammuz, to show that bathing is permitted on that day. And he sought to abolish the fast of the Ninth of Av. And with respect to the Ninth of Av, the Sages did not agree with him.

讗诪专 诇驻谞讬讜 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 专讘讬 诇讗 讻讱 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗诇讗 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 讛讜讛 讜讚讞讬谞讜讛讜 诇讗讞专 讛砖讘转 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讛讜讗讬诇 讜谞讚讞讛 讬讚讞讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 讞讻诪讬诐 拽专讬 注诇讬讛 讟讜讘讬诐 讛砖谞讬诐 诪谉 讛讗讞讚

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda said to Rabbi Elazar: My teacher, the incident did not occur in this fashion. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi never sought to abolish the fast of the Ninth of Av. Rather, it was a year when the Ninth of Av occurred on Shabbat, and they postponed it until after Shabbat. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said about that case: Since it has already been deferred from its usual time, let it be altogether deferred this year. And the Rabbis did not agree with him. Rabbi Elazar read the verse about Rabbi Abba bar Zavda: 鈥淭wo are better than one鈥 (Ecclesiastes 4:9), meaning, it is good that you were here to provide an accurate report about that incident.

讜专讘讬 讛讬讻讬 谞讟注 谞讟讬注讛 讘驻讜专讬诐 讜讛转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖诪讞讛 讜诪砖转讛 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖诪讞讛 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专讬诐 讘讛住驻讚 诪砖转讛 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专 讘转注谞讬转 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专 讘注砖讬讬转 诪诇讗讻讛 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讘专 讗专讘讬住专 讛讜讛 讜讻讬 谞讟注 讘讞诪讬住专 谞讟注

The Gemara asks: And how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi plant a sapling on Purim? Didn鈥檛 Rav Yosef teach with regard to the verse: 鈥淭herefore the Jews of the villages, who dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth day of the month of Adar a day of gladness and feasting, and a good day [yom tov]鈥 (Esther 9:19), that the term 鈥済ladness鈥 teaches that it is prohibited to eulogize on Purim; 鈥渇easting鈥 teaches that it is prohibited to fast; and the term 鈥済ood day鈥 [yom tov] teaches that it is prohibited to perform labor, just as on a Festival, which is also referred to as a yom tov? Rather, what happened was as follows: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was in a place that observed Purim on the fourteenth, and when he planted the sapling, he planted it on the fifteenth.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讛讜讛 讜讟讘专讬讗 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讜讗讬 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讘专 讞诪讬住专 讛讜讛 讜讻讬 谞讟注 讘讗专讘讬住专 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Wasn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in Tiberias, and Tiberias was surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun. Consequently, he was obligated to observe Purim on the fifteenth. Rather, say just the opposite: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi lived in a place that observed Purim on the fifteenth, and when he planted the sapling, he planted it on the fourteenth.

讜诪讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛 讚讟讘专讬讗 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讜讛讗 讞讝拽讬讛 拽专讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 诇讞讝拽讬讛 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: Wasn鈥檛 it obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that the city of Tiberias was surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun? Didn鈥檛 Hezekiah read the Megilla in Tiberias both on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not? The Gemara answers: Hezekiah was indeed uncertain about the matter, whereas it was obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that Tiberias had been surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua.

讜讻讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讘诪讙讬诇转 转注谞讬转 讗转 讬讜诐 讗专讘注讛 注砖专 讜讗转 讬讜诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讬讜诪讬 驻讜专讬讗 讗讬谞讜谉 讚诇讗 诇诪住驻讚 讘讛讜谉

The Gemara asks further: And when it was obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that the Megilla should be read in Tiberias on the fifteenth, was it permitted to plant there on the fourteenth? Isn鈥檛 it written in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit that the fourteenth day and the fifteenth day of Adar are the days of Purim, and one is not permitted to eulogize on them?

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讗 讗诇讗 诇讗住讜专 讗转 砖诇 讝讛 讘讝讛 讜讗转 砖诇 讝讛 讘讝讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘讛住驻讚 讜讘转注谞讬转 讗讘诇 诪诇讗讻讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜转讜 诇讗

And Rava said: This statement is necessary only to prohibit those who observe Purim on this day to eulogize on that day, and those who observe Purim on that day to eulogize on this day. Since the two days are mentioned in the Bible, it was only necessary to mention them in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit in order to indicate that the prohibition against eulogizing applies to both days. Presumably, the same should apply to the prohibition against performing labor. Consequently, how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi plant a sapling on the fourteenth of Adar? The Gemara answers: That applies only to eulogies and fasting. However, labor is prohibited for only one day, either the fourteenth or the fifteenth, and no more.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘 讞讝讬讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 砖讚讬 讻讬转谞讗 讘驻讜专讬讗 讜诇讟讬讬讛 讜诇讗 爪诪讞 讻讬转谞讬讛 讛转诐 讘专 讬讜诪讗 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn鈥檛 Rav see a certain man planting flax on Purim, and cursed him, and the man鈥檚 flax never grew. The Gemara answers: There, the man was obligated to observe Purim on that day that he planted the flax. Therefore, it was certainly prohibited to perform labor.

