📋 Shiur Overview
Lecture Summary – Rambam, Laws of Megillah, Chapter 1, Laws 1–5
—
Law 1: Reading the Megillah in Its Time – A Positive Commandment of Rabbinic Origin
The Rambam’s language: “Reading the Megillah in its time is a positive commandment of rabbinic origin (mitzvas aseh midivrei sofrim).”
Plain Meaning
Reading the Megillah in its time is a positive commandment of rabbinic origin. The lecture begins with the word “in its time” (bizmanah) – what does the Rambam mean by this?
Novel Insights and Explanations
1) The Source of “In Its Time” – “In Their Times” (bizmaneihem) in Megillas Esther
The source for the idea that there are multiple times for reading the Megillah is from the verse “these days of Purim in their times” (yemei haPurim ha’eileh bizmaneihem) – the plural language “in their times” indicates that the Sages derived that there is more than one time for reading the Megillah. This aligns with the first page of Tractate Megillah, where the Mishnah says “the Megillah is read on the eleventh, on the twelfth,” etc. The Rambam brings this same source also in his Commentary on the Mishnah. In the Gemara there are other sources (for example, “she rose to royal authority” – “shekamah b’kaneh malkhusa”), but the Rambam decided to bring the source from “in their times.”
2) The Simple Meaning of “In Their Times” vs. the Sages’ Exposition
The straightforward meaning of “in their times” in the Megillah refers only to the two days of Purim (the fourteenth and fifteenth) – that is what the Megillah means. The Gemara, however, derived from this a broader exposition – that it also means an “expanded time” (zman harchavah), multiple times when one may read (the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth).
3) Does One Even Need a Verse – “He Is the Master and He Is the Master” (hei mara v’hei mara)
Why does one need a verse at all? One could simply say that this is a rabbinic enactment (takanas chachamim) – “he is the master and he is the master” – the Sages enacted it to make things easier for people. The answer: it’s not simply “he is the master” – the Gemara says “and some say” (v’ika d’amri) that the Men of the Great Assembly in the time of Esther only enacted one time, and later the Sages added more. According to the principle of Rabbeinu Yerucham that a later court (beis din) can add upon earlier Sages, it is permitted. But if we know that the Sages added it, one needs a hint (remez) in Scripture – and that is “in their times.” One could indeed say that this is Oral Torah (Torah sheb’al peh) without a hint – just as with the Written Torah, where expositions tell us things that are not stated explicitly, but we know that Moses received them from the Almighty. But they did find a hint, and the Rambam brings it explicitly – which indicates that he holds the hint is significant.
4) Halachic Practical Difference (Nafka Minah) from This Source
If the multiple times had not been enacted “at that same event” (b’oso ma’aseh – in the time of Esther), one would have said that in all the villages (smaller towns), one must come into the city to hear the Megillah – just as with the Paschal offering one must go to the Land of Israel. The fact that it is based on “in their times” provides a foundation that one can read in one’s own place, not only in the city.
5) “In Its Time” – The Mitzvah Exists Only in Its Time
The main point: “in its time” means that the special mitzvah of reading the Megillah exists only on Purim. There is no mitzvah to read the Megillah the entire year. This is the mitzvah that overrides the Temple service (avodah), overrides Torah study (talmud Torah) – only “in its time.”
6) Is Reading the Megillah Part of Torah Study – “Given to Be Read” (nitnah lihikros) vs. “Given to Be Written” (nitnah lihikasev)
There is a fundamental distinction: whether Megillas Esther was “given to be written” (nitnah lihikasev – a part of the Holy Writings) or “given to be read” (nitnah lihikros – only given to be read as a mitzvah, not as a book of the Holy Writings). According to Shmuel, who holds “given to be read,” Megillas Esther is essentially a “ritual object” (cheftza shel mitzvah) – like a shofar – which one uses for the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. In that case, reading the Megillah is not a fulfillment of the mitzvah of Torah study, but rather a separate mitzvah.
If according to Shmuel, Megillas Esther is not truly a part of the Holy Writings but rather a ritual object, then: when one reads the Megillah, one perhaps does not fulfill the mitzvah of Torah study. If someone were to ask a rabbi, “I only have one hour to learn,” no one would tell him to learn Megillas Esther (except on Purim). But on Purim it is “the most important Torah study” – not because it is Torah study, but because it is a special mitzvah that overrides Torah study.
According to the Kabbalists, there is no difference whether it is the laws of lulav or “obscure verses” in Chronicles or Kings – everything has the holiness of Torah, everything has holy allusions according to the four levels of interpretation (PaRDeS). But without that, on a simple level, the question remains: what is the defining principle that makes everything in the Written Torah qualify as Torah study?
7) The Dispute Whether One Must Read the Entire Megillah
In the Gemara there is a dispute whether one must read the entire Megillah or a portion suffices. The one who says a portion suffices does not see it truly as a mitzvah of “reading the Megillah” in the full sense, but rather as a matter of commemorating the miracle through reading portions. (The second speaker disagrees – he holds that even the one who says a portion suffices, it can still be a full mitzvah.)
—
Recap of Previous Lectures (Laws 1–3)
In the previous lectures it was learned: that there is a mitzvah of reading the Megillah (mikra Megillah); the Rambam’s source for this, which is somewhat different from the Gemara; the Rambam says it is simply a general rabbinic principle, but in the Gemara and sources one sees that there is a longer discussion. There was criticism of the lecture that one is “chopping up the Rambam” – the answer is that one only said it is not the simple straightforward reading, and the Rambam has his own approach (mahalakh).
[Digression: Printing sefarim / Megillah in practice – someone printed a Megillah in practice with a printing machine that he himself bought. Rabbi Nosson and Rabbi Aharon Leib also did this – bought printers to print their sefarim.]
—
Law 4: Times of Reading the Megillah – Walled Cities, Towns, Shushan, Villagers
A. The Rule: Walled from the Days of Yehoshua bin Nun = Walled City (kerakh) (fifteenth), Not Walled = City (ir) (fourteenth)
The Rambam’s language: “Any city that was surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, even if it does not currently have a wall, reads on the fifteenth… and this city is called a kerakh (walled city). And any city that was not surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua, even though it is currently walled, reads on the fourteenth, and this city is called an ir (city).”
Plain Meaning
A city that was walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun – even if it currently has no wall – reads on the fifteenth, and is called a “kerakh.” A city that was not walled from the days of Yehoshua – even if it is currently walled – reads on the fourteenth, and is called an “ir.”
Novel Insights and Explanations
1) The Rambam’s Order: “In Their Times” Is the Source for All Times, Not Only for Villagers
The Rambam lays out the order differently than one would learn from the Gemara alone. In the Gemara, the understanding is that first there is the basic “in its time” (the fourteenth and fifteenth), and then “in their times” is an expansion for villagers (who can read earlier). But the Rambam lays out that from the word “in their times” itself comes the idea that there is more than one time – and this already includes the distinction between the fourteenth and fifteenth, between walled cities and towns. Only afterward comes the expansion for villagers.
2) The Rambam Does Not Give a Reason Why Cities Walled from the Days of Yehoshua Read on the Fifteenth
A strong point: the Rambam does not say why cities walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun read on the fifteenth. He does not say it is “because of Shushan” or “because of the miracle.” He simply says: this is the law. One must read what the Rambam says, not insert what one knows from the Gemara into the Rambam.
3) Shushan the Capital Is an “Exception” – Not the Rule
This is the main novel insight: according to the Rambam’s presentation, Shushan the Capital is an exception to the law, not the foundation of the law. The rule is: walled from the days of Yehoshua = fifteenth, not walled = fourteenth. Shushan was not walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun (Shushan is not mentioned in the Torah as walled from the days of Yehoshua, and according to this, Shushan historically was not such a city). Nevertheless, in Shushan one reads on the fifteenth – because there the main miracle occurred, as it says “and they rested on the fifteenth of it” (v’noach bachamishah asar bo). This makes Shushan a special case, not the foundation for all walled cities.
This is a reversed order from how one usually learns in the Gemara, where the understanding is that Shushan is the foundation (because there the miracle occurred on the fifteenth), and from there all walled cities were included. The Rambam, however, presents it that cities walled from the days of Yehoshua is the rule (without an explained reason), and Shushan is the exception that is added because the miracle occurred there.
4) “In Which the Miracle Occurred” – “In It” (bo) Refers to Shushan (the Place), Not to the Day
“In it” (bo) in the language “in which the miracle occurred” (shebo na’aseh hanes) refers to Shushan – in Shushan the miracle occurred. If the Rambam had meant the day, he would have written “on the day” (bayom), not “in it” (bo). The verse “and they rested on the fifteenth of it” is brought as proof that in Shushan they rested on the fifteenth – this is the source for why Shushan specifically reads on the fifteenth, not because the fifteenth is a general miracle-day.
—
B. The Reason for “Walled from the Days of Yehoshua bin Nun” – Honor of the Land of Israel
The Rambam’s language (end of Law 4): “In order to give honor to the Land of Israel, which was desolate at that time, so that they should read like the people of Shushan and be considered as if they are nearby walled cities, even though they are currently desolate, since they were walled from the days of Yehoshua, and they should remember the Land of Israel through this miracle forever.”
Plain Meaning
The Sages changed the measure of “walled city” from the time of the miracle (the days of Achashverosh) to the days of Yehoshua bin Nun: in order to give honor to the Land of Israel, which was desolate in those times, so that they should be counted as walled cities based on their historical status, and so that the Land of Israel should have a remembrance in the miracle of Purim.
Novel Insights and Explanations
5) The Question: Why Not Cities Walled from the Days of Achashverosh?
A logical question: if Shushan is an exception, and walled cities are already made to read on the fifteenth, why not from the outset make it cities walled from the days of Achashverosh (which would include Shushan itself without needing an exception)?
The answer (as the Rambam brings from the Gemara): they wanted the cities of the Land of Israel that were desolate in the time of Achashverosh, but were walled from the days of Yehoshua, to also read on the fifteenth – in order to give them honor. If one had taken from the days of Achashverosh, the desolate cities of the Land of Israel would not have been included.
6) The “Revolution” in the Logic – The Rambam’s Approach from the Bottom Up
The simple reading of the Megillah is: Shushan is a walled city, the miracle occurred there, therefore all walled cities read like Shushan (fifteenth). That is the natural starting point – Shushan is the source, and all walled cities align themselves with Shushan.
But the Rambam turns it around: essentially, the main point of the enactment is not Shushan, but the Land of Israel. The Sages wanted the Land of Israel to have a part in the miracle. The mechanism of the “reversal” – step by step:
– Step one: The natural rule would have been: walled city = walled at the time of the miracle (days of Achashverosh), like Shushan.
– Step two: But then Jerusalem and other cities in the Land of Israel – which did not have walls in those times – would not have been included. This is a “great embarrassment” (bushah gedolah) – that there is a special holiday for walled cities, and the Land of Israel, the heart of the Jewish people, is excluded.
– Step three: To avoid the embarrassment, the Sages changed the measure: walled city = walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun. This brings in the Land of Israel, because in the days of Yehoshua those cities did have walls.
– Step four: But this creates a new problem: Shushan itself – the source of the entire enactment – perhaps did not have a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun! Therefore Shushan becomes an “exception” – an exception is made for Shushan because the miracle occurred there.
This is a “true revolution” – Shushan, which was the source of the entire enactment, becomes the exception, and the Land of Israel, which had no wall at the time of the miracle at all, becomes the main focus.
7) “And They Should Remember the Land of Israel Through This Miracle” – A Second Reason
The Rambam adds: “and they should remember the Land of Israel through this miracle forever.” This is a second dimension: not only to avoid embarrassment, but that the Land of Israel should have a “remembrance” in the miracle. The miracle of Purim takes place entirely in Babylonia/Persia – Shushan the Capital. This is a problem: a miracle of the entire Jewish people that has no connection at all to the Land of Israel. By counting walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, one brings in a “remembrance of the Land of Israel” into the miracle – one connects the miracle with the history of the Land of Israel.
Megillas Esther is one of the few books in Tanakh that takes place entirely in Babylonia/outside the Land of Israel. Daniel also takes place in Babylonia, but there it speaks of a story of an individual Jew (self-sacrifice), not of a national event of the entire Jewish people. With Purim we speak of a miracle for the entire nation – and that makes the absence of the Land of Israel even more palpable.
8) “Go Back to Your Glory” – The Symbolic Meaning of the Days of Yehoshua bin Nun
One goes back to the days of Yehoshua bin Nun because that is the time when the Jewish people were “a great nation on high” – when Yehoshua brought the people into the Land of Israel, conquered the land, and the cities had walls. That is the “glory” of the Jewish people, in contrast to the “great lowliness” of the days of Achashverosh, when the Jews were under a foreign king. “I am not going to reckon according to the times we are looking at now, which is a state of great lowliness. I am going back to a time when I was the king.”
Shushan the Capital represents the “peak” of Achashverosh’s empire – a massive empire with walled cities. But for Jews, that is not their “peak.” Their “peak” is the days of Yehoshua bin Nun (and the days of David and Solomon). By counting walled from the days of Yehoshua, one is saying: “My walled city is not your walled city. My strength is not when you are strong, but when I was strong.”
9) A Wall Is a Symbol of Sovereignty and Might – Yehoshua’s Walls Tell of His Might
A wall is generally an expression of sovereignty – a city with a wall is a strong, fortified city. When one speaks of “walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun,” one is not merely speaking of a technical marker, but telling a story of might – Yehoshua conquered thirty-one kings, all with fortified cities, and he broke through all their walls. Every city that was walled from the days of Yehoshua tells the story of his conquest.
Three layers in this insight:
– First: It establishes the significant time period – honor of the Land of Israel.
– Second: It brings out and celebrates the might of Yehoshua bin Nun himself.
– Third: It reminds us of Yehoshua’s might – as a moral lesson for generations.
