Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 8, scan section 41

who has no friends, which has the preference ? Shall we assume the Megilla has the preference, because it proclaims the miracle ; or the burying has preference, for the honor of man ? After he had considered, he himself decided that the burying has pref- erence, as the Master said (Sabbath, p. 85) : Great is the honor of man, which supersedes even a negative commandment of the Torah. The text says: R. Joshua b. Levi said that " a large city and its neighborhood," etc., are considered as the city itself. We have learned in a Boraitha, in addition to this : If it is in the neighborhood, even if it cannot be seen from a distance together with the city; and when it can be seen with the city, although it is not near the city. (This is explained, when the city is in a valley or on a mountain.) R. Joshua b. Levi says again: A city where the inhabitants had resided before, and later it was surrounded with a wall, must be considered as a village. Why so ? Because it is writ- ten [Lev. xxv. 29]: " And if a man sell a dwelling-house in a walled city." Whence we may infer that the city was walled before he dwelt in it, but not if he had dwelt in it and afterward it was walled. He says again: A city where there are not ten TRACT MEGILLA. 7 unemployed men * who devote all their time to the study of the Law must be considered as a village. What does he come to teach us ? Did we not learn this in the following Mishna: What is called a great city ? If there are ten unemployed men and less than this it is a village ? His teaching is needed to tell us that, even if it was a great city and men came thither from the whole world, if there are fewer than ten men unemployed there, it is considered as a village. The same says again: A large city that was destroyed, and afterward was rebuilt, must be consid- ered as a large city. What is meant by destroying ? Shall we assume it is meant that the walls were destroyed ? Then if they were only rebuilt it is considered a large city, and not otherwise ? Did we not learn in a Boraitha, R. Eliezer b. R. Jose said: It is written [ibid. 30]: " The house in the city which has a wall," from which we infer, which has had a wall previ- ously, even though it has not now ? Nay, what is meant by the expression " destroyed " is, that it has not now ten unemployed men (who learn the Law). R. Joshua b. Levi says again: It is obligatory for women to hear the reading of the Megilla, because they benefited also by the same miracle. He says again: If the Feast of Purim falls on Sabbath, it may be lectured about the duties of this day (Purim). Why only the Feast of Esther ? Is this not a rule for all festivals ? Did we not learn in a Boraitha: Moses ordained that the Israelites should lecture on the duties of each day: the Halakhoth of Passover on Passover, those of Pentecost on Pentecost, and those of Tabernacles on the Feast of Tabernacles ? One might say, we shall take a precautionary measure not to lecture about the Megilla, lest one carry it four ells in public ground. As Rabha explains further on, he comes to teach us that such a precautionary measure is not taken about lecturing. The same says again: So also said R. Helbu in the name of Ulla: One is obliged to read the Megilla in the evening, and to repeat it in the daytime, as it is written [Ps. xxx. 13]: " To the end that my glorious soul may sing praise to thee, and never be silent. O Lord my God ! forever will I give thanks unto thee." (As this psalm in the Pesiqtha is interpreted to refer to Mordecai and Esther, he explains '* may sing praise to thee" means to read the Megilla in the night, and " never be silent " means to read it in the day.) * The Hebrew term for this is " Batlonim." The true meaning is that eveiy city must hire ten persons who shall do nothing but study and pray. 8 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. " Inhabitants of villages shall read," etc. R. Hanina said: The sages made it easier for the inhabitants of villages to read on the days of assembly, because they usually supply with water and food the inhabitants of towns on those days. ' ' How is to be understood ? ' If it falls on Monday, ' ' ' etc. Why, in the first part of the Mishna, does it begin with the order of the days of the month and when it comes to explain it, it begins with the order of the days of the week ? (It does not say " read on the 15th," but " on the morrow.") Because con- fusion between the numbers of the days in the month and in the week would have arisen, therefore it begins with the dates of the month alone. '* If it fell on the eve of Sabbath," etc. According to whom is this Mishna ? According to Rabbi, or according to R. Jose ? Which Rabbi and R. Jose ? Of the following Boraitha: If it falls on the eve of Sabbath, villages and large open cities used to read it on the day of assembly, and inhabitants of walled towns read it on that same day. Said Rabbi: I say that the large open towns must not have the appointed time postponed, and must be equal to walled towns, and both read the same day. And which R. Jose ? From the following Tosephtha: If it falls on the eve of Sabbath, the inhabitants of walled towns and vil- lages read on the day of assembly, and the large open cities read on the appointed day. R. Jose, however, said: The inhabitants of walled towns do not read in advance of those of the large cities, but both read on the appointed day. But does Rabbi hold that for the inhabitants of large cities we do not change for the day of assembly ? Did we not learn in another Boraitha : If the Feast of Purim falls on Sabbath, the inhabitants of villages read in advance on the previous assembly day, and the inhab- itants of large open cities read on the eve of Sabbath, and those of walled towns on the day following ? As the appointed day has already been changed for the inhabitants of large cities for the previous day, (I say) it shall be fixed on a day before, which is the assembly day ? What comparison is this ? In case of the above Boraitha the right-time was on Sabbath, and as they had it changed it was set two days before ; but in the previous Bo- raitha the right-time was the eve of Sabbath, why should it be changed ? According to whom is what R. Helbu said in the name of R. Huna, as follows: If the Feast of Purim fall on Sab- bath all is postponed for the day of assembly (Thursday). [What is meant by " all" ? Is it possible, " all " ? Do not the inhab- TRACT MEGILLA. 9 itants of a walled town read it on the Sabbath itself ? It means, for those for whom it has to be postponed, it shall be set on the assembly day.] This will be according to Rabbi. We see, however, that all agree that the Megilla must not be