专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讘讬讜诪讬讛 讛住驻讚 讜转注谞讬转 拽讘讬诇讜 注诇讬讬讛讜 诪诇讗讻讛 诇讗 拽讘讬诇讜 注诇讬讬讛讜

Rabba, son of Rava, said a different answer to the question: Even if you say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi planted the sapling on his own day of Purim, i.e., on the day that the Megilla was read in his location, it was still permitted to plant the sapling. This is because the Jewish people accepted upon themselves the prohibitions against eulogizing and fasting on Purim, but they did not accept upon themselves the prohibition against performing labor.

讚诪注讬拽专讗 讻转讬讘 砖诪讞讛 讜诪砖转讛 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讻转讬讘 诇注砖讜转 讗讜转诐 讬诪讬 诪砖转讛 讜砖诪讞讛 讜讗讬诇讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诇讗 讻转讬讘

This can be proven from the fact that initially, when Mordecai and Esther proposed the celebration of Purim, it is written: 鈥淎 day of gladness and feasting and a good day [yom tov]鈥 (Esther 9:19), and at the end, when it the celebration of Purim was accepted by the Jewish people, it is written: 鈥淭hat they should make them days of feasting and gladness鈥 (Esther 9:22), whereas the term good day [yom tov], which alludes to a day when it is prohibited to perform labor, is not written. The people never accepted upon themselves the prohibition against performing labor on Purim as if it were a Festival, and therefore the prohibition never took effect.

讜讗诇讗 专讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讟讬讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讘专讬诐 讛诪讜转专讬谉 讜讗讞专讬诐 谞讛讙讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专 讛讜讛 讜讘讗转专讬讛 讚专讘讬 诇讗 谞讛讜讙

The Gemara asks: If labor is permitted on Purim, what is the reason that Rav cursed that man who planted the flax? The Gemara answers: It was a case of matters that are permitted by halakha, but others were accustomed to treat them as a prohibition, in which case one may not permit these actions in their presence, lest they come to treat other prohibitions lightly. In the place where that man planted his flax, it was customary to abstain from labor on Purim. However, in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 place, it was not the custom to abstain from labor on Purim, and therefore it was permitted for him to plant the sapling even in public.

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇注讜诇诐 谞讛讜讙 讜专讘讬 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟注 讻讚转谞谉 注讘专讜 讗诇讜 讜诇讗 谞注谞讜 诪诪注讟讬谉 讘诪砖讗 讜诪转谉 讘讘谞讬谉 讜讘谞讟讬注讛 讘讗讬专讜住讬谉 讜讘谞讬砖讜讗讬谉

And if you wish, say an alternative answer: Actually, it was the custom to abstain from labor on Purim in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 place, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi engaged in a joyful act of planting, for pleasure rather than for financial benefit. As we learned in a mishna with regard to public fasts: If these fasts for rain have passed and the community鈥檚 prayers have still not been answered, and the drought continues, one decreases his business activities, as well as construction, planting, betrothals, and marriages.

讜转谞讗 注诇讛 讘谞讬谉 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟讬注讛 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讗讬讝讛讜 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛讘讜谞讛 讘讬转 讞转谞讜转 诇讘谞讜 讗讬讝讜 讛讬讗 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛谞讜讟注 讗讘讜专谞拽讬 砖诇 诪诇讻讬诐

And it was taught in a baraita about this mishna: When the Sages said that construction must be decreased on public fasts, they were not referring to the construction of homes for people who have nowhere to live, but to joyful construction. Similarly, when they said that planting must be decreased, they were not referring to planting food crops, but to joyful planting. What is meant by joyful construction? This is referring to one who builds a wedding chamber for his son. It was customary to build a special house where the wedding would take place, and at times the couple would also live there. What is meant by joyful planting? This is referring to one who plants trees for shade and pleasure such as one might find in a royal garden [avurneki]. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi engaged in joyful planting on Purim, in keeping with the joyous nature of the day.

讙讜驻讗 讞讝拽讬讛 拽专讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 讜诪讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪诇转讗 讚讟讘专讬讗 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜注专讬 诪讘爪专 讛爪讚讬诐 爪专 讜讞诪转 专拽转 讜讻谞专转 讜拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 专拽转 讝讜 讟讘专讬讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讞讚 讙讬住讗 砖讜专讗 讚讬诪讗 讛讜转

搂 The Gemara examines the matter itself cited in the previous discussion. Hezekiah read the Megilla in Tiberias both on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not. The Gemara asks: Was he really uncertain about the matter of Tiberias? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd the fortified cities were Ziddim-zer, and Hammath, Rakkath, and Chinnereth鈥 (Joshua 19:35), and we maintain that Rakkath is Tiberias? The Gemara answers: This is the reason that he was uncertain: Although Tiberias was surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua, Hezekiah was uncertain about the halakha due to the fact that on one side, there was a wall of the sea, i.e., there was no physical wall, but the city was protected due to the fact that it adjoined the sea.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗诪讗讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讜讚讗讬 诇讗讜 讞讜诪讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗砖专 诇讜 讞讜诪讛 讜诇讗 砖讜专 讗讬讙专 住讘讬讘 驻专讟 诇讟讘专讬讗 砖讬诪讛 讞讜诪转讛