10) The Contrast Between Yehoshua bin Nun and Mordechai – A Hidden Allusion in the Law
The wall is not Yehoshua’s wall – it’s the Canaanites’ wall! Yehoshua broke it down, he didn’t build it. That is precisely the point. The allusion in “walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun” is a contrast to the exile-reality of Purim. What is the weakness of the Jewish people in the times of Mordechai? That Jews are part of a gentile culture, they rejoice that “the king is on our side,” Mordechai is a “small manipulator” who found an exile-way to manipulate the system. This is “very un-Jewish, very un-Land-of-Israel-like, very un-Yehoshua-bin-Nun-like.”
Therefore, through the law of walled cities, one tells Jews: look back! There was once Yehoshua bin Nun – he didn’t need to beg any king, he came in, thirty-one kings, and he broke through all their walls. The mention of Yehoshua bin Nun in the context of Purim is a quiet moral lesson – an allusion that the ideal is not the exile-“success” of Mordechai, but the might of Yehoshua.
11) Dispute Among the Rishonim: Walled from the Days of Yehoshua – Only in the Land of Israel or Also Outside?
The Maggid Mishneh brings that there were Geonim and other Rishonim who held that the law of walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun applies only in the Land of Israel, not outside it. The Rambam, however, says clearly “whether in the Land of Israel or outside the Land of Israel” – that the law applies everywhere.
According to the reason of honoring the Land of Israel, one could say the law should only apply in the Land of Israel – since the entire reason is for the sake of the Land of Israel. But the Rambam does not understand it that way, and he makes it a general law for all cities everywhere.
A novel reasoning is proposed: Outside the Land of Israel, the law of walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun should not apply, because: “We don’t know history, we don’t know what happened with time periods – we know what is written in the Torah.” A city that is not mentioned in Tanakh does not exist in our tradition-world (mesorah). The concept of “walled from the days of Yehoshua” is part of our tradition, not of archaeological facts. A city in China or America with ancient walls has no connection to this law.
However: The Rambam rules that it applies also outside the Land of Israel, and the Gemara brings that “Rav Ashi read in Hutzal” (a city in Babylonia). Perhaps one can narrow it: the cities in Babylonia that are mentioned in Tanakh (or in the vicinity of Tanakh-cities) have this law, but not a wildly foreign city that has no connection to Tanakh. In the Gemara itself there was a doubt whether the law of walled cities applies outside the Land of Israel – which supports the principle that it is not so simple.
[Digression: Historical question – according to “normal history” (secular history), the Temple had already been built long before the time of Purim, and the Land of Israel was not desolate. This is only according to the history as the Sages understood it – they “got mixed up with the order of the Persian kings” and it came out for them that Megillas Esther was before the ascent of Ezra. For halachic purposes, one follows the tradition of the Sages, not “real history.”]
[Digression: Archaeological questions – how does one even know which cities were walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun? Even in the Land of Israel, most cities that are actually walled from the days of Yehoshua – “nobody follows this, the public is not particular about it.”]
[Digression: “Wall” as a symbol of civilization – “wall” in this context means not merely a physical wall, but a symbol of the strength of a civilization. The concept of “place” (makom) in Torah only began to play a role with Yehoshua’s entry into the Land – before that, “place” did not play a role in Torah.]
[Digression: The case of Jericho – Jericho was walled, but Yehoshua brought the wall down! Is Jericho “walled from the days of Yehoshua” or not? (Wikipedia says that Jericho is the oldest known city with a wall.) The question is raised but not formally resolved.]
—
C. Shushan the Capital – “And They Rested on the Fifteenth of It”
Novel Insights and Explanations
12) Why Is the Miracle Symbolized by “Resting” and Not by the Battle Itself?
The main miracle was on the fourteenth – that is when the Jews fought their enemies, that is when the great miracle occurred! Why does the Rambam bring the verse “and they rested on the fifteenth of it” as the foundation for Shushan’s Purim?
The answer: the main joy is the joy of rest – when the miracle concluded. Not the moment of battle is the holiday, but the moment of tranquility afterward.
But further it is asked: if so, why does one need a separate law for Shushan at all? The Rambam’s language is that in Shushan they were “busy” on the fourteenth (they were still killing), therefore they only rested on the fifteenth. But this is a “minor detail” – merely because they hadn’t finished killing! What is the essential distinction? [This remains a question.]
—
D. The Law of Villagers – They Read Early on the Day of Gathering
The Rambam’s language: “Villagers who do not enter the synagogues except on Monday and Thursday, it was enacted for them that they should read early on the day of gathering… and if it falls on a day other than Monday or Thursday, they read early on the Monday or Thursday closest to the fourteenth.”
Plain Meaning
Villagers – Jews who live in small villages – have a special enactment that they can read the Megillah early on the “day of gathering” (yom haknisah) – the day they come together (Monday or Thursday).
Novel Insights and Explanations
13) Why Can’t Villagers Read on Their Own?
The Rambam’s language is “who do not enter the synagogues except on Monday and Thursday” – it does not say that they “cannot” read, but that they do not enter the synagogues except on Monday and Thursday. “It doesn’t say they can’t – you can read into it whatever you want, but in the words it doesn’t say that.”
14) “Synagogues” – Not “City”
The Rambam (and the Mishnah/Gemara) says “who do not enter the synagogues” – it does not say they go into the city, but to the synagogues. It is not speaking of a geographic movement to a city, but of coming to a synagogue.
15) “Day of Gathering” – Gathering in the Village, Not Entering the City
The meaning is that they gather in their own village – in a study hall or synagogue where they used to gather on Monday and Thursday. The Lechem Mishneh agrees: “they gather on their own day of gathering” – it speaks of a gathering in their own village, not of going into a city.
A proof: if one says that villagers go into a city, who should read for them there? The city-dwellers read on their own day (the fourteenth), not on the eleventh or twelfth. There would be no Megillah reading specifically for the villagers in the city. But if one says they gather in their own study hall in the village – that is their Purim, and it works.
16) Megillah Requires a Congregation – A Principle That Emerges from the Villagers
From the law of villagers emerges the principle that reading the Megillah is something that requires a communal framework – it is not merely a private mitzvah, but something connected with “synagogues” and “the day of gathering.” Reading the Megillah has an element of community (tzibbur) – one must do it in a communal setting.
17) Reading the Megillah – A Reading, Not Part of a Feast
“The day of gathering” shows that reading the Megillah is a matter of reading – something done when people come together, similar to the public Torah reading – not part of a feast or banquet (seudah or mishteh).
18) Women and Reading the Megillah on the Day of Gathering
Women are obligated in reading the Megillah, but they did not come to the public Torah reading on Monday and Thursday. If “the day of gathering” is based on the Monday and Thursday Torah reading, and women don’t come to that, how does it work for women? [This remains a question.]
—
E. The Law of Ten for Those Who Read Early
The Rambam’s language: “All those who read early do not read it with fewer than ten.”
Plain Meaning
When one reads early, one needs at least ten.
Novel Insights and Explanations
19) The Law of Ten – Rav vs. Rava/Rav Asi
The Maggid Mishneh brings that the Ra’avad says: “Everything is in public, but in public itself the mitzvah requires ten” – even in its proper time, ten is a mitzvah, but not in its proper time it is an obligation.
The dispute in the Gemara:
– Rava says: one always needs ten for reading the Megillah.
– Rav says: in its proper time – even an individual; not in its proper time – with ten.
– Rav Asi says: one always needs ten.
– The Rambam rules like Rav – in its proper time one can read alone; not in its proper time one needs ten.
– But even Rav, the Gemara states, “was concerned for Rava’s opinion” (chash lah l’dRava) – he did seek to have a minyan.
– The Ra’avad says: in practice, ideally (l’khatchilah) one always needs ten, but after the fact (b’di’eved) an individual may read in its proper time.
20) Why Ten Is Needed When Reading Early – The Reason Lies in “Gathering”
The reason is already hinted at in the Rambam’s language – “who do not gather except on Monday and Thursday” (she’einan miskabtzin). The word “gather” (miskabtzin) means that the entire concept of reading early is based on their coming together. If the entire foundation of reading early is the gathering, one cannot say that everyone should go home and read individually – that would collapse the entire concept of “gathering.” Therefore, “gathering” itself implies a minyan – a community that comes together.
This means: the law of ten when reading early is not merely an added requirement of “in a multitude is the King’s glory” (b’rov am hadras melekh) – it is inherent in the very definition of reading early, which is based on “gathering.”
21) “In a Multitude Is the King’s Glory” – An Extra Virtue, Not the Core Law
There is a concept of “in a multitude is the King’s glory” regarding reading the Megillah – to read in public. But this is not the reason for the law of ten when reading early. This is an extra virtue that exists even according to the opinion that one does not need ten as a matter of core law. It is a general principle of performing mitzvos in public, not a specific law in reading the Megillah.
—
F. The Definition of “Village” – The Rambam’s Definition
Novel Insights and Explanations
22) The Distinction Between “Ten Idle Men” (asarah batlanim) and “Ten People” (asarah bnei adam)
“Ten idle men” means ten people who are free from work and can be in the study hall every day – this makes a place into an “ir” (city). But “ten people” is a lower level – it speaks of merely ten Jews in general, even if they are not idle. When even that is not present, the law is different.
23) “One Only Reads It in Synagogues”
The Rambam says that when villagers read the Megillah, one only reads in synagogues. This supports the understanding that it speaks of a gathering in a synagogue in the village, not of going into a city.
—
G. A City That Does Not Have Ten People – “His Remedy Is His Deficiency”
Novel Insights and Explanations
24) The Concept of “His Remedy Is His Deficiency” (tikanto kilkalto) – Various Interpretations
The concept “tikanto kilkalto” (or “kilkalto tikanto”) originates from a Yerushalmi:
– First approach: The “deficiency” is that he does not have ten people. The “remedy” from this is that he can read alone on the fourteenth – because he cannot read early (since “one does not read early with fewer than ten”), he remains with the regular law of “one only reads in its proper time” – on the fourteenth.
– Second approach (Gilyon Maharsha): It is actually “kilkalto tikanto” – backwards. The “deficiency” (that he doesn’t have ten) is itself his “remedy” – because he doesn’t need a minyan, he can read alone on the fourteenth. The great novel insight is that one who does not have ten people does not need a minyan to read the Megillah – he reads alone on the fourteenth.
This is a strange thing: for villagers it is made harder – one specifically needs a minyan to read early. But one who does not read early (reads on the fourteenth) does not need a minyan. This means the law of ten is only a condition for reading early, not for the reading itself.
**25)
25) The Ra’avad’s Dispute
The Ra’avad writes: “and it has no reason” (v’ein lo ta’am) – he does not understand the Rambam’s reasoning. The Ra’avad understands that the Rambam is saying that a place that does not have ten Jews is “neither a village nor anything” (ein lah lo kfar v’lo klum) – it is nothing. The Ra’avad brings a proof from
ir hanidachas (a city led astray) – that fewer than ten people does not qualify as a “city” at all.
The Ra’avad says: “I will always tell you ten; fewer than ten is a village” – he holds that fewer than ten is simply a village, and he follows the regular law of a village (reading early). The Ra’avad disputes the entire law.
The Ra’avad perhaps did not know that the language “his remedy is his deficiency” is a Yerushalmi expression, and he may dispute a Yerushalmi as well, but perhaps he already dealt with the Yerushalmi through a different interpretation.
—
H. “In Our Times One Only Reads in Its Proper Time”
The Rambam’s language: “But in our times one only reads in its proper time, which is the fourteenth and the fifteenth. Villagers and city-dwellers read on the fourteenth, and those in walled cities read on the fifteenth.”
Plain Meaning
In our times – when there is no Jewish sovereignty – there is no reading early for villagers, but rather everyone reads in their regular time: the fourteenth or the fifteenth.
Novel Insights and Explanations
26) What Does “In Our Times” Mean – The Concept of “Sovereignty” (malkhus)
The Rambam says “in our times” but does not say why one cannot read early. The Gemara says: “When? At a time when the Jewish people dwell on their land” (or “at a time when the hand of Israel is strong”) – only when there is Jewish sovereignty. The Rambam’s language is “in the time of sovereignty” (bizman malkhus) – an interesting expression.
27) “Years in Their Proper Order” (shanim k’tikkunan) – What Does This Mean?
Someone suggested that “years in their proper order” means when one sanctifies the months based on visual sighting of the new moon, and the court (beis din) clarifies when Passover is – i.e., the order of the years is in its proper state. This is acknowledged as a nice interpretation, but the Rambam does not learn it this way – the Rambam says explicitly that it means Jewish sovereignty.
This is connected with the concept of “they acknowledged and accepted it” (hodu v’kibluhu) – when the Jews accepted the mitzvos of Purim, they began to concern themselves with the new mitzvos that lay before them, specifically Passover – thirty days before the holiday. Jewish sovereignty means that there is a functioning Jewish government that can oversee the proper order of things.
28) Rabbi Yehudah’s Reason – “Everyone Looks to It” (hakol mistaklin bah)
The Gemara brings Rabbi Yehudah who says “everyone looks to it.” The Gemara understands this to mean that the poor need to know when Purim is in order to come at the right time for gifts to the poor (matanos la’evyonim). When Purim is observed on different days, they don’t know when to come.
29) The Kesef Mishneh’s Interpretation
The Kesef Mishneh interprets the Rambam that “at a time when the hand of the gentiles is strong, so that they cannot travel freely to fulfill the mitzvos completely” – it is a matter of danger and difficulty in traveling. This is not entirely clear – perhaps the Rambam means that because “the hand of the gentiles is strong,” the village may not even have a synagogue at all, so one cannot make the early reading.