The Gemara asks: If so, why was he uncertain? The sea is certainly not a wall. As it is taught in a baraita with regard to the sale of houses in walled cities, the phrase: 鈥淲hich has a wall鈥 (Leviticus 25:30), indicates that the city has a bona fide wall and not merely a wall of roofs. If a city is completely encircled by attached houses but there is no separate wall, it is not considered a walled city. The next verse, which is referring to cities that have no wall 鈥渞ound about them鈥 (Leviticus 25:31), excludes Tiberias from being considered a walled city, as the sea is its wall on one side and it is not fully encircled by a physical wall. Consequently, Tiberias is not considered a walled city.

诇注谞讬谉 讘转讬 注专讬 讞讜诪讛 诇讗 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 拽讗 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诇注谞讬谉 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪讗讬 驻专讝讬诐 讜诪讗讬 诪讜拽驻讬谉 讚讻转讬讘讬 讙讘讬 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讛谞讬 诪讬讙诇讜 讜讛谞讬 诇讗 诪讬讙诇讜 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讙诇讬讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讛谞讬 诪讬讙谞讜 讜讛谞讬 诇讗 诪讬讙谞讜 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讙谞讬讗 诪砖讜诐 讛讻讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: With regard to the sale of houses of walled cities, Hezekiah was not uncertain. Where he was uncertain was with regard to the reading of the Megilla: What are the unwalled towns and what are the walled cities that are written with regard to the reading of the Megilla? Is the difference between them due to the fact that these unwalled towns are exposed, whereas those walled cities are not exposed? If so, since Tiberias is also exposed, as it is not entirely surrounded by a wall, it should be considered unwalled. Or perhaps the difference is due to the fact that these walled cities are protected, whereas those unwalled towns are not protected, and Tiberias is also protected by the sea and should be treated as a walled city. It was due to that reason that Hezekiah was uncertain when to read the Megilla.

专讘 讗住讬 拽专讬 诪讙讬诇讛 讘讛讜爪诇 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讛讗讬 讛讜爪诇 讚讘讬转 讘谞讬诪讬谉 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讛讬讗

The Gemara relates that Rav Asi read the Megilla in the city of Huzal in Babylonia on both the fourteenth and the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not. Huzal was an ancient city, and it was possible that it had been surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua. Some say a different version of this report, according to which there was no uncertainty. Rav Asi said: This city of Huzal of the house of Benjamin was walled since the days of Joshua, son of Nun.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讻讬 讛讜讬谞讗 讟诇讬讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诪诇转讗 讚砖讗讬诇谞讗 诇住讘讬讬讗

Incidental to the previous discussion concerning Tiberias, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: When I was a child I said something that I later asked the Elders about,

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

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: 2-9 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

The holiday of Purim is celebrated on the 14th of Adar. Walled cities from the time of Joshua celebrate it...
talking talmud_square

Megillah 5: Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi: Mishnah Compiler and… Gardener

A new mishnah! What is considered a "large city"? [Including What's What on the "10 batlanim"] And how these days...
Megilla with Dr. Ayelet Hoffmann Libson

Introduction to Megillah

Watch the video introduction or listen to the podcast below. https://youtu.be/fwTrNOQA0To Podcast: https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/hadran/IntroMegilla.mp3
intro to megillah

Introduction to Masechet Megillah

For a Refua Shelaima for Chava Naami bat Daba Chana, Evie Haar, 讘转讜讱 砖讗专 讞讜诇讬 讬砖专讗诇. The primary focus of...

Megillah 5

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Megillah 5

砖诪讞讛 讗讬谞讛 谞讜讛讙转 讗诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛

the rejoicing that takes place on Purim is practiced only in its designated time, the fourteenth of Adar.

讗诪专 专讘 诪讙讬诇讛 讘讝诪谞讛 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛 讘注砖专讛 专讘 讗住讬 讗诪专 讘讬谉 讘讝诪谞讛 讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛 讘注砖专讛 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讜讞砖 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讛讗 讚专讘 讗住讬

Rav said: One may read the Megilla in its proper time, i.e., on the fourteenth of Adar, even privately. However, when it is read not at its proper time, e.g., when the villages advance their reading to the day of assembly, it must be read with a quorum of ten, because the enactment allowing the Megilla to be read before its proper time was only made for a community. Rav Asi disagreed and said: Both at its proper time and not at its proper time, the Megilla must be read with a quorum of ten. The Gemara relates that there was an incident where Rav had to read the Megilla on Purim, and he was concerned for this opinion of Rav Asi and gathered ten men even though he was reading the Megilla in its proper time, on the fourteenth of Adar.

讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讜讛讗 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞诐 讻讝诪谞诐 诪讛 讝诪谞诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚 讗祝 砖诇讗 讘讝诪谞诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讞讬讚

The Gemara asks: And did Rav actually say this, that when the Megilla is read not at its proper time, it can only be read with a quorum of ten? Didn鈥檛 Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, say in the name of Rav: If Purim occurs on Shabbat, Shabbat eve is the proper time for reading the Megilla? The Gemara expresses surprise with regard to the wording of Rav鈥檚 statement: Is Shabbat eve the proper time for reading the Megilla? Isn鈥檛 Shabbat itself its proper time? Rather, is it not true that this is what he said, i.e., that this is the way his statement should be understood: Reading the Megilla not at its proper time is like reading it at its proper time; just as at its proper time, it can be read even privately, so too, not at its proper time, it can be read even privately.

诇讗 诇注谞讬谉 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 讘注砖专讛 讗诇讗 诪讗讬 注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪讚专讘讬 讚讗诪专 讛讜讗讬诇 讜谞讚讞讜 注讬讬专讜转 诪诪拽讜诪谉 讬讚讞讜 诇讬讜诐 讛讻谞讬住讛 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚注专讘 砖讘转 讝诪谞诐 讛讜讗

The Gemara rejects this argument: Rav鈥檚 statement was not made with regard to reading the Megilla with a quorum of ten. Rather, what is the meaning of Rav鈥檚 statement that Shabbat eve is the proper time? It was meant to exclude the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said: Since the readings in the large towns were already deferred from their usual date and the Megilla was not read on the fourteenth, they are deferred to the day of assembly. This statement of Rav teaches us that Shabbat eve is the proper time for these towns to read the Megilla, as stated in the mishna.

诪转谞讬壮 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

MISHNA: What is considered a large city, where the Megilla is read on the fourteenth of Adar? Any city in which there are ten idlers. However, if there are fewer than that, it is considered a village, even if it has many inhabitants.

讘讗诇讜 讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 讗讘诇 讝诪谉 注爪讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜诇讗 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉

It was with regard to these times for reading the Megilla that the Sages said that one advances the reading of the Megilla before the fourteenth of Adar and one does not postpone the reading to after its proper time. However, with regard to the time when families of priests donate wood for the fire on the altar, which were times those families would treat as Festivals; as well as the fast of the Ninth of Av; the Festival peace-offering that was brought on the Festivals; and the commandment of assembly [hakhel] of the entire Jewish people in the Temple courtyard on Sukkot in the year following the Sabbatical year to hear the king read the book of Deuteronomy; one postpones their observance until after Shabbat and does not advance their observance to before Shabbat.

讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讘讛住驻讚 讜讘转注谞讬转 讜诪转谞讜转 诇讗讘讬讜谞讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讜诐 砖谞讻谞住讬谉 讘砖谞讬 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讗讘诇 诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 谞讻谞住讬谉 诇讗 讘砖谞讬 讜诇讗 讘讞诪讬砖讬 讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讗讜转讛 讗诇讗 讘讝诪谞讛

The mishna continues: Even though the Sages said that one advances the time for reading the Megilla and one does not postpone the reading, one is permitted to eulogize and fast on these days, as they are not actually Purim; nevertheless, gifts for the poor are distributed on this day. Rabbi Yehuda said: When is the Megilla read on the day of assembly, before the fourteenth of Adar? In a place where the villagers generally enter town on Monday and Thursday. However, in a place where they do not generally enter town on Monday and Thursday, one may read the Megilla only in its designated time, the fourteenth of Adar.

讙诪壮 转谞讗 注砖专讛 讘讟诇谞讬谉 砖讘讘讬转 讛讻谞住转

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that a large city is one that has ten idlers. It was taught in a baraita: The ten idlers that are mentioned here are ten idlers that are in the synagogue, i.e., men who do not have professional responsibilities other than to sit in the synagogue and attend to communal religious needs. The presence of ten such men establishes a location as a prominent city.

讘讗诇讜 讗诪专讜 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜诇讗 讬注讘讜专

We learned in the mishna: It was with regard to these times for reading the Megilla that the Sages said that one advances the reading of the Megilla and one does not postpone it. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: The verse states: 鈥淭he Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all who joined themselves to them, and it shall not pass, that they should keep these two days鈥 (Esther 9:27), which indicates that the designated time must not pass without the reading of the Megilla.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪讜谞讬谉 讬诪讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 诇讞讚砖讬 讛砖谞讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讗转讛 诪讜谞讛 诇砖谞讬诐 讜讗讬 讗转讛 诪讜谞讛 讬诪讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐

Having mentioned a teaching of Rabbi Abba in the name of Shmuel, the Gemara cites another of his statements: And Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: From where is it derived that one does not count days to make up years, i.e., a year is considered to be comprised of either twelve or thirteen lunar months, and not 365 days? As it is stated: 鈥淥f the months of the year鈥 (Exodus 12:2), which indicates that you count months to make up years, but you do not count days to make up years.