30) The Reading “Everyone Endangers Themselves for It” (mistaknin bah) – Language of Danger
The Ra’avad brings a second reading: “everyone endangers themselves for it” (hakol mistaknin bah) – with a language of danger, not “looks to it” (mistaklin). This means that people would put themselves in danger to travel into the city for the Megillah. Therefore the early reading was abolished – so as not to create extra dangers. According to this second reading, the danger makes it a leniency (one does not need to read early), similar to Chanukah where danger is a reason for a leniency (one places the menorah on one’s table in a time of danger).
—
I. A City-Dweller Who Went to a Walled City and Vice Versa
The Rambam’s language: “A city-dweller who went to a walled city and a walled-city-dweller who went to a city: if he intends to return to his place in time for his reading, he reads like his place. And if not – he does not intend to return until after the time of reading – he reads with the people of the place where he is.”
Plain Meaning
One who travels from a city to a walled city or vice versa: if he intends to return to his place in time for his reading, he reads according to his place. If not, he reads with the people of the place where he is.
Novel Insights and Explanations
31) A City-Dweller Can Read Alone
“He reads like his place” – he reads alone, without a congregation. This proves that a person can personally read alone when he reads in his proper time. One should not say that he should read with the congregation of the walled city because it is a greater mitzvah – no, because it is not his day. A city-dweller who is in a walled city reads alone on the fourteenth, even though the walled city only reads on the fifteenth.
32) Only Villagers Need Ten
The distinction is clear: only villagers who read early need ten – “those who read early do not read with fewer than ten.” But when a person reads in his proper time, he can read alone, even without a minyan.
—
J. The Definition of “Walled City” – Nearby and Visible (samukh v’nireh)
The Rambam’s language: “A walled city – anything adjacent to it and anything visible with it, and he brings proof from ‘more than two thousand cubits’ – reads on the fifteenth.”
Plain Meaning
A place that is adjacent to the walled city or visible together with the walled city, even more than two thousand cubits away, reads like the walled city on the fifteenth.
—
K. A Doubtful Walled City – A City That Does Not Know When It Was Established
The Rambam’s language: “A city that does not know when it was established… reads on both days, on the fourteenth and the fifteenth, and only makes a blessing… on reading the Megillah on the fourteenth alone.”
Plain Meaning
A city where it is not known whether it was walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun reads both days – the fourteenth and the fifteenth – but only makes a blessing on the fourteenth.
Novel Insights and Explanations
33) Why Not Apply the Rule of “A Rabbinic Doubt Is Ruled Leniently” (sefeika d’rabbanan l’kula)?
The Megillah is rabbinic, so a rabbinic doubt should be ruled leniently – one shouldn’t need to read at all! The answer: it is not a doubt about the obligation – he is certainly obligated to read; the question is only on which day. Therefore he reads both days.
34) Why Only One Blessing on the Fourteenth?
The Chacham Tzvi’s reasoning: once he has read on the fourteenth, he has already fulfilled his obligation – because the fourteenth is the primary time for most of the world. Therefore, on the fifteenth it is already a rabbinic doubt, and one does not make a blessing.
—
Law 5: One Does Not Read the Megillah on Shabbos
The Rambam’s language: “One does not read the Megillah on Shabbos, as a decree lest one take it in his hand and go to someone who is expert to read it, and carry it four cubits in the public domain. For everyone is obligated in its reading, and not everyone is expert in its reading.”
Plain Meaning
One does not read the Megillah on Shabbos, because of the concern that people will carry the Megillah four cubits in the public domain, since everyone is obligated but not everyone can read it themselves.
Novel Insights and Explanations
1) The Language Is the Same as Regarding Blowing the Shofar
The Rambam’s language – “for everyone is obligated… and not everyone is expert” – is the same language as regarding the shofar. This is the foundation of the decree: because everyone is obligated, the concern is greater that one will come to carry.
—
When Purim Falls on Shabbos – One Reads Early
The Rambam’s language: “Therefore, if the time of its reading falls on Shabbos, one reads it early, before Shabbos. And one asks and expounds on the laws of Purim on that day, Shabbos, in order to mention that it is Purim.”
Plain Meaning
When Purim falls on Shabbos, one reads the Megillah earlier (Friday), and on Shabbos itself one studies the laws of Purim “in order to mention that it is Purim.”
Novel Insights and Explanations
2) What Does “To Mention That It Is Purim” Mean?
A sharp question: what is the concept of “mentioning”? Either one performs the mitzvos or not – what kind of category is “not forgetting that it is Purim”?
This is connected with the principle of “do not forget” – “you shall erase… do not forget” (timcheh… lo tishkach): a Jew must not forget that it is Purim. It is not merely a mitzvah to perform, but an obligation to remember.
3) Why Don’t Villagers Also Need “To Mention”?
Villagers who already read on the eleventh – why don’t they also need to do something “to mention that it is Purim” on the fourteenth?
The answer: For villagers, Purim is indeed the fourteenth, and they only read the reading early – but Purim itself has not been moved. With Shabbos, however, it is different: it is not as if Purim was established on a different day – Purim is indeed Shabbos, only the reading was moved earlier. Therefore, on Shabbos itself one must “mention that it is Purim.”
4) The Distinction Between Villagers Reading Early and Reading Early Due to Shabbos
For villagers there are many times (the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth) – this is part of the enactment, it is “in their times.” But with Shabbos there is no other time – it is a new situation where one must read early, and therefore one needs the extra law of “mentioning.”
—
The Details When Purim Falls on Shabbos
The Rambam’s language: “How so? If the fourteenth falls on Shabbos – city-dwellers read early on Friday, and walled-city-dwellers read in their proper time on Sunday. If the fifteenth falls on Shabbos – walled-city-dwellers read early on Friday, which is the fourteenth, and city-dwellers read on that day which is their proper time. It turns out that everyone reads on the fourteenth.”
Plain Meaning
When the fifteenth falls on Shabbos: walled-city-dwellers read early on Friday (which is the fourteenth), and city-dwellers also read on the fourteenth because that is their proper time. Thus everyone reads on the fourteenth.
Novel Insights and Explanations
5) “It Is a Year of Unity”
When the fifteenth falls on Shabbos (like this year), all Jews read on one day – the fourteenth. This is a sign of unity: Shabbos unites Jews.
6) A Humorous Reasoning – Shabbos Makes Everyone Like Walled-City Dwellers
Perhaps on Shabbos all Jews become like walled-city dwellers, because through the eruv everything is considered one domain. However, this is not accepted as practical law.
—
The First Adar and the Second Adar
In a leap year, when the month is doubled (ibur shanah – intercalation of the year), the second Adar is the proper time – one reads the Megillah in the second Adar.
📝 Full Transcript
Lecture Notes – Rambam, Laws of Megillah, Chapter 1, Laws 1–4 (Continued)
—
Recap of Previous Lectures
Speaker 1:
And we were learning a lecture in the holy Rambam, Laws of Megillah, yes? Laws of Megillah, in the sixth, Law 4, okay? Let’s go… no, no, no, no, I mean already.
And we were in the first three laws actually, I wrote Law 1 through 4, but actually we didn’t learn through 4, we learned the first three laws and we learned that there is a mitzvah of reading the Megillah (mikra megillah), and we learned at length the Rambam’s source for this, when in the Gemara it says it a bit differently.
We learned that, I wrote it down, a few people were very upset that I’m criticizing the Rambam, about what happened there and so forth, I received a few messages, aside from those who were against the article there.
I wrote again here, I learned there that the Rambam says it’s simply a general principle of the Rabbinic laws (derabbanan), but in the Gemara and in the sources one sees that there’s a whole discussion. He is over… he was upset at the Torah. Anyways… who was upset at the… oh, there it’s written the same language that was written on Facebook there.
I mean with a bit of disrespect for the Rambam ignoring the whole discussion. Me being disrespectful? He has his approach (mahalakh). I only said that it’s not the straightforward interpretation (pashut pshat). There is a better approach, a different approach. The truth is that I have no way to make it, I didn’t explain the approach of the Sages (Chazal). I’m only saying that it appears to me differently.
—
Law 1: Reading the Megillah in Its Time – A Positive Commandment from the Words of the Scribes
Speaker 1:
Okay, in any case, now we’re going to learn another note, okay? Yes. We learned the language was… let’s be precise in the language of “reading the Megillah in its time” (kri’at hamegillah bizmanah).
Speaker 2:
But your main question on the Rambam isn’t about “not all cases are equal” (lav kol apei shavin), it’s not about “not all cases are equal.” It’s more about the matter that “do not add” (bal tosif) has everything to do with the declaration. And when you remove that, you need to understand why they learned Megillah differently. More than that.
Speaker 1:
Okay, let’s continue chasing this here. Yes, it’s one of the things. Let’s… let’s move on, okay?
The Source of “In Its Time” – “In Their Times” (Bizmaneihem) in the Scroll of Esther
We learned the language in the Rambam, “reading the Megillah in its time is a positive commandment from the words of the Scribes” (kri’at hamegillah bizmanah mitzvat aseh midivrei sofrim), right? By the way, he wants to know the source for this. One needs to bring out “in its time” (bizmanah). One needs to say, to bring out the holiday… the purpose of Purim “in its time.” “In its time” – we derive “in its time” from “its reading, meaning ‘in their times’ (bizmanam)”. That was the topic we’re going to learn. And that is the mitzvah “in its time.”
Whether the Megillah Contains a Commandment to Read the Megillah
The truth is that it doesn’t say in the Megillah “reading the Megillah.” We already discussed this. Maybe not, it doesn’t say anywhere that one should read the Megillah. Not in the Megillah itself, right? “And therefore they wrote” (ve’al ken katvu), and there it says that.
The segulah and miracles, it was once said that the segulah and miracles means… he wrote all these things… it doesn’t say… it doesn’t actually say to read the Megillah. He doesn’t actually mean that.
Speaker 2:
It also says in the Gemara that there’s a dispute (machloket), there are those who say it’s enough to read a portion of the Megillah. It says that the reading… that as you say, it’s a part of the…
Speaker 1:
No, that’s a different question. Because then the question is whether it says there’s a mitzvah to read, it means reading the whole thing. When it says there’s a mitzvah to read the Torah, it doesn’t mean reading one portion (parsha). But when it says one can read a portion, those who say one can read a portion, the implication is that he doesn’t see it truly as a mitzvah of reading the Megillah. He truly sees it as a matter of commemorating the miracle through reading portions of it.
Speaker 2:
No, not necessarily. I don’t agree with that. I don’t agree with that at all.
“In Its Time” – The Mitzvah Is Only at Its Designated Time
Speaker 1:
Okay, in any case, there is a mitzvah to read the Megillah in its time. And “in its time” apparently means… ah, but “in its time” means yes, that on Purim one must read the Megillah. It’s not that there’s a mitzvah to read the Megillah the whole year. I don’t know, maybe it’s not a mitzvah at all, it’s a part of Tanakh, I don’t know. But now we’re talking about the mitzvah, the special mitzvah, which you said earlier, in any case, overrides the Temple service (avodah), overrides Torah study (talmud Torah).
Speaker 2:
Right, right.
Discussion: “Given to Be Read” (Nitnah Lehikrot) or “Given to Be Written” (Nitnah Lehikatev)
Speaker 1:
Now, regarding this matter… right, right. Now, regarding this matter, I’m only asking about this because there is the… and we say that… there is the question whether it was “given to be read” (nitnah lehikrot) or “given to be written” (nitnah lehikatev). That is, when we speak of the novelty of reading the Megillah, we’re talking about two things. It means, as it were, that a book was added to the Holy Writings (Kitvei HaKodesh), there is another book, the Scroll of Esther (Megillat Esther), and this book is a book that one reads on Purim. It’s as if, according to Shmuel at least, which you said is not truly a part of the Holy Writings, but rather what? Shmuel said, essentially this is a part of… it was only “given to be read.” The Megillah is a legal category (din), it is the ritual object of the mitzvah (cheftza shel mitzvah) that one reads.
So if someone learns it as Torah study (limud haTorah), would one tell him there are better things to learn? I don’t know, according to him perhaps one doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah of Torah study when reading the Megillah.
Speaker 2:
You make a good point. According to Shmuel, no. It’s simply like a shofar, which is the ritual object of the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. So then the reading in its time… there is a law about something else, about another… no, that’s the only one. There is a “thing that is read” (davar shekor’im), you need to read it from a written text (ketav). Because otherwise the Gemara… because Shmuel does agree that one must read from a written text, not by heart (be’al peh). But it’s only for that purpose. The position is Shmuel’s, the other position is different, that’s a dispute among Tannaim. For example, regarding Chronicles (Divrei HaYamim) or others, they don’t have this, they already have reading. He does have some specific details, but not so important.
Discussion: Whether Megillat Esther Constitutes Torah Study
Speaker 1:
What’s relevant to the reading of Chronicles, but it’s interesting, one can look at it a bit this way, that for example there is Torah that is more important and Torah that is less important. For example, laws of ritual purity and impurity (hilkhot tumah vetaharah), there is a person who needs to know the basic mitzvot that he has to do, etc. So on a random Tuesday, if a person wants to do Torah reading, he should think about which Torah is now the most important Torah for him.
But we need to consider, what is it now? Now, reading the Megillah is the most important Torah. One can also say the “thirty days before the holiday” (shloshim yom kodem lechag). There are the general mitzvot of Torah that you have upon you, but now, the most important Torah is, let’s say, I don’t know what, Tractate Makkot, Laws of Shabbat, Laws of Vows, whatever, according to halakhah they say the most important are laws of ritual purity and impurity. But on Purim morning, on Purim at the proper time, the mitzvah of Torah study takes on a new form. What is the Torah that you should do now? If reading the Megillah is indeed a mitzvah, is indeed Torah, if it were Torah then he would… it’s indeed from the perspective of… that’s true.
If someone would ask a rabbi, I only have one hour to learn, they would certainly not tell him that… nobody would tell him to learn a bit of Megillat Esther every day. But on Purim, that is the most important Torah study.
Speaker 2:
In a general way it works like this, meaning, on Pesach one reads a bit, on the holidays of the three pilgrimage festivals (shalosh regalim) one can say, whatever. But Megillat Esther is Purim. Again, one can also learn, the one who holds that Megillat Esther is truly part of the Holy Writings can learn it. But the one who holds… I need to look in my printer’s notebooks, he has a cover for it, he has it…
Digression: Printing Sefarim
Speaker 1:
He didn’t print it at a printer, he bought himself a printing machine, he printed it himself. He didn’t own it. He found higher-quality printing, no. He didn’t own it? He was simply handy, he had a… he bought such a piece, and it came out by itself. I don’t know. I know that Rabbi Nasan did it, he wanted to… print his books, so he bought a printer. Rabbi Aharon Leib also did so, he made a whole office with printers, all his things. I want to continue learning with him. A printer is simply by itself, you understand? Okay.
Ah, it looks quite nice, the Megillah in practice, it’s on its way. Need to add the introductions, it’s a ready book, no?
Back to the Topic: Torah Study and Megillat Esther
Speaker 2:
According to the Kabbalists (mekubalim)… I haven’t looked, I wanted to see where it says that one should read the Megillah. According to the Kabbalists, listen Rabbi Yitzchak, one can understand why the entire Torah is the mitzvah of Torah study. There’s no difference whether it’s the laws of lulav in the eighth chapter, or whether it’s, I don’t know, obscure verses in Chronicles or in Kings, because it has the sanctity of Torah (kedushat haTorah), there are whole explanations for why these things are important, and also these things have, according to PaRDeS, they all hint at holy things. But without that, if you go even according to the plain meaning (kifshuto), why should one say reading the Megillah is a mitzvah, why is it Torah study? What is the definition (geder)? What establishes that everything that is the Written Torah (Torah shebikhtav)? According to the Rambam, the entire Written Torah is called Torah study, no? I don’t know.
Summary: Reading in Its Time According to Shmuel
Speaker 1:
Okay, we’ve come to take up the topic of whether there is a suspension of women who learn. I only said that here there is reading in its time. If one learns that Megillat Esther is only like a ritual object of the mitzvah of reading the Megillah, then it only creates reading in its time, there is no reading of the Megillah as a mitzvah of Torah study, I don’t know, it’s not a matter. There is a matter on Purim to read the Megillah, but there is no matter of studying the Megillah.
One got caught up in the reading, but that doesn’t matter. One got caught up in the homilies (drashot), and one got caught up in the Torah teachings, well, that’s a problem, but that’s with getting caught up. No, one got caught up in the plain meaning, that you’re not going now, you’re thinking now about Purim, you’re a bit in the Purim spirit now, but it is Purim.
—
What Is the Time of Its Reading – “The Sages Established Many Times for Them”
Speaker 1:
But now the question is, what is the time of its reading? Interestingly, the Rambam said, “The Sages established many times for them for Megillat Esther, as it says ‘in their times’ (bizmaneihem)”. And from the word “bizmaneihem” the Sages derived that there is more than one time. Yes, do you remember the words? The first page of Tractate Megillah. Where it says “that was established as a royal prerogative” (shekamah bekaneh malukhah). There are various sources that the Gemara found for this law. The Rambam decided to bring the “bizmaneihem.”
Speaker 2:
What is another approach? I don’t remember by heart. There are other approaches in the Gemara.
Speaker 1:
Yes, the Mishnah, the Mishnah has “the Megillah is read on the 11th, on the 12th” etc., and he brings there in the Commentary on the Mishnah (Perush HaMishnayot) as well, he immediately brought the matter of “these days of Purim in their times” (yemei haPurim ha’eleh bizmaneihem), there is a source from the Torah.
The Plain Meaning of “Bizmaneihem” vs. the Sages’ Interpretation
By the way, that’s not the straightforward plain meaning, right? The straightforward plain meaning is simply talking about the two days. The Megillah talks about this, that there are two days, that’s what one observes. The Gemara only found the hint (remez) somehow that it doesn’t only mean that, but it also means that there is an expanded time.
Discussion: Whether a Verse Is Even Needed – “He Is the Master and He Is the Master”
Speaker 2:
One wouldn’t have actually needed a verse, because one can say it’s “He is the master and He is the master” (hi mara vehi mara) – the Sages enacted it. The Sages said that one should make it easy for people. Just as we see in general that the enactments of the Sages (takkanot chakhamim), the Sages want to make it so it shouldn’t be very difficult for people. But they did want it to be so from Esther’s times.
Speaker 1:
I’m saying, essentially one could have said it’s “He is the master and He is the master.” It’s not “He is the master,” the Gemara says “and some say” (ve’ikka de’amri), it’s all based on the “and some say” that the Men of the Great Assembly (Anshei Knesset HaGedolah) in the time of Esther only made one thing, later the Sages added. There is a law, one court after another court, as Rabbeinu Yerucham points out, one can add upon our Sages. Therefore, if you know that the Sages made it, there must be a hint. The question is where it’s hinted.
The truth is you’re right, that the Rambam could have said that this is the Oral Torah (Torah shebe’al peh), just as in the Written Torah (Torah shebikhtav) the homiletical interpretations (drashot) tell us things that aren’t written explicitly, but we know that this is how Moses our teacher received it from the Almighty (mipi haGevurah). Sometimes it’s hinted, sometimes it’s not. And one could have also said here that it’s Oral Torah. Why not? If we know that the Sages enacted that the courts would enact such and such, it doesn’t have to be written. That’s very good. But they found a hint, “from where do we know?” (minayin) – that’s how one can interpret it. But the Rambam does bring the hint, which means he brings it explicitly.
Halakhic Practical Difference from This Source
It could indeed be that without this source… this is a strong halakhic distinction, because if it hadn’t been enacted at that very event, one would have said regarding all the villages, forgive them, it’s only a mitzvah of the Paschal offering (korban Pesach). The mitzvah is to go to the Land of Israel and slaughter a Paschal offering. If you know there’s a mitzvah of Megillah, come into the city and read the Megillah. Regarding everything, one shouldn’t say anything about a city. No, no, I want to be able to do it where I am.
Law 4: “And These Are the Times of Its Reading” – The Distinctions Between a Walled City (Kerakh), a City (Ir), and Shushan
The Rambam’s Order: “Bizmaneihem” Is the Source for All Times
Speaker 1:
Therefore, if they made it, there must have been a hint. The question is what the hint is. The truth is, you’re right that the Rambam could have said that this is Oral Torah, just as in the Written Torah, in thirty things that aren’t written explicitly, but we know that this is how Moses our teacher received it from the Almighty. Sometimes it’s hinted, sometimes it’s not, and one could have also said here that it’s Oral Torah. Why not? If we knew, and the Sages received that the courts would enact such and such, even if it’s not written.
One can elaborate on this, but the Rambam brings it by way of a hint, as if he brings it explicitly. It could indeed be that without this source, the tradition, as it were, it wouldn’t have been so. There is a strong halakhic distinction, because if it hadn’t been enacted in this manner, one would have said, “in all the villages, set up for the kingdom.” There is a mitzvah of the Paschal offering. The mitzvah is to go to the Land of Israel and slaughter a Paschal offering. If you know there’s such a mitzvah of Megillah, come into the city and read the Megillah. It’s no more than the city. In general, but here they say there wasn’t a city. No, I’m saying the distinction between…
The Language of the Rambam: The Basic Law of the Times of Reading
Speaker 1:
Let’s read. “And these are the times of its reading.” What are the times of its reading? There is more than one time. First of all, so. The Rambam rules the law as follows: “Any province that was surrounded by a wall in the days of Joshua son of Nun, even if it doesn’t have a wall now, reads on the fifteenth of the month, and this province is called a kerakh (walled city).” That means a kerakh. What does it matter to me that it’s called a kerakh? I don’t know, it’s a thing to understand the Gemara. He says, this is what in the Gemara they talk about a lot, “residents of walled cities, residents of walled cities” (bnei kerakhim). You know what they mean? “And any province that was not surrounded by a wall in the days of Joshua, even though it is surrounded now, reads on the fourteenth, and this province is called an ir (city).” That is “residents of cities, residents of towns” (bnei ir, bnei ayarot). That is… one minute, let me elaborate.
Digression: Shushan the Capital – Was It Walled from the Days of Joshua?
Speaker 1:
“And Shushan the capital.” Let me elaborate on the Gemara. “And Shushan the capital, even though” – to make from Joshua. From where do we know that it wasn’t? Good question. Maybe it was? Does the Gemara say something about this?
Speaker 2:
No, does the Gemara have Psalms (Tehillim) or not?
Speaker 1:
All of this is stated in a Gemara, but how the Gemara knows, I don’t know. I don’t know. It’s a good question. Maybe it was indeed walled from the days of Joshua son of Nun. I don’t know. I don’t know who said it.
Speaker 2:
And have you looked into the history of the region a bit? If you only know.
Speaker 1:
Okay. Well, I’ll tell you the Torah. It doesn’t say. There was such a city Shushan, either yes or no. There’s no history. You’re talking about Torah Jews, they don’t know any history. You know what it says in the Chumash (Pentateuch). In the Chumash, is Shushan mentioned as being walled from the days of Joshua? No. Good day. It didn’t exist.
Speaker 2:
Again, the Shushan from the verse is a walled city. Because the words… we are talking about the city.
Speaker 1:
I’m saying because there it was indeed a walled city. We’re talking about the city that is mentioned in the Torah. Shushan that is mentioned above. No, Shushan is a biblical text. Shushan is from the Torah (d’Oraisa). Not from that Shushan. The Shushan where there was “miracle and joy and gladness” (nasu v’simcha v’sasson). That Shushan is what we’re talking about.
Shushan HaBirah Is an Exception – Not the Rule
Speaker 1:
But let’s go back to walled cities from the days of Joshua. “They read on the fifteenth, for on it the miracle was done, as it says ‘and they rested on the fifteenth of it.'” Does it say in the Megillah “and they rested on the fifteenth of it”? That the Jews needed to rest — that’s the miracle? Read the Megillah, my friend. First read the Megillah.
And let’s bring it out. “And why, and why,” if so, “why did they make the matter dependent on the days of Joshua?” Ah, the Gemara asks this: “In order to give honor to the Land of Israel, which was in ruins at that time.” The Rambam asks what I just told you. The Rambam lays it out like this: the halachah is, we are hinted to through “in their times” (bizmaneihem), but he doesn’t bring the entire verse. It’s very interesting, because this is actually stated explicitly in the Megillah. He first brings “bizmaneihem” — that according to this we accept the second thing, that there is the fourteenth and the fifteenth. But okay. First it says “bizmaneihem” — there is more than one time. And how so? First it’s like this: a city that is walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun reads on the fifteenth. A city that is not walled reads on the fourteenth. Okay, but that’s not yet about what we read in the present time (b’zman hazeh). That’s still the basic — the time. He does say we read in the present time. You say it like that.
Speaker 2:
He says it like that. No, “and these are they” (v’eilu hein), and then he goes on to the villagers (bnei hakfarim). It doesn’t say anywhere later that the villagers read in the present time.
Speaker 1:
All these things are read in the present time according to the Rambam.
The Rambam sets up the “in the present time” like this: first, from the “in the present time” there is the basic. Because the Gemara says like this: first there is “in the time.” Then “in their times” is an expansion (ribbui). Then we go into, ah, the villagers. We’re talking about the villagers.
Discussion: How the Rambam Lays Out the Times
Speaker 2:
But the Rambam doesn’t say that. The Rambam doesn’t say it like the Gemara. The Rambam reads what is written in the Rambam.
Speaker 1:
The Rambam says, from the word “bizmaneihem” there is an expansion — we read at the times. What are the times? There is more than one time. What are the times? There are distinctions. What are the distinctions? What are the basics?
The Rambam — the Rambam does say it. I’ll tell you, we’ll look into it and it will be clear. Because when he says “villagers” he does say, “an enactment that they advance it,” because they gather. The same stringency that was enacted regarding the main reading of the Megillah — what is the stringency? Because they gather, they read on the fifteenth, etc. That is the day itself.
I know you know Gemara and you know the distinction, but in the holy Rambam, in the holy Rambam, you’re imagining it. It doesn’t say that in the Rambam, because the Rambam sets up the whole thing in reverse. Let me tell you.
“And all of Israel in every city that does not have a wall from the days of Joshua bin Nun reads on the fifteenth.”
Right? It’s a deficient thing — we celebrate miracles that happened in the diaspora (chutz la’aretz), in the Land of Israel…
Speaker 2:
No, no, no, no. Please stay with the halachah that he states.
Speaker 1:
What he says is this: there are several times for the Megillah. Now, which times? It goes like this: a city that is walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun, a city that is not walled — fifteenth, fourteenth. It doesn’t concern me what happened later; it only concerns me from the days of Joshua bin Nun. He asks a question: what about Shushan HaBirah? In this halachah, specifically the cities that were walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun read on the fifteenth — there is an exception, an exception, an exception. And that is the city of Shushan. Not for any other reason, but as an exception because “in it was the miracle” (shebo hayah hanes). In Shushan there was the miracle. He doesn’t say more than that. In Shushan there was specifically the miracle. Just as it says in the Megillah “and they rested on the fifteenth of it” — that the city dwellers in Shushan rested on the fifteenth.
Discussion: “Shebo Hayah HaNes” – What Does “Bo” Refer To?
Speaker 2:
“Shebo hayah hanes” — does it mean referring to the word Shushan, or does “shebo” mean referring to the day?
Speaker 1:
That’s how I learned it. No, no, “shebo” — in Shushan. Because in Shushan, on that day it was the fifteenth, that was the main miracle. “Shene’esah bo nes b’chamishah asar” — the miracle was done in it on the fifteenth.
Speaker 2:
No, no, no, no, no. That’s where you read it wrong.