讜专讘谞谉 讚拽讬住专讬 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专讜 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪讞砖讘讬谉 砖注讜转 诇讞讚砖讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 注讚 讞讚砖 讬诪讬诐 讬诪讬诐 讗转讛 诪讞砖讘 诇讞讚砖讬诐 讜讗讬 讗转讛 诪讞砖讘 砖注讜转 诇讞讚砖讬诐

The Gemara adds: And the Sages of Caesarea said in the name of Rabbi Abba: From where is it derived that one does not calculate hours to reckon the months? A lunar cycle takes approximately twenty-nine and a half days, but a calendar month is considered to be twenty-nine or thirty full days and not precisely a lunar cycle. As it is stated: 鈥淯ntil a month of days鈥 (Numbers 11:20), which indicates that you calculate days to reckon the months, but you do not calculate hours to reckon the months.

讗讘诇 讝诪谉 注爪讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讜转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讜讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜诇讗 诪拽讚讬诪讬谉 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讗拽讚讜诪讬 驻讜专注谞讜转 诇讗 诪拽讚诪讬 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讛拽讛诇 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讻转讬 诇讗 诪讟讗 讝诪谉 讞讬讜讘讬讬讛讜

搂 We learned in the mishna: However, with regard to the time when families of priests donate wood for the fire on the altar, the fast of the Ninth of Av, the Festival peace-offering, and the commandment of assembly [hakhel ], one postpones their observance until after Shabbat and does not advance their observance to before Shabbat. The Gemara explains the reason for this halakha with respect to each item mentioned in the mishna. The fast of the Ninth of Av is not advanced because one does not advance calamity; since the Ninth of Av is a tragic time, its observance is postponed as long as possible. The Festival peace-offering and the commandment of assembly [hakhel ] are not advanced because the time of their obligation has not yet arrived, and it is impossible to fulfill mitzvot before the designated time has arrived.

转谞讗 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讘砖诇诪讗 讞讙讬讙讛 讚讗讬 诪讬拽诇注 讘砖讘转讗 诪讗讞专讬谞谉 诇讛 诇讘转专 砖讘转讗 讗诇讗 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗

It was taught in a baraita: One postpones the Festival peace-offering and the entire time period of the Festival peace-offering. The Gemara attempts to clarify this statement: Granted that when the baraita says that the Festival peace-offering is postponed, it means that if a Festival occurs on Shabbat, when the Festival peace-offering cannot be sacrificed, one postpones it until after Shabbat and sacrifices the offering on the intermediate days of the Festival. However, what is the meaning of the phrase: The time period of the Festival peace-offering?

讗诪专 专讘 讗讜砖注讬讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讘砖讘转 讜注讜诇转 专讗讬讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉

Rav Oshaya said: This is what the baraita is saying: One postpones the Festival peace-offering if the Festival occurs on Shabbat, and one postpones the burnt-offering of appearance even due to the Festival itself. Despite the fact that a Festival day is the time for sacrificing a Festival peace-offering, the burnt-offering of appearance may not be sacrificed until after the Festival day.

诪谞讬 讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 [讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专讬诐] 诪讘讬讗讬谉 砖诇诪讬诐 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

The Gemara adds: Whose opinion is reflected in the mishna according to Rav Oshaya鈥檚 explanation? It is the opinion of Beit Shammai, as we learned in a mishna (Beitza 19a) that Beit Shammai say: One may bring peace-offerings on a Festival day to be sacrificed in the Temple. Most portions of a peace-offering are eaten by the priests and the individual who brought the offering. Consequently, its slaughter is considered food preparation, which is permitted on a Festival day. And one may not place his hands on the head of the offering, as that includes leaning with all one鈥檚 might upon the animal, which is prohibited on a Festival.

讗讘诇 诇讗 注讜诇讜转 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讘讬讗讬谉 砖诇诪讬诐 讜注讜诇讜转 讜住讜诪讻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

However, burnt-offerings may not be brought at all on the Festival. Since they are not eaten, their slaughter is not considered food preparation, and it therefore constitutes a prohibited labor on the Festival. Beit Hillel disagree and say: One may bring both peace-offerings and burnt-offerings on a Festival day, and one may even place his hands on them.

专讘讗 讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讟驻讬 诇讗 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖诇讗 讞讙 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛专讗砖讜谉 砖诇 讞讙 讞讜讙讙 讜讛讜诇讱 讗转 讻诇 讛专讙诇 讻讜诇讜 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛讗讞专讜谉 砖诇 讞讙 注讘专 讛专讙诇 讜诇讗 讞讙 讗讬谞讜 讞讬讬讘 讘讗讞专讬讜转讜

Rava said that the baraita should be understood as follows: One postpones the Festival peace-offering for the entire time period of the Festival peace-offering, i.e., for the entire duration of the Festival. However, it may not be postponed for longer than this. As we learned in a mishna (岣giga 9a): One who did not offer the Festival peace-offering on the first Festival day of the festival of Sukkot may offer the Festival peace-offering for the duration of the entire pilgrimage Festival, including the intermediate days and the last day of the Festival. If the pilgrimage Festival has passed and he did not yet bring the Festival peace-offering, he is not obligated to pay restitution for it. The obligation is no longer in force, and he therefore is not liable to bring another offering as compensation.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讞讙讬讙讛 讜讻诇 讝诪谉 讞讙讬讙讛 诪讗讞专讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 注爪专转 讚讞讚 讬讜诪讗 诪讗讞专讬谉 讚转谞谉 诪讜讚讬诐 砖讗诐 讞诇 注爪专转 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 砖讬讜诐 讟讘讜讞 讗讞专 讛砖讘转