Speaker 1:
No, that’s how one derives it from the words “and they rested on the fifteenth of it” — that in Shushan they rested on the fifteenth. Ah, it’s a wonderful point. He says that “shebo” — the day was the miracle, “shene’esah bo nes b’chamishah asar.”
Speaker 2:
No, no, no, no, no, no. You’re reading it wrong.
Speaker 1:
It’s not a holiday for a miracle. By the way, if “bo” referred to the day, it would have said “bayom,” not “bo.” You’re keeping on reading it according to what you know in the Gemara. I want to tell you what the Rambam says. And this is built on a Rashi — we are not a Rashi. And a bit in the Gemara, and a bit in Rashi.
Speaker 2:
But why — because the miracle was there — is it the fifteenth?
Speaker 1:
Very good. Because the miracle was there on the fifteenth. But Shushan is special. Normally, what the Rambam says is that what we read in all walled cities on the fifteenth has nothing to do with a miracle. It doesn’t say it has nothing to do with a miracle. Simply, I don’t know. In Shushan, since the miracle was there, the main miracle so to speak, the section of Shushan cannot not be Shushan, so there too they read on the fifteenth, even though it’s not walled. The law is about walled cities.
Speaker 2:
The other walled cities — is it because of Shushan, and the Rambam doesn’t hold that way?
Speaker 1:
No, no, not because of Shushan. Not because of anything. Simply, he doesn’t say why. It’s a strange decree. That’s a further point. That’s not what it says.
Speaker 2:
No, no, no. I don’t know where you’re getting this from. And that we say all cities that are also walled like Shushan?
Speaker 1:
Learn what it says in the Rambam. No, no, nothing about Shushan. Walled — the Rambam brings in a line from the Gemara. Of course, this is all backwards. But I want to say what the Rambam says. There is a halachah: walled cities from the days of Joshua. Shushan is seemingly an exception. Ah, Shushan had a miracle, so in its honor they added it — specifically because the miracle was there, they made it so even though it’s not walled. Can you read the Rambam?
Speaker 2:
Where is the miracle on the fourteenth? In which place? Not in Shushan?
Speaker 1:
It says nothing at all about a miracle on the fourteenth in all the things you brought me.
Speaker 2:
No, he tells you about cities that don’t have a wall.
Speaker 1:
It only says this: “A province that was not walled” (medinah shelo hayesah mukefes chomah). A province that is walled — the large cities (krachim), walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun. It doesn’t say why. It doesn’t say why. You don’t need to know why. You only need to know the halachah. Very good.
And the Rambam doesn’t say why. He only says yes, for walled cities from the days of Joshua bin Nun. He doesn’t say why. He says about walled cities — he doesn’t say why. Why not the entire halachah? Why does the Rambam say this? Because the Rambam states the halachah as it appears to him. Shushan is an exception to the halachah. A curious exception. The halachah is that walled cities read on the fifteenth. But Shushan was not walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun. The answer is, Shushan is special because there was a miracle there. All of this is stated in the Rambam. Anything else is your imagination.
Question: Why Not Walled Cities from the Days of Achashverosh?
Speaker 1:
I’ll ask you a question — let me ask you a question. It’s actually interesting. If we’re already making it about walled cities, and then we go and make Shushan an exception, then — since the miracle was there — we should have from the outset made it about walled cities from the days of Achashverosh. Not make an exception. The answer is, since the Land of Israel was in ruins at that time — of course, according to the history of Chazal, not according to the real history. But, yes, you know. Or you don’t know. The Temple had already been built long before the time of Purim, according to normal history. This is only according to the history that the Sages understood — they got confused with the order of the Persian kings there, and it came out for them that Megillas Esther was before the ascent of Ezra, and so on.
Halachah 5: “In Order to Give Honor to the Land of Israel, Which Was in Ruins at That Time”
Speaker 1:
And it comes out that what — the advantage they accomplished — listen, now let’s go backwards. Let’s go back to the Rambam, let’s see what it says. “In order to give honor to the Land of Israel, which was in ruins at that time, so that they would read like the people of Shushan and be considered as if they are large walled cities, even though they are now in ruins.” And they were gathered from the wellsprings of salvation, and they merited to ascend to the Land of Israel with Ezra speedily. What is the meaning of all these words?
Indeed, actually, now it goes back — here it comes back clearly to what you wanted to say. Actually, the place of the Temple…
Halachah 4 (Continued): The Reason for Walled Cities from the Days of Joshua bin Nun – Honor of the Land of Israel
The Language of the Rambam (End of Halachah 4)
“In order to give honor to the Land of Israel, which was in ruins at that time, so that they would read like the people of Shushan and be considered as if they are nearby walled cities, even though they are now in ruins, since they were walled from the days of Joshua, and there should be a remembrance of the Land of Israel through this miracle forever.”
Explanation of the Language
Speaker 1: What is the meaning of all these words? Indeed, actually, now it goes back — here he comes back, as it were, to what you wanted to say. Actually, the walled city concept is about Shushan, not the whole circle. Actually, the article is Shushan, “for in it the miracle was done” (shesham ne’esah bo hanes), right? And Shushan is… with Shushan, the Sages divided it among all walled cities. And Shushan is a walled city.
Why does he insert for us this disclosure — how do you say it in Hebrew? — that actually, you should know that in those times Shushan was not walled, and if Shushan had been walled at that time, everything would have been fine. No, it wouldn’t have been fine. But they would have then needed to make all walled cities not count. How did walled cities from the days of Joshua bin Nun come about at all?
The Rambam’s Approach – Reversal of the Logic
The Rambam says the reason is as follows: there is a problem that it would have been embarrassing. There would have been great embarrassment for the Land of Israel. We are making here a special holiday, a special day for walled cities. Why? Because Shushan is a walled city, and the miracle was there — here it begins. And the Jews from Jerusalem come and they ask, “When do we make Purim? Us, walled cities?”
Let me lay out my point for a moment. “We are not walled cities; we don’t have a wall.” What? The Land of Israel doesn’t have a wall? It doesn’t fit. It doesn’t fit.
So, further, we’re going to pretend that the Land of Israel does have a wall. But it doesn’t have a wall? You know what? We’re going to change the halachah. Let me lay it out. Let me deal with Shushan. Walled cities — which walled cities? Those that were walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun. But you’re not walled now? Okay. If so, then Shushan is a problem? Okay, we’ll make an exception for Shushan.
Do you grasp how he reversed the whole story? This is what it says here, as far as I understand. That we want to say that it’s as if the Land of Israel is walled. It doesn’t fit that there should be a holiday where the Land of Israel is not walled.
Discussion: The Revolution in the Order of the Sugya
Speaker 2: So, I want to understand — when the Sages discuss this, they are already speaking after Shushan is already a walled city.
Speaker 1: Yes, the story is reversed. Because which other walled cities aligned themselves to be similar to Shushan? It does say in the Megillah that Shushan is a walled city, so all walled cities do like them. That’s the simple meaning (pashut pshat) of the verse, correct?
But the Rambam says that in those times there was not yet a walled city. Which times are those? The times of the Megillah? No, of course yes. The times of Joshua bin Nun — it wasn’t. Ah, how can you align all those cities with Shushan, since all those cities had a… Ah, yes, I understand all those cities.
Speaker 2: So at the time of the reading of the Megillah, at the time of the miracle of Purim, Shushan was a walled city, so all walled cities are like it. So seemingly, according to this, one would say: when does one need to be walled? At the same time when Shushan is walled, because you want to equate it with Shushan.
But he says no, because that would have been a great embarrassment for the Land of Israel, because it would have turned out that regarding the Land of Israel, everyone would have said it’s not a walled city, since they didn’t have a wall from the times of Mordechai and Esther. So they said, no — when is the Land of Israel’s real story? In the days of Joshua bin Nun, and based on that we reckon it.
“And There Should Be a Remembrance of the Land of Israel Through This Miracle” – A Second Reason
He says, not only that, but it turns out — and now, in honor of this, not only the Land of Israel merited, but all cities apparently, both in the Land of Israel and in the diaspora, all cities — in honor of the fact that they wanted to change it. In other words, instead of making an exception, they could have made an exception for the Land of Israel, saying, true, all…
Here it’s very interesting — it completely reversed, a real revolution. Actually, in the present time, according to how the Gemara reads, at the time of Purim, Shushan is built — that is the main city, families, yes, “every city according to its families,” but the main city is not built. Actually, everything should have gone according to Shushan.
I ask, seemingly it would have been difficult — Jerusalem is not built — you know what, we can make an exception for Jerusalem, saying that the Land of Israel is special.
But since we want so strongly to establish that the Land of Israel is not walled, they reversed the whole thing entirely, turned the matter around, and said it depends on the Land of Israel. When in the Land of Israel? Not the Land of Israel of today — today is fake.
How does he say it — how is there a walled city? Because he looks in the Book of Joshua; there he found it out. What does he have to do with reality? No, he said one thing: it goes back to the time that is indeed beautiful, goes back to its glory. Today is fake — it’s the best of times. It’s precisely the same as the days of Joshua bin Nun, the days of David and Solomon. Because perhaps he means to say, and there comes a time when the Land of Israel is in its complete downfall.
Okay, there’s something to it. There is a settlement in the Land of Israel, there is a people, there is a reason for there to be a verse. But let’s say, the reason for settlement in the Land of Israel — a verse would have fallen away, whatever. In any case, let’s say we reckon with the fact that there is a verse. But they are in the Land of Israel.
The Shushan discussion is about walled cities — there it is walled. And now, moreover — here is Shushan itself, which is the source of the whole thing, and it has become such an exception. You know what, it could be that when the miracle is there, you can make them an exemption.
So you are now a city with a wall; I have no city and no wall — I have nothing. So I’m going to go back to the glory of the times when there was a wall, and you are an exception because you didn’t have a wall. And you know what, I’m going to combine the two periods. Like a servant, like a servant — perhaps one can fit you in.
And the Rambam adds another word. He says, “And there should be a remembrance of the Land of Israel through this miracle” (v’yihyeh zikaron l’Eretz Yisrael b’nes zeh) — as if there is a problem that we’re talking about the Land of Israel. It’s a problem that the redemption is here in Shushan, when it’s already after the Jews have gone to the Land of Israel.
No, you’re flying over a whole thing. There is a miracle in the Land of Israel. Let’s take it here in Shushan. Is there any book in Tanach that takes place entirely in Babylonia? Yes, there are more. But Daniel — Daniel happens where? Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Purim — it all takes place entirely in Babylonia. Ezra is about returning to the Land of Israel.
What about Daniel? Daniel in the lions’ den happens where — in Babylonia, no? The entire book takes place in Babylonia. Okay, there it wasn’t that all of Israel (Klal Yisrael) was in Babylonia; it was… we’re talking about a story, a narrative about a Jew, a story of self-sacrifice (mesiras nefesh). Here we’re talking about the matter on a national level (Klal Yisrael). Daniel is prophecies about the future…
No, but I’m saying, here there is something more, because here it is that all of Israel is not in the Land of Israel — it’s a great embarrassment that all of Israel is not in the Land of Israel. It’s an embarrassment that there is a miracle without any remembrance of the Land of Israel.
Not an embarrassment — he says, I know, he says that regarding the first matter, it shouldn’t be an embarrassment. Here he says that it is “and there should be a remembrance of the Land of Israel through this miracle.” What bothers you about what it means… It is “a remembrance of the Land of Israel through this miracle.”
Summary of the Sugya – The Rambam’s Approach from the Bottom Up
If you learn the entire sugya, I understand why this is the way, the normal way how the story goes, I don’t have the strength. But the Rambam laid down, as is his way, the approach from the back, right? From the bottom up he lays it down. According to the whole…
I can say, if one wants to try to make it a bit simpler and more accessible, then one can say that there are times when a nation is shaped.
Shushan the capital – the story takes place in Shushan’s peak times, when Achashverosh had a huge empire and everything was walled. Unfortunately, the Jews were not at their best at that time. So Jews need to remind themselves of the good times from when they were once a walled city.
The more obligating approach is that one dedicates oneself not to the times we’re looking at now, which is great lowliness, it wasn’t, or the wicked were much greater. So no, I’m going to go to a time when I was the king, Yehoshua bin Nun, when he and we entered and they killed out all the nations, we were “a great nation on high,” and that is the time to which we reckon. This is to somewhat remove the shame of… It’s a great shame, yes, Achashverosh is a huge king, and basically Mordechai finagled it and he saves the Jews.
Discussion: The History of a City
Speaker 2: According to what you’re saying, one doesn’t need to go back to Yehoshua, one can say just like a city…
Speaker 1: Ah, regarding the shame, yes, it’s the history of the nation. A city, aside from its physical geography, also has a history. When is Jerusalem? Jerusalem is a certain place, but Jerusalem is also in a certain time. Where is Jerusalem? A measure of building. Now there’s just such a thing here, it’s nothing.
Where is Shushan? Achashverosh. There was a province, etc. Aha. It says how long Achashverosh was the supreme ruler. It could be that it’s literally true. There was a period when he was in many kingdoms, and he had a peak. So that’s a peak. A wonder. I had a walled city, I had around it a hundred miles of better provinces.
So you’re ashamed that Jews are basically in poverty? Don’t go into the shame for me. So that’s very much when one is conquering. On which city, on which does the… When our walled city is by us, which cities are what? When one establishes the land, when one establishes the…
I agree with you. But the sugya is a major sugya. There’s something to think about, we don’t have the strength right now to go into it and we need to learn the plain meaning of the text, with all the questions of the plain meaning of Scripture, Chazal, and the sugya. We need to learn… But one shouldn’t misunderstand the topic, it’s actually in any case. One needs to learn the plain meaning of the verses, what the verse says, one needs to learn all the sources, the Mishnayos, and the Rishonim as they understood it. Let’s, if we ever have extra time… It’s already 15 now.
Discussion: The Connection to Torah and Place
Speaker 2: I think it’s also connected with the Torah, that before the times of Yehoshua, before Jews came to the Land of Israel, place didn’t play any role in the Torah. We learned this in a session two years ago.
Speaker 1: Okay, let’s learn.
—
Halacha 6: Bnei HaKfarim – Village Jews Who Read Earlier
The Language of the Rambam (Halacha 6)
Speaker 1: Okay, bnei hakfarim (villagers). Let’s first know clearly the halacha according to the Rambam, okay? First, the first thing is, there is in the Rambam, and the Rambam sets forth general rules of the law. Okay, now. Besides that, there’s another thing. Bnei hakfarim, yes, bnei hakfarim, which he said earlier what that is. Yes, I’m just looking in the Maggid Mishneh to see that it’s correct.
Dispute Among the Rishonim: Walled from the Days of Yehoshua – Only in the Land of Israel?
Ah, it’s interesting, there was a dispute among the Rishonim. There were Geonim and other Rishonim who wanted to say that the “walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun” doesn’t apply outside of the Land of Israel, it only works in the Land of Israel. I think they’re right. The Rambam says clearly, “whether outside the Land of Israel,” that if you know that a city in America… But the other Rishonim say that the distinction only applies in the Land of Israel.
No, because I would have said that they’re right. Why? Because we said that it goes with the verse.
Discussion: Archaeological Questions and Practical Application
Imagine someone comes along, he did research, an archaeologist. By the way, the question is an archaeological question, it’s not any… Anyway, right? Even in the Land of Israel, most cities, every third city is basically walled, and nobody follows this, the public isn’t careful about it. From the days of Yehoshua bin Nun? Well, wonder, do you know what was in the days of Yehoshua bin Nun? What’s the question altogether?
If it’s a complete ruin that has no connection anymore, no relationship, if a new state was established on the grounds of a previous one, is it forever?
The Jews took over an inheritance that continues. I’m with you, it’s a good question. The Native Americans had buildings? I agree with you. A wall doesn’t mean a barrier, a wall means, it’s understood, history. A wall is simply a symbol of the strength of a civilization.
Halacha 4 (Continued): The Hint of “Walled from the Days of Yehoshua bin Nun” – The Might of Yehoshua and the Contrast to Exile
Speaker 1: A wall is simply an expression of sovereignty. Yes, a wall is usually made to protect a city, it’s a thing. I agree with you, I’m on your side.
Speaker 2: Okay, so the other way, let’s say, it’s a wall established by Yehoshua bin Nun.
Speaker 1: Oh, I’m sorry, every wall established by Yehoshua bin Nun tells a story of the might of Yehoshua bin Nun. Because every city had a wall, and he conquered all those walled cities.
Speaker 2: Earlier you said at length.
Speaker 1: But I want to say something, a small thing. When one says “walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun,” one is saying something else too, that there’s another wall that Yehoshua conquered. Because Yehoshua waged a war, and when there’s a wall it means there was a difficult battle.
Speaker 2: Not necessarily.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, let’s say I find you a city. By the way, there is such a city, there are old cities, you know, even the wall of Jericho is a whole matter, because a wall is very difficult.
Speaker 2: Let’s say I find you a nice Torah insight, give me a minute, let’s not rush.
Speaker 1: But this is the weakness of Israel already. I want to say a Torah insight here. The weakness of Israel is not, ah, they decided that now is the important time. That’s one interpretation. The second interpretation is that it brings out to celebrate the might of Yehoshua. That’s the second novelty. There’s a third novelty, that one needs to remember the might of Yehoshua.
Because you ask a good question. I mean, I feel though that it’s not correct. Because you ask a question, that it’s not the might of Yehoshua, it’s not Yehoshua bin Nun’s wall, it’s the Canaanites’ wall. It’s the wall that Yehoshua broke when he entered. So that’s the weakness of Israel. These are all the cities that the Jews have…
Speaker 2: Okay, it’s somewhat worthwhile. One wants to go back and connect a bit with this. You know that there were the six days of Creation, and the Jews were very happy. Then regarding our matter, then regarding our matter, and… “And the hours of the king were completed according to the law in the land of Shushan.”
Speaker 1: I wanted to make a Torah insight about Yehoshua.
Speaker 2: Okay, okay, very good. You can make a Torah insight. There is a Torah insight, but the second one let’s learn once. I was in the middle of something.
Speaker 1: One thing, you have all the Torah insights. I want to know something else. I forgot what I wanted to know.
Speaker 2: You have a Torah insight, that the fact that the wall from the days of Yehoshua tells of the might of Yehoshua is a new novelty.
Speaker 1: I wanted to say like this, I wanted to say that, ah, I wanted to say that it’s not necessarily that one finds this here.
Speaker 2: You want to say that there’s a cultural continuity.
Speaker 1: I don’t believe that there’s a cultural continuity in the world, maybe in Syria, in Iran, in Arabia they’re proud that… I don’t want to say it’s false, I want to try a different approach. I don’t believe that today, in America certainly not, in Europe maybe.
I’m very excited about my little insight that I want to say here, which is a hidden hint. Because what is the weakness of the Jews in the times of Mordechai? What did Mordechai do? A little manipulator who found a way to… Such an exile-like way.
One says to the Jews, look back, there was once Yehoshua bin Nun, he didn’t go begging the king, rather he entered, there were thirty-one kings, and they were all brought down, he broke all their walls. That’s what a Jew should be! That’s Yehoshua bin Nun. When Ben-Gurion said that he was a reincarnation of Yehoshua bin Nun.
But there’s a hint in the Torah, because we see such a problem that Jews are part of a gentile culture, and they rejoice that it worked out, the king is on our side. It’s very un-Jewish, it’s very un-Land of Israel-like, it’s very un-Yehoshua bin Nun-like. Okay, at least one mentions that Yehoshua bin Nun broke a bunch of walls.
Speaker 2: Okay, now, it’s a bit funny, I understand your problem that you have, it’s not a problem what you’re saying. What I want to know is something else. What I wanted to know is that… What I want to know is… What I want to know is… Ah, so…
Discussion: Does “Walled from the Days of Yehoshua bin Nun” Apply Outside the Land of Israel?
Speaker 2: What I’m thinking is this: let’s say someone goes to… I don’t know, he finds some city that has a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, okay? Jericho.
Speaker 1: Not Jericho, not in the Land of Israel. I want to see a distinction, okay? In Cordoba. I don’t know, they tried, the gentiles with these things. Alexandria, there are very old cities.
Speaker 2: Not walled, there aren’t many old cities walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, okay? In Babylonia, in Iraq there isn’t… Iraq has cities with lineage, and…
Speaker 1: That means it’s a ruin from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun. Avraham Avinu, a ruin. Do you know how long ago Yehoshua bin Nun was? He built millennia ago. He was a very long time ago. And maybe in Cairo, some city in Egypt. The oldest walls. I already checked it. These are weak stories.
Speaker 2: It doesn’t need to have a wall today, it only needs to have had a wall then, right?
Speaker 1: Right. No, no. Luxor, okay? Well, well. Thebes, cities in Egypt could be. It would be weird, okay?
I’m thinking of an interesting question about Jericho. Jericho was walled from the days of Yehoshua, it had fallen. Yehoshua brought it down. It wasn’t walled in the days of Yehoshua.
Speaker 2: Wikipedia, they say that Jericho is the oldest city known to have had a wall, actually.
Speaker 1: Yes, it has a down side. Okay, in any case, let’s say one finds in Syria some city, okay? In Babylonia maybe there’s a city walled from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, they say.
Speaker 2: Babylonia is a city, I’ll give you a city.
Speaker 1: Okay, the question is also if one finds an old civilization in America, or…
Speaker 2: Okay, the question is about a city. He wants to argue, he comes, a Jew comes and argues, we’re going to read the Megillas Esther here on the fifteenth. Why? Because there’s a piece of Torah that’s relevant to me.
Speaker 1: I don’t agree. Why? Because that city doesn’t exist. The whole idea of “from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun” is that for us, we don’t know history, we don’t know what happened with times. We know what’s written in the Chumash. And in the Chumash it says that Jerusalem has a wall, good day, a city has a wall.
Speaker 2: Ah, hold on, it doesn’t hold anymore! Ah, interesting, that’s good. It doesn’t say it in a book, not a real Chumash.
Speaker 1: Exactly. So, for me it’s simple that outside the Land of Israel, I’m not talking about outside the Land of Israel. I’m talking about a city that’s mentioned in Tanach. If it’s not mentioned in Tanach, it doesn’t exist. It’s not part of our story, it doesn’t exist. What does it matter? What importance does it have? The matter isn’t being discussed. Do you understand what I’m saying? It has significance. It’s a part of our mesorah (tradition).
Okay, the spies come back and report, and they also say that there are walls, right?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: Fortified, fortified, fortified. It’s a symbol of might. Fine, you go to Hebron, you go do something with Hebron’s old city, I agree, where there’s not just no trees and such. But more than that I don’t agree. Do you understand what I’m saying?
Speaker 2: Yes, a good reasoning.
Speaker 1: I now understand why the Rishonim wanted to argue that it also applies outside the Land of Israel. The Rambam says it also applies outside the Land of Israel, and he brings that… And the Gemara says, ah, “Rav Ashi read in Hitzal,” and I had a doubt. As we see in the Gemara that there was a doubt whether it applies outside the Land of Israel.
Or I can say that it was those cities, those cities in Babylonia, which are already mentioned from the region, and not otherwise, not in some city in China.
Speaker 2: Ah, for example here.
Speaker 1: But already, the halacha is like the Rambam, not like Yitzchak Kleider.
Speaker 2: Let me ask you, what would you have been more proud of, when Mordechai HaTzaddik is broken, or when there’s a city with a wall?
Speaker 1: Okay, wait, you’ll get there. Now, this is the law of Shushan the capital, where there was a miracle, and I have with it the old Jerusalem of David.
Speaker 2: Okay.
The Law of Shushan – “Venoach BaChamisha Asar” (And They Rested on the Fifteenth)
Speaker 1: Now, bnei kfarim, let’s learn another law about bnei kfarim. Bnei kfarim, not someone with a head for… Bear, just follow me. What do we read?
Speaker 2: No, but I do want to understand why the miracle is symbolized with the words “venoach bachamisha asar bo” (and they rested on the fifteenth of it).
Speaker 1: It’s not symbolized. There’s a Torah teaching that the main joy is the joy of the rest when the miracle ended.
Speaker 2: Yes, but when a person is at war with his fellow, he strikes, he kills, that’s when the miracle happens! The great event is on the fourteenth.
Speaker 1: It is, because the Rambam brings precisely the verse “venoach bachamisha asar” (and they rested on the fifteenth). It’s an interesting thing, because the day before was the miracle.
Speaker 2: Why do you say from the words “venoach bachamisha asar” that we read, that this is the miracle?! Why does one need Shushan?! And that in Shushan they were busy on the fourteenth, they couldn’t make the fourteenth into Purim, and because they were busy killing?! It’s a little detail! That they killed the rest, they hadn’t finished yet, and what was in other cities?! And what was busy, on the third day they killed?!
Speaker 1: Okay, okay. Let’s learn now.
Halacha 6 (Continued): The Law of Bnei Kfarim – They Read Early on the Day of Assembly
Speaker 1: Bnei hakfarim, read for me, please. “Bnei kfarim, she’einan mitkabtzin b’vatei knesiyos ela b’Sheini uv’Chamishi, tiknu lahen she’yihu makdimin v’korin b’yom haknisa” – “Villagers, who don’t gather in synagogues except on Monday and Thursday, it was enacted for them that they should read early on the day of assembly.”
I had understood that one doesn’t need to come an extra day?! We just now learned a novel background insight, that the Megillah needs to be at least at a beginning, I know that one needs to read it in a congregation. So the villagers don’t have anything set up, it’s too far away. In a good scenario, the rabbi does this.
Speaker 2: No, there are Jews who can’t at all, not even one. They are villagers. It doesn’t say that someone is a Jew, it doesn’t say that someone is a pauper!
Speaker 1: But they don’t have a minyan (quorum).
Speaker 2: It doesn’t say they can’t. You can read into it whatever you want, but the words don’t say that. But what it does say is… it asks you… should each one read for himself?
Speaker 1: Yes… and don’t they combine it with the Torah reading?
Speaker 2: I don’t know. Again… you know, do they travel into the city to read the Torah scroll?
Speaker 1: That one doesn’t know when a congregation is lacking. By the way, it doesn’t say that they gather to the city. It says they gather to the synagogues. It doesn’t say anything about a city.
Speaker 2: And the Rambam noticed this?
Speaker 1: Oh, interesting. But it could be that he understands this automatically, that in the villages there are no synagogues, because Jews should rejoice. So they go to the city where the synagogues are. So they go to them, where they have next to a central gathering place. But they should be like in the corner.
It’s a “kevurim” meaning the villagers’ graves, in any case, on the thirteenth and fourteenth and fifteenth, and they read on that day, and if it falls on a different day, other than Monday and Thursday, they advance it and read on the Monday and Thursday closest to the fourteenth. That is the reasoning there.
So you’re saying that here we see that a megillah is something, a matter that one sees.
Discussion: What Does “Yom HaKenisah” Mean – Gathering in the Village or Entering the City?
Speaker 1: But here it’s a bit different from your answer that the reading of the Megillah (krias hamegillah) is part of the feasting and rejoicing (mishteh v’simcha). Here we see that it’s a technical matter of gathering together on the day of assembly (yom hakenisah) and hearing the Megillah reading. Furthermore…
Speaker 2: You’re asking a good question (kushya).
Speaker 1: I’ve refuted my own answer, nice?
Speaker 2: No, on the contrary, it’s a proof to my answer. Just as… but one needs to gather together. Does one need a quorum of ten (minyan)?
Speaker 1: You’re being foolish.