Rav Ashi said that the baraita should be understood as follows: The Festival peace-offering may be postponed for the entire time period of a Festival peace-offering. This indicates that even if Shavuot, which is one day, occurs on Shabbat, one postpones the Festival peace-offering and offers it on one of the six days after Shavuot. As we learned in a mishna (岣giga 17a): Beit Hillel concede that if Shavuot occurs on Shabbat, the day of slaughter is after Shabbat. Since the Festival peace-offering and the burnt-offering of appearance cannot be sacrificed on Shabbat, they are slaughtered after Shabbat. This indicates that the Festival peace-offering may be slaughtered after the Festival day of Shavuot, as is the case on the other Festivals.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 专讘讬 谞讟注 谞讟讬注讛 讘驻讜专讬诐

Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi 岣nina said: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did several unusual things: He planted a sapling on Purim, and was not concerned about performing labor and thereby possibly denigrating the day.

讜专讞抓 讘拽专讜谞讛 砖诇 爪驻讜专讬 讘砖讘注讛 注砖专 讘转诪讜讝 讜讘拽砖 诇注拽讜专 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 诇讜

And he bathed at the time when the wagons [kerona] were traveling through Tzippori, i.e., on the market day, when the public would know about it, on the seventeenth of Tammuz, to show that bathing is permitted on that day. And he sought to abolish the fast of the Ninth of Av. And with respect to the Ninth of Av, the Sages did not agree with him.

讗诪专 诇驻谞讬讜 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 专讘讬 诇讗 讻讱 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗诇讗 转砖注讛 讘讗讘 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 讛讜讛 讜讚讞讬谞讜讛讜 诇讗讞专 讛砖讘转 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讛讜讗讬诇 讜谞讚讞讛 讬讚讞讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 讞讻诪讬诐 拽专讬 注诇讬讛 讟讜讘讬诐 讛砖谞讬诐 诪谉 讛讗讞讚

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda said to Rabbi Elazar: My teacher, the incident did not occur in this fashion. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi never sought to abolish the fast of the Ninth of Av. Rather, it was a year when the Ninth of Av occurred on Shabbat, and they postponed it until after Shabbat. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said about that case: Since it has already been deferred from its usual time, let it be altogether deferred this year. And the Rabbis did not agree with him. Rabbi Elazar read the verse about Rabbi Abba bar Zavda: 鈥淭wo are better than one鈥 (Ecclesiastes 4:9), meaning, it is good that you were here to provide an accurate report about that incident.

讜专讘讬 讛讬讻讬 谞讟注 谞讟讬注讛 讘驻讜专讬诐 讜讛转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖诪讞讛 讜诪砖转讛 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖诪讞讛 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专讬诐 讘讛住驻讚 诪砖转讛 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专 讘转注谞讬转 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪诇诪讚 砖讗住讜专 讘注砖讬讬转 诪诇讗讻讛 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讘专 讗专讘讬住专 讛讜讛 讜讻讬 谞讟注 讘讞诪讬住专 谞讟注

The Gemara asks: And how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi plant a sapling on Purim? Didn鈥檛 Rav Yosef teach with regard to the verse: 鈥淭herefore the Jews of the villages, who dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth day of the month of Adar a day of gladness and feasting, and a good day [yom tov]鈥 (Esther 9:19), that the term 鈥済ladness鈥 teaches that it is prohibited to eulogize on Purim; 鈥渇easting鈥 teaches that it is prohibited to fast; and the term 鈥済ood day鈥 [yom tov] teaches that it is prohibited to perform labor, just as on a Festival, which is also referred to as a yom tov? Rather, what happened was as follows: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was in a place that observed Purim on the fourteenth, and when he planted the sapling, he planted it on the fifteenth.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讛讜讛 讜讟讘专讬讗 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讜讗讬 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讘专 讞诪讬住专 讛讜讛 讜讻讬 谞讟注 讘讗专讘讬住专 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Wasn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in Tiberias, and Tiberias was surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun. Consequently, he was obligated to observe Purim on the fifteenth. Rather, say just the opposite: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi lived in a place that observed Purim on the fifteenth, and when he planted the sapling, he planted it on the fourteenth.

讜诪讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛 讚讟讘专讬讗 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讜讛讗 讞讝拽讬讛 拽专讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 诇讞讝拽讬讛 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: Wasn鈥檛 it obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that the city of Tiberias was surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun? Didn鈥檛 Hezekiah read the Megilla in Tiberias both on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not? The Gemara answers: Hezekiah was indeed uncertain about the matter, whereas it was obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that Tiberias had been surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua.