Speaker 2: No, but it’s established on the day of assembly. It’s not something that was done as part of the great feast (seudah). It’s something like one should gather together in the study hall (beis hamidrash) and read. It’s a matter of reading, a reading that one does at the time of assembly. They celebrate, hello. It’s not that men, women, and children came into the city.
Speaker 1: Apparently not, because they didn’t come for the Torah reading (krias haTorah).
Speaker 2: The same people… I don’t understand what you’re saying.
Speaker 1: No, the same women didn’t come to the Torah reading on Monday and Thursday.
Speaker 2: If they didn’t conduct Torah reading on Monday and Thursday.
Speaker 1: If Megillah reading, yes.
Speaker 2: If you’re told that women are obligated in Megillah reading (nashim chayavos b’krias hamegillah). Soon one can see if they make the feast then.
Speaker 1: That’s a good question.
Speaker 2: No, it’s a bit strange, because if… okay, I’m talking about certain people. Once you say that you need to come in with the whole family, you can already stay for the day of Purim. What is Purim? Let’s first learn…
Speaker 1: No, okay. Let’s first learn what it says, afterwards we’ll look for other answers.
Question: If Yom HaKenisah Means Entering the City, Who Reads for the Village Dwellers?
Speaker 2: If you’re also correct that yom hakenisah means in the village. Because if not, the townspeople (bnei ayaros) need to read on their day. So nobody from them goes to read in the city. A person from the countryside comes to the city, and he has their Purim, who goes to read for them? The city dwellers read in their own city. So the good point about traveling is as you say that the Rambam means that traveling refers to the village dwellers who gather together.
Speaker 1: I say so. Until now I had the view that the village dwellers come to the city, and I remember from the Gemara that one also comes for… I don’t remember for what other things, and they come to the city to hear the Torah reading. But in practice, it could be that the village dwellers themselves lived more isolated, there was one study hall where everyone walked to, and they read the Torah there.
Speaker 2: And you’re saying that this is a good interpretation (pshat), because the other interpretation I understand cannot be, because if in the city itself they read on the fourteenth, what happens? There’s no Megillah reading in the study hall. There’s Torah reading in the study hall. Megillah reading specifically for the village dwellers, how did it work? But a study hall in the village works very well, because that is the Purim of the villages.
Speaker 1: There’s no time. Let’s learn…
Speaker 2: Okay, hundred percent, no problem.
Halacha 7: Details of the Advancement – Which Days One Advances To
Speaker 1: Let’s learn what it says. “How so? The general rule is this: if the fourteenth falls on Monday or Thursday, they read on that day.” And if it falls on a different day, they read on the nearest preceding one. And he goes through all the details, it doesn’t matter. We already know everything we need to know. But he says that the earliest is the eleventh. If it’s Tuesday, there’s a day before it, which is the thirteenth. If it’s Wednesday, it’s Monday, which is the twelfth.
The Requirement of Ten for Those Who Advance
He says, “In all these cases where they advance and read, they do not read it with fewer than ten.”
Speaker 2: What does it mean, in Meah Shearim I can read publicly alone? Can I?
Speaker 1: As you said, because then there is indeed a type of Megillah reading.
Speaker 2: What is the distinction for why specifically it needs to be no fewer than ten?
The Maggid Mishneh and Ra’avad: The Requirement of Ten as Ideal Practice
Speaker 1: I’m looking into it. The Maggid Mishneh says, the Ra’avad establishes everything, but publicly itself the mitzvah requires ten. The question is, why does the Rambam say here that those who advance also need ten for public reading? After all, Rava states in the Gemara that he said ten are needed. Rav himself who disagrees with him, we are concerned for Rava’s opinion. Rav himself was also concerned for Rava, in any case.
Rav said: at its proper time, even an individual; not at its proper time, with ten. The Rambam rules according to Rav’s law. Rav said at its proper time an individual suffices, not at its proper time requires ten, it must be with ten.
Speaker 2: Why does Rav say so? What is the reason why?
Speaker 1: The Rambam doesn’t give a reason why. He doesn’t say.
Speaker 2: Rava says, the holy Rav who argues, correct?
Speaker 1: Yes, that Rava says yes, it must be with ten. And even Rav who says an individual suffices, it does say in the Gemara that he was concerned for Rava’s opinion, he did seek to have a minyan. Therefore he says, in practice it comes out that if one can only do it individually, one may do it individually, even when advancing. And if one can have ten, and when advancing, and if one can have ten, and when there are ten. Ideally (l’chatchilah) one always needs ten. So concludes the Ra’avad.
The Ra’avad says that being concerned for Rava is obvious. Rather, even according to the one who says ten are needed. Rav said that at its proper time one doesn’t need a minyan, not at its proper time one does. Why, we don’t know. I mean, do you understand why?
Insight: The Reason for Ten Lies in “Gathering Together”
Speaker 2: Because the whole concept of why the village dwellers would advance is because they gather together. When they gather together, you can’t say they go and do it individually. They gather together, you have no right to advance.
Speaker 1: Exactly the opposite, you could say. True. Alright.
Rav Asi’s Position and the Rambam’s Ruling
So, Rav Asi argued that one always needs ten. And regarding this, the Gemara states that sometimes Rav Ashi did not follow Rav Asi. The Rambam ruled like Rabbah, not like Rav Asi. Correct?
Speaker 2: That’s all. Is there something more that I need to know?
Speaker 1: The Ra’avad says however that one should indeed have ten like Rav Asi, and therefore one authority, the Ra’avad, says this is a mitzvah. I already know what he wants from the Ra’avad.
Question on the Rambam’s Language
But the Rambam’s language is a bit interesting, because one needs to state the halacha more strongly. One needs to say the halacha that one can advance only when advancing with ten, but if there’s no minyan, should they all say it individually in public? It comes out the other way, it comes out that all those who advance do not read except with ten. It must be, one must be able to say more that the law of the village dwellers has to do with the fact that they are…
Insight: “Gathering Together” Hints at the Requirement of Ten
Ah, what I want to say is that essentially the halacha is already hinted at in the word “those who do not gather except on the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth”, that then it is a gathering. According to what I’ve been suggesting to you, that is the reason.
But the Rambam isn’t entirely… it actually just occurred to me, it occurred to me. But the Rambam says here, what he states, he doesn’t give the reasons about Torah and all those things. He says very well, he says “those who do not gather for the Torah portions except on the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth”, he states the reason here very clearly. He doesn’t just say it casually, he doesn’t just use the words casually. He says publicizing the miracle (pirsumei nisa), “those who do not gather for the Torah portions except on the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth”, therefore they should then read the Megillah. And the conclusion fits very well with this.
Speaker 2: I agree, but what are you doing with your people? Should everyone go home and read publicly?
Speaker 1: Of course not! It’s the whole arrangement of “gathering together” and it falls apart.
Speaker 2: One minute. Ah, you know already, “gathering together” means a minyan, as it were. Very good.
Speaker 1: It needs to be said. It could be this is logical reasoning (s’vara), but it needs to be said.
The Principle of “In a Multitude of People is the King’s Glory” – An Additional Virtue
Okay, I don’t know what the Ra’avad is talking about, the Ra’avad in the halachos that the Rambam stated in the halachos, I don’t know. What is the reason why it should need to be ten? Every sacred matter (davar shebikdusha) requires ten? That doesn’t mean… okay, let’s move on. I don’t know.
Speaker 2: You haven’t learned the Gemara, no?
Speaker 1: I have the Maggid Mishneh just as you do.
Speaker 2: Ah, you’re looking at the Gemara? Okay. Ah… “Blessed is He who sanctifies His name.”
Speaker 1: Maggid Mishneh, beginning, “Blessed is He who sanctifies His name.” Everyone. There’s a sharp Rashba in the laws of Eruvin (Hilchos Eruvin), chapter 202. He has something to read in life. There he doesn’t say at all that one doesn’t fast on the twelfth.
Speaker 2: Right. That one doesn’t fast on the twelfth, but still one should… there is a virtue of “Blessed is He who sanctifies His name.”
Speaker 1: So the virtue is not the reason for the halacha. The virtue is an additional virtue, even according to the one who says that one doesn’t fast at all, that it’s not required at all, there is still a concept. It’s not a law in the essence of Megillah reading, rather it’s a different general law of “Blessed is He who sanctifies His name,” of performing mitzvos publicly. Okay.
Halacha 8: Definition of “Village” – What is a Village?
Speaker 1: Now, village (kfar). I have time, I’ve already learned. Village… Now, the Lechem Mishneh has a discussion about this. “On the day of assembly when they were all in their village.” Already, from the language it’s implied that there was a gathering.
Speaker 2: Very good.
Speaker 1: The Lechem Mishneh will elaborate on this point. Okay. So apparently he agrees with me, the Lechem Mishneh. He says that this is a village, one doesn’t enter instead of a village. “They gather on their day of assembly.” It fits very well.
Village, halacha 8. Yes, let’s finish this. Village, “that they enter on Monday and Thursday.” Yes. “And they only read it in synagogues.”
Speaker 2: How is that forbidden?
Speaker 1: One minute. Okay.
The Rambam’s Definition of a Village
Now he goes back to the first foundational principle. They said “village,” they didn’t say what a village means, Master of the Universe. Now he’s going to tell us what a village means. What is the distinction of a village? What is the distinction of a village?
Speaker 2: Ah, he said earlier… he began, he gave the definition before, he said…
Speaker 1: Yes, what?
Speaker 2: He said the distinction between a walled city (krach) and a city (ir), he said the distinction between a city and a village.
Speaker 1: Ah, walled city and city, correct. “A village that they enter on Monday and Thursday, and they only read it in synagogues.” Very good.
That’s good! What is a village? It says here, he says as follows: “The settlement that was given to the synagogue for the needs of the community, it is like a village and they advance and read on the day of assembly.” Did you hear? There’s a powerful statement here.
—
Halacha 8 (continued): A City That Doesn’t Have Ten Men – “Its Remedy is Its Detriment”
Speaker 1: Ah, I think he’s correct. “A village that doesn’t have ten idle men (batlanim), five don’t read in it, only on the fourteenth.” Very good. “And a city that has ten idle men, they read in it in the synagogue for the needs of the community, and it is considered like a village, and they advance and read on the day of assembly.” Did you hear? Very good.
There’s a powerful statement here. What’s good? What’s good? What does a village mean? A village means a place that doesn’t have a permanent minyan. Permanent idle men (batlanim). A minyan of regular attendees. Right. Who are always there. But when there’s a minyan of non-idle men, you don’t have a minyan, because there’s always the… Rashi explains. Who says this? I say this. But when you do have ten permanent idle men, even if you don’t have… because what is the distinction between a village and a walled city? Now we’ll understand. A village and a city, the distinction is that a village doesn’t have a permanent study hall, only when they still gather together, and a city has a permanent study hall.
Now, what does it mean a city has a permanent study hall? There need to be ten people who don’t have work, correct? Because the worker, he can’t come to the study hall every day. Maybe Monday and Thursday he can come, you call him to be counted, but he can’t come every day. So, a city needs to have ten idle men. Eighteen. So the question is, the ten idle men… So village and city, let’s put it this way, village and city have a basic minyan. A city means a town, a village means such a hamlet. But what is the halacha? Regarding our halacha, regarding the law of the city wall, a city that doesn’t have ten idle men is like a village, it’s not actually a village, it’s like a village. Regarding this halacha, what does it mean? That one can read there with advancement, because what makes sense? Because you don’t have a minyan every day. So that’s the point, as the Chafetz Chaim said regarding Radin.
The Case of “There Aren’t Ten People” – Its Remedy is Its Detriment
But from him, “there aren’t ten people in it”, yes? There aren’t even ten people at all, fine. Yes. Its remedy is its detriment (takanas’o kilkul’o). What does “its remedy is its detriment” mean? Its remedy and there aren’t ten people in it. What is the better option? What is the remedy? The one who is disadvantaged when he doesn’t have ten people, and he has a remedy that he has more days when he can read. What? Read again. He has fewer days! Indeed, its remedy is what? That the person doesn’t have ten people? What is the remedy in that?
Speaker 2: And there aren’t ten people in it. Ten people, he doesn’t mean the same ten idle men at all. Not at all, not even ten people. I would imagine. So its remedy, they’re now going to view him as a village, so that’s his detriment.
Speaker 1: No, they’re going to… because one doesn’t advance with fewer than ten, therefore he doesn’t advance, he remains like a city, a large city, and they only read at its proper time. He comes back to what he said that only having a minyan of people together allows advancement. If there are fewer people…
Speaker 2: Oh, I’m not trying to understand. I understand that its remedy is its detriment. What is the remedy of this village? I don’t understand. That a whole large city but it doesn’t have ten people for a minyan.
Speaker 1: So what is the remedy? Tell me, explain “its remedy,” the meaning of the words. Its remedy is its detriment.
Speaker 2: That technically the Jews apparently have the enactment that they can advance because they don’t have their own permanent minyan. But that is their detriment because they’re indeed not a city since they don’t have ten, but that also harms them because they can’t be like the village, since a village can’t pray because one doesn’t advance except with ten.
Speaker 1: Because why? Because one doesn’t advance except with ten. It’s simply a problem. They should meet up, they should certainly get a minyan.
Speaker 2: I don’t know. Ah, something else. I don’t understand what it means. You understand?
Speaker 1: Simply, he should have a problem, he doesn’t have a minyan. Okay, so it’s obvious. But one doesn’t need to make a whole big fuss about it. I don’t know anymore. He doesn’t have a minyan, so it’s a problem. There’s no minyan. What can one do? I don’t need a minyan. Don’t need a minyan at all. That’s the great novelty (chiddush).
So, what does he say? It says… your question to me. What I don’t understand is what we should make of it. Not at its proper time, how they resolve the difficulty, not at its proper time with twenty people. Here not with advancement, he concludes. Ah, a great city.