讜讻讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讬讛 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讘诪讙讬诇转 转注谞讬转 讗转 讬讜诐 讗专讘注讛 注砖专 讜讗转 讬讜诐 讞诪砖讛 注砖专 讬讜诪讬 驻讜专讬讗 讗讬谞讜谉 讚诇讗 诇诪住驻讚 讘讛讜谉

The Gemara asks further: And when it was obvious to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that the Megilla should be read in Tiberias on the fifteenth, was it permitted to plant there on the fourteenth? Isn鈥檛 it written in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit that the fourteenth day and the fifteenth day of Adar are the days of Purim, and one is not permitted to eulogize on them?

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讗 讗诇讗 诇讗住讜专 讗转 砖诇 讝讛 讘讝讛 讜讗转 砖诇 讝讛 讘讝讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘讛住驻讚 讜讘转注谞讬转 讗讘诇 诪诇讗讻讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜转讜 诇讗

And Rava said: This statement is necessary only to prohibit those who observe Purim on this day to eulogize on that day, and those who observe Purim on that day to eulogize on this day. Since the two days are mentioned in the Bible, it was only necessary to mention them in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit in order to indicate that the prohibition against eulogizing applies to both days. Presumably, the same should apply to the prohibition against performing labor. Consequently, how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi plant a sapling on the fourteenth of Adar? The Gemara answers: That applies only to eulogies and fasting. However, labor is prohibited for only one day, either the fourteenth or the fifteenth, and no more.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘 讞讝讬讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 砖讚讬 讻讬转谞讗 讘驻讜专讬讗 讜诇讟讬讬讛 讜诇讗 爪诪讞 讻讬转谞讬讛 讛转诐 讘专 讬讜诪讗 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn鈥檛 Rav see a certain man planting flax on Purim, and cursed him, and the man鈥檚 flax never grew. The Gemara answers: There, the man was obligated to observe Purim on that day that he planted the flax. Therefore, it was certainly prohibited to perform labor.

专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讘讬讜诪讬讛 讛住驻讚 讜转注谞讬转 拽讘讬诇讜 注诇讬讬讛讜 诪诇讗讻讛 诇讗 拽讘讬诇讜 注诇讬讬讛讜

Rabba, son of Rava, said a different answer to the question: Even if you say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi planted the sapling on his own day of Purim, i.e., on the day that the Megilla was read in his location, it was still permitted to plant the sapling. This is because the Jewish people accepted upon themselves the prohibitions against eulogizing and fasting on Purim, but they did not accept upon themselves the prohibition against performing labor.

讚诪注讬拽专讗 讻转讬讘 砖诪讞讛 讜诪砖转讛 讜讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜诇讘住讜祝 讻转讬讘 诇注砖讜转 讗讜转诐 讬诪讬 诪砖转讛 讜砖诪讞讛 讜讗讬诇讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诇讗 讻转讬讘

This can be proven from the fact that initially, when Mordecai and Esther proposed the celebration of Purim, it is written: 鈥淎 day of gladness and feasting and a good day [yom tov]鈥 (Esther 9:19), and at the end, when it the celebration of Purim was accepted by the Jewish people, it is written: 鈥淭hat they should make them days of feasting and gladness鈥 (Esther 9:22), whereas the term good day [yom tov], which alludes to a day when it is prohibited to perform labor, is not written. The people never accepted upon themselves the prohibition against performing labor on Purim as if it were a Festival, and therefore the prohibition never took effect.

讜讗诇讗 专讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讟讬讬讛 诇讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讘专讬诐 讛诪讜转专讬谉 讜讗讞专讬诐 谞讛讙讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专 讛讜讛 讜讘讗转专讬讛 讚专讘讬 诇讗 谞讛讜讙

The Gemara asks: If labor is permitted on Purim, what is the reason that Rav cursed that man who planted the flax? The Gemara answers: It was a case of matters that are permitted by halakha, but others were accustomed to treat them as a prohibition, in which case one may not permit these actions in their presence, lest they come to treat other prohibitions lightly. In the place where that man planted his flax, it was customary to abstain from labor on Purim. However, in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 place, it was not the custom to abstain from labor on Purim, and therefore it was permitted for him to plant the sapling even in public.

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇注讜诇诐 谞讛讜讙 讜专讘讬 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟注 讻讚转谞谉 注讘专讜 讗诇讜 讜诇讗 谞注谞讜 诪诪注讟讬谉 讘诪砖讗 讜诪转谉 讘讘谞讬谉 讜讘谞讟讬注讛 讘讗讬专讜住讬谉 讜讘谞讬砖讜讗讬谉

And if you wish, say an alternative answer: Actually, it was the custom to abstain from labor on Purim in Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 place, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi engaged in a joyful act of planting, for pleasure rather than for financial benefit. As we learned in a mishna with regard to public fasts: If these fasts for rain have passed and the community鈥檚 prayers have still not been answered, and the drought continues, one decreases his business activities, as well as construction, planting, betrothals, and marriages.