The Gilyon Maharsha – Its Detriment is Its Remedy
Oh, he says the opposite, that the detriment is the remedy. The remedy is… you see that the advantage is when a person can indeed be together and have Purim like all Jews. That’s the word? The Lechem Mishneh doesn’t say remedy and detriment. He says the opposite. He is… that he doesn’t have enough people. That is his remedy, that anyway he has Purim like everyone, and he can read alone.
It says the people of the large city have a benefit that they can read, that they don’t have the restriction that he must only have ten. Only those who advance need ten. He says, this is… that the person doesn’t have a minyan. His detriment, that he doesn’t have a minyan. That is his remedy, that makes him better, that he can read alone on the fourteenth.
It’s an interesting thing, one needs to understand. What happens with someone who comes before, who says I want to read differently specifically on the fourteenth. It’s only a remedy for those who can’t, because… one needs to understand, this is a strange thing, because the village dwellers are made to have it harder, they must have a minyan. Yes, if one goes with this. The village dwellers can only advance with fewer than ten. But the one who doesn’t advance, doesn’t advance because he can’t have fewer than ten.
What do I do, I’m a benchwarmer, he says one day traveling and one day doing. Whatever, old dreams, the end of dreams. I’m going to read specifically for all Jews. On the day of the 14th. It appears here that when he is fully inclusive, what he has no ten. This is an enactment that he can read on the day of the 14th. But let’s see what the Rambam says. But the translation isn’t clear. Maybe the Oz V’Hadar will help me with the translation. Sometimes it helps.
The Rambam and the Raavad – “And There Are Not Ten Jews in It”
“And there are not ten Jews in it.” The others learn that it doesn’t mean there aren’t ten Jews, but rather a town that doesn’t have ten people doesn’t even have the status of a village (kfar). Is that what it says here?
The Rambam says, what does the Raavad say? “The Raavad wrote: ‘and it has no reason.'” The Raavad understands that the Rambam says “it has neither the status of a village nor anything.” The Rambam says that ancient villages, a place that doesn’t have ten people, is not a place unto itself. He follows the whole world, he is a person of the great city of the world. He has no city, and he brings a proof from the law of the subverted city (ir ha-nidachat). A subverted city is not called a city. But I haven’t seen that the Rambam says “and there are not ten Jews in it” at all, that there aren’t ten Jews.
He explains, the Gilyon Maharsha explains it this way: “Takanta kol kalta, kol kalta takanta” — essentially. It’s backwards. It should have been “takanta kol kalta,” not “kol kalta takanta.” It’s not clear. Okay, it starts with a tav, it ends with “kol kalta.”
So the Raavad says that perhaps just as with a subverted city, which must have ten people — fewer than ten people and it’s not even a city, it’s nothing — you can still go in the Land of Israel until the conditions of the 14th day are met.
In any case, we are in doubt. “I always say to you ten; fewer than ten, it is a village.” The Raavad says it could have been ten, but it’s not true. It’s a village, he follows the 15th. In short, the Raavad disagrees with the entire halacha.
The Yerushalmi and the Raavad
But there is a Yerushalmi. What do the others say? There is a Yerushalmi. The Raavad may disagree with a Yerushalmi too, no?
Speaker 2: No, the Raavad didn’t know that the language “takanta kol kalta” is a Yerushalmi expression. He doesn’t see such a thing, right? What he means is that he brings a Yerushalmi?
Speaker 1: Yes, but he already fulfilled the Yerushalmi by saying earlier that one advances the reading when there are fewer than ten, right? Okay, in the wilderness we say, let’s finish the halachot after…
Speaker 2: But he already advanced it on the day of entry.
Speaker 1: Yes, but in general this entire halacha — does one need this during the time of the kingdom?
—
Halacha 9: “In This Time, One Reads Only at Its Proper Time”
The Rambam’s Words
An interesting expression. What does “kingdom” mean? “But in this time, one reads only at its proper time, which is the fourteenth day and the fifteenth day. Residents of villages and towns read on the fourteenth, and residents of walled cities read on the fifteenth.”
What does “at its proper time” mean? The Rambam doesn’t say why. Okay, he doesn’t say why. That is the simple meaning for us. So says the Gemara: “We have learned: from the time that the enactments of Israel changed from this time, one reads only at its proper time.” These are the words of the kingdom of Israel. The Rambam is contradicted. “They changed from their enactment, Israel changed from this time.”
Rabbi Yehuda – “Everyone Looks to It”
Rabbi Yehuda says, “Everyone looks to it (ha-kol mistaklin bah).” What does “everyone looks to it” mean? The Gemara understood that this means because the poor need to have money, and they know when to come at the right time.
The Kesef Mishneh’s Explanation
The Kesef Mishneh says as follows: “At a time when the hand of the gentiles is strong, and they cannot go and come to fulfill the mitzvot completely.” It’s very interesting. So, as if it’s only a matter of servitude — you come home, you’ll come in when the kingdom says. It’s not clear what “the hand of the gentiles is strong” means. It’s not clear. He perhaps explains that the Rambam means to say that since “the hand of the gentiles is strong,” consequently the village doesn’t necessarily have a synagogue at all, so one can’t make such general arrangements. It’s not clear. The simple meaning of the Gemara has to do with the matter of the poor traveling to the place of Megillah reading.
The Version “Mistaknin Bah” – Language of Danger
“And there are those who read ‘mistaknin bah’ (they are endangered by it).” It’s a danger, so therefore what? “Mistaknin bah” means what? That the poor are endangered by it, looking out for it? Again, the Gemara — that’s one explanation. But the Gemara is, there are those who read, says the Raavad, “everyone is endangered” — with a language of danger. What does “endangered” mean? They would specifically travel to… as a danger, so let’s not create dangers. What, the danger is the extra going into the city?
Speaker 2: Yes, they crowd in, they crowd, they crowd in.
Speaker 1: But the Rambam speaks of dangers in the village. Whatever it is, too many dangers is not good. Once, and the danger of Chanukah is a type of thing. That’s how it sounds. According to the second version which is the opposite, they said that the danger makes it a leniency of “one who leaves it on his table.” Here the danger makes it a proof.
—
Halacha 4 (Continued): “Years in Their Proper Order” – What Does This Mean?
Speaker 1:
What is “correcting”? One travels specifically to… as dangers. What is the danger of extra going into the city? Yes, with too much doing. But the Rambam says that one corrects in the village. Whatever it is, too many corrections in the good. Once… that’s how it sounds. According to the second version that the Rambam brings, only the danger makes it a leniency of rest for the Divine Presence. Here he is in danger, making it a…
What does “years in their proper order (shanim k’tikkunan)” come in? What does it mean? The Rambam inserted his own foundation. The kingdom of Israel. I thought about this though… The Rambam says, kingdom is when “years are in their proper order.” That means… what does “shanim k’tikkunan” mean for a good year? Translation… The Chafetz Chaim was worth words. The Chafetz Chaim was worth words. The Rambam is an advocate. Tell me the translation.
Speaker 2:
“Shanim k’tikkunan” means to say when they sanctify the new month based on the sighting of the moon, and things are in their proper order.
Speaker 1:
Right, so then one might think perhaps there is permission to learn here… because it doesn’t concern me, because Adar II is not really Adar… no, no, no, no, no. I thought that one must learn “shanim k’tikkunan” means that the beit din clarifies the months — I mean, they announce further when Pesach is. So there is an explanation here. Who says this explanation? It’s a nice explanation. I’m sure it’s written somewhere; I didn’t make up everything. One worries about Pesach.
Speaker 2:
Ah, very interesting.
Speaker 1:
The Rambam, however, doesn’t learn it that way. The Rambam says it’s the kingdom of Israel. I don’t know what Israel has to do with it. So, one can think that because there was “they accepted it willingly (hodu v’kibluhu),” the Jews began to worry about the new mitzvot that lay before them now. What do I need to do now? He began to worry about the great next mitzvah which would be Pesach. Okay. Thirty days before the festival. There’s a contradiction; I’ll tackle it soon. I don’t know. Okay, let’s finish the halachot. Yes.
—
Halacha 10: A City Resident Who Went to a Walled City and a Walled City Resident Who Went to a City
Speaker 1:
Okay, “A city resident who went to a walled city, and a walled city resident who went to a city — if his intention is to return to his place at the time of his reading, he reads according to his place.”
So it says here, alone?
Speaker 2:
Alone.
Speaker 1:
The Rambam indeed learns that a person can personally read alone. Why shouldn’t he? But one shouldn’t say that it’s a greater mitzvah for him to read with the entire congregation. No, because it’s not his day. “He reads according to his place.” He reads today, alone. He doesn’t have tomorrow, Shushan Purim, to hear in the beit midrash, and the walled city — he reads the Megillah alone a day before. So it says in the Rambam that one can read alone. Only the village residents need a minyan — since they advance the reading with ten. But when a person reads at his proper time, he can read alone.
“And if not — if his intention is to return only after the time of reading — he reads with the people of the place where he is.”
What is the definition of a walled city (krakh)? He says, “A walled city — anything adjacent to it and anything visible with it, and he brings proof from ‘more than two thousand cubits.'” Just as we learned not long ago regarding Shabbat, a traveling walled city “reads on the fifteenth.”
—
Halacha 11: A City That Doesn’t Know When It Was Established – Doubtful Walled City
Speaker 1:
“A city that doesn’t know when it was established, whether it was destroyed in the time of Joshua or not, reads on both days — the fourteenth and the fifteenth — and only makes a blessing on them.”
And he would presumably make a blessing?
Speaker 2:
Yes, “on the reading of the Megillah (al mikra megillah).”
Speaker 1:
Ah, a blessing, but he can only make it once. “Al mikra megillah on the fourteenth only.” Why is “reading the Megillah” rabbinic? I mean, a doubt in a rabbinic matter is ruled leniently (sefeika d’rabbanan l’kula). He shouldn’t need to read at all then.
Speaker 2:
No, a doubt in a rabbinic matter means when the entire thing is a decree.
Speaker 1:
I mean, it’s also like rabbinic decrees. I don’t know if one would say regarding a rabbinic egg. But you can say there are two categories — a doubt in a Torah matter is ruled stringently (sefeika d’oraita l’chumra). He is certainly obligated; the question is on which day he is obligated.
Speaker 2:
Ah, ah, there is no doubt in the obligation. One reads…
Speaker 1:
Ah, that’s what the Chacham Tzvi already says regarding the blessing — once you’ve read on the fourteenth day, you’ve already fulfilled your obligation. So one can say now it’s a rabbinic doubt ruled leniently. I don’t know.
Let’s learn an important halacha about… about… about… but which reading is only the additional one? If my reading is the majority of the world.
—
Halacha 13: One Does Not Read the Megillah on Shabbat
Speaker 1:
The last halacha is from this year, yes, when we speak about Shabbat. Reading the Megillah on the first occasion, when it falls out in the year when the month is brought close, Adar II is at its proper time. Okay.
“One does not read the Megillah on Shabbat.” This is a basic principle in learning the Gemara: “Since not everyone is proficient in reading it, and they might carry four cubits in the public domain. For everyone is obligated in reading it, and not everyone is proficient in reading it.”
Speaker 2:
Yes, that language also appears regarding the blowing of the shofar?
Speaker 1:
I don’t remember. Yes, it’s the same.
“Therefore, if the time of its reading falls on Shabbat, one advances and reads it before Shabbat. And one asks and expounds on the laws of Purim on that day of Shabbat, in order to mention that it is Purim.”
It’s Shabbat, but what does one do that is Purim-like on that Shabbat? One learns about Purim. What is the concept of “in order to mention that it is Purim”? It’s an interesting thing, “to mention.” Either you do the mitzvot or not. What is this “to mention that it is Purim”? Why do you need such a mitzvah? Not to forget that it’s Purim. What is the concept?
The entire Purim is about not forgetting — “to make known that all your hope.” A Jew must not forget. “Do not forget” — “you shall erase… do not forget.” A Jew must not forget that it’s Purim. It’s an interesting thing.
But why don’t we say, for example, that also the village residents or the town residents should, on the day that is actually Purim, “mention that it is Purim”? They don’t have this mitzvah. The village residents who already read on the 11th — they should also do something “to mention that it is Purim” on… which Jews?
Speaker 2:
The Jews who already read on the 11th. They already read. Whether they have other mitzvot is a question in general — whether other mitzvot were enacted for them.
Speaker 1:
They have the other mitzvot of the holiday, that’s what you mean to say.
Speaker 2:
No, but it seemed to me that when it’s Shabbat, it’s not as if Purim was established on a different day.
Speaker 1:
Just as the time of Purim was advanced. As if Purim is Shabbat, then perhaps there is an extra law that the reading is a day before Shabbat, instead of Shabbat. Consequently, I’m thinking, why for example regarding the village residents does one already need the “to mention that it is Shabbat”? It’s “to mention that it is Purim,” I mean. Because he’s already going to have his Purim on the 14th. Here it only says they advance the reading. Okay, one needs to see indeed regarding the other mitzvot.
I want to say, it’s not the “at their times” like what you said earlier. “At their times” — there are many times. There isn’t another time that if it’s Shabbat, it’s on a different day. It’s not the same category. Regarding this, there is the “to mention that it is Purim.”
—
Halacha 14: How So – When Purim Falls on Shabbat
Speaker 1:
Further. “How so? The fourteenth day that falls on Shabbat — town residents advance and read on Friday, and walled city residents read at their proper time on Sunday. If the fifteenth falls on Shabbat, walled city residents advance and read on Friday, which is the fourteenth day” — very good — “and town residents read on that same day, which is their proper time, and it turns out that everyone reads on the fourteenth.” Very good, just as happened this year.
It’s a year of unity. Shabbat unites Jews. The Purim that comes on Shabbat — not just any Shabbat. Okay. It could be that on Shabbat all Jews become like those surrounded by walls, yes? Because the eruv — everything is spoken of as one domain. Okay. Why doesn’t that work now?