讜转谞讗 注诇讛 讘谞讬谉 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟讬注讛 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讗讬讝讛讜 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛讘讜谞讛 讘讬转 讞转谞讜转 诇讘谞讜 讗讬讝讜 讛讬讗 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛谞讜讟注 讗讘讜专谞拽讬 砖诇 诪诇讻讬诐

And it was taught in a baraita about this mishna: When the Sages said that construction must be decreased on public fasts, they were not referring to the construction of homes for people who have nowhere to live, but to joyful construction. Similarly, when they said that planting must be decreased, they were not referring to planting food crops, but to joyful planting. What is meant by joyful construction? This is referring to one who builds a wedding chamber for his son. It was customary to build a special house where the wedding would take place, and at times the couple would also live there. What is meant by joyful planting? This is referring to one who plants trees for shade and pleasure such as one might find in a royal garden [avurneki]. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi engaged in joyful planting on Purim, in keeping with the joyous nature of the day.

讙讜驻讗 讞讝拽讬讛 拽专讬 讘讟讘专讬讗 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 讜诪讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪诇转讗 讚讟讘专讬讗 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜注专讬 诪讘爪专 讛爪讚讬诐 爪专 讜讞诪转 专拽转 讜讻谞专转 讜拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 专拽转 讝讜 讟讘专讬讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讞讚 讙讬住讗 砖讜专讗 讚讬诪讗 讛讜转

搂 The Gemara examines the matter itself cited in the previous discussion. Hezekiah read the Megilla in Tiberias both on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not. The Gemara asks: Was he really uncertain about the matter of Tiberias? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd the fortified cities were Ziddim-zer, and Hammath, Rakkath, and Chinnereth鈥 (Joshua 19:35), and we maintain that Rakkath is Tiberias? The Gemara answers: This is the reason that he was uncertain: Although Tiberias was surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua, Hezekiah was uncertain about the halakha due to the fact that on one side, there was a wall of the sea, i.e., there was no physical wall, but the city was protected due to the fact that it adjoined the sea.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗诪讗讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讜讚讗讬 诇讗讜 讞讜诪讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗砖专 诇讜 讞讜诪讛 讜诇讗 砖讜专 讗讬讙专 住讘讬讘 驻专讟 诇讟讘专讬讗 砖讬诪讛 讞讜诪转讛

The Gemara asks: If so, why was he uncertain? The sea is certainly not a wall. As it is taught in a baraita with regard to the sale of houses in walled cities, the phrase: 鈥淲hich has a wall鈥 (Leviticus 25:30), indicates that the city has a bona fide wall and not merely a wall of roofs. If a city is completely encircled by attached houses but there is no separate wall, it is not considered a walled city. The next verse, which is referring to cities that have no wall 鈥渞ound about them鈥 (Leviticus 25:31), excludes Tiberias from being considered a walled city, as the sea is its wall on one side and it is not fully encircled by a physical wall. Consequently, Tiberias is not considered a walled city.

诇注谞讬谉 讘转讬 注专讬 讞讜诪讛 诇讗 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 拽讗 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 诇注谞讬谉 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪讗讬 驻专讝讬诐 讜诪讗讬 诪讜拽驻讬谉 讚讻转讬讘讬 讙讘讬 诪拽专讗 诪讙讬诇讛 诪砖讜诐 讚讛谞讬 诪讬讙诇讜 讜讛谞讬 诇讗 诪讬讙诇讜 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讙诇讬讗 讗讜 讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讛谞讬 诪讬讙谞讜 讜讛谞讬 诇讗 诪讬讙谞讜 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讙谞讬讗 诪砖讜诐 讛讻讬 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara answers: With regard to the sale of houses of walled cities, Hezekiah was not uncertain. Where he was uncertain was with regard to the reading of the Megilla: What are the unwalled towns and what are the walled cities that are written with regard to the reading of the Megilla? Is the difference between them due to the fact that these unwalled towns are exposed, whereas those walled cities are not exposed? If so, since Tiberias is also exposed, as it is not entirely surrounded by a wall, it should be considered unwalled. Or perhaps the difference is due to the fact that these walled cities are protected, whereas those unwalled towns are not protected, and Tiberias is also protected by the sea and should be treated as a walled city. It was due to that reason that Hezekiah was uncertain when to read the Megilla.

专讘 讗住讬 拽专讬 诪讙讬诇讛 讘讛讜爪诇 讘讗专讘讬住专 讜讘讞诪讬住专 诪住驻拽讗 诇讬讛 讗讬 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讛讬讗 讗讬 诇讗 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讛讗讬 讛讜爪诇 讚讘讬转 讘谞讬诪讬谉 诪讜拽驻转 讞讜诪讛 诪讬诪讜转 讬讛讜砖注 讛讬讗

The Gemara relates that Rav Asi read the Megilla in the city of Huzal in Babylonia on both the fourteenth and the fifteenth of Adar, because he was uncertain if it had been surrounded by a wall since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, or not. Huzal was an ancient city, and it was possible that it had been surrounded by a wall in the time of Joshua. Some say a different version of this report, according to which there was no uncertainty. Rav Asi said: This city of Huzal of the house of Benjamin was walled since the days of Joshua, son of Nun.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讻讬 讛讜讬谞讗 讟诇讬讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诪诇转讗 讚砖讗讬诇谞讗 诇住讘讬讬讗

Incidental to the previous discussion concerning Tiberias, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: When I was a child I said something that I later asked the Elders about,

Scroll To Top