Parallel
מגילה 18
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Afterwards shall the children of Israel return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king. And when David comes, prayer will come, as it says. Even then will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer. And when prayer has come, the Temple service will come, as it says, Their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable upon mine altar. And when the service comes, thanksgiving will come, as it says. Whoso offereth the sacrifice of thanksgiving honoureth me. What was their reason for inserting the priestly benediction after thanksgiving? Because it is written, And Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and he came down from offering the sin-offering and the burnt-offering and the peace-offerings. But cannot I say that he did this before the service? — Do not imagine such a thing. For it is written, ‘and he came down from offering’. Is it written ‘to offer’? It is written, ‘from offering’. Why not then say it [the priestly benediction] after the [blessing of] the Temple service? — Do not imagine such a thing, since it is written, whoso offereth the sacrifice of thankgiving. Why base yourself upon this verse? Why not upon the other? — It is reasonable to regard service and thanksgiving as one. What was their reason for having ‘give peace’ said after the priestly benediction? — Because it is written, So they [the priests] shall put my name upon the children of Israel, and [then] I shall bless them; and the blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, is peace, as it says, The Lord shall bless his people with peace. Seeing now that a hundred and twenty elders, among whom were many prophets. drew up the prayers in the proper order, why did Simeon the Pakulite formulate them? — They were forgotten, and he formulated them afresh. Beyond this it is forbidden to declare the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He. For R. Eleazar said: What is the meaning of the verse, Who can express the mighty acts of the Lord, or make all his praise to be heard? For whom is it fitting to express the mighty acts of the Lord? For one who can make all his praise to be heard. Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Johanan: One who descants upon the praises of the Holy One, blessed be He, to excess is uprooted from the world, as it says, Shall it be told to him that I should speak? Should a man [try to] say, surely he would be swallowed up. R. Judah a man of Kefar Gibboraya, or, as some say, of Kefar Gibbor Hayil, gave the following homily: What is meant by the verse, For thee silence is praise? The best medicine of all is silence. When R. Dimi came, he said: In the West they say: A word is worth a sela’, silence two sela's. IF ONE READS IT BY HEART, HE HAS NOT PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION. Whence this rule? — Raba said: We explain the expression zekirah in one passage from its use in another. It is written here, And these days shall be nizkarim [remembered] and it is written elsewhere, Write this le-zikaron [for a memorial] in the book. Just as there it was to be in a book, so here it must be in a book. But how do we know that this ‘nizkarim’ implies ‘uttering’? Perhaps it means mere reading with the eyes? — Do not imagine such a thing, since it his been taught: ‘Remember’ [zakor]. Am I to say, this means only with the mind? When the text says, thou shalt not forget, the injunction against mental forgetfulness is already given. What then am I to make of ‘remember’? This must mean, by utterance. IF ONE READS IT IN A TRANSLATION, HE HAS NOT PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION. How are we to understand this? Are we to suppose that it is written in Hebrew and he reads it in a translaion? This is the same as reading by heart! — It is required for the case where it is written in a translation and he reads it in a translation. IT MAY, HOWEVER, BE READ TO THOSE WHO DO NOT SPEAK HEBREW IN A LANGUAGE OTHER THAN HEBREW. But you have just said, IF ONE READS IT IN ANY [OTHER] LANGUAGE HE HAS NOT PERFORMER HIS OBLIGATION? — Rab and Samuel both answered that what is referred to here is the Greek vernacular. How are we to understand this? Shall we say that it is written in Hebrew and he reads it in Greek? This is the same as saying by heart? — R. Aha said in the name of R. Eleazar: What is referred to is where it is written in the Greek vernacular. (R. Aha also said in the name of R. Eleazar: How do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob El [God] Because it says, And the God of Israel called him [Jacob] El. For should you suppose that [what the text means is that] Jacob called the altar El, then it should be written, ‘And Jacob called it’. But [as it is not written so], we must translate, ‘He called Jacob El’. And who called him so? The God of Israel). An objection was brought [against the dictum of Rab and Samuel] from the following: ‘If one reads it in Coptic, in Hebraic, in Elamean, in Median, in Greek, he has not performed his obligation’! — This [statement] means only in the same sense as the following: ‘If one reads it in Coptic to the Copts, in Hebrew to the Hebrews, in Elamean to the Elameans, in Greek to the Greeks, he has performed his obligation’. If that is the case, why do Rab and Samuel explain the Mishnah to refer to the Greek vernacular? Let them make it refer to any vernacular? — The fact is that the Mishnah agrees with the Baraitha, and the statement of Rab and Samuel was meant to be a general one [thus]: Rab and Samuel both say that the Greek vernacular is good for all peoples. But it is stated, ‘[He may read] in Greek for the Greeks’ — for the Greeks, that is, he may, but for others not? — They [Rab and Samuel] concurred with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, as we have learnt: ‘Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Scrolls of the Scripture also were allowed to be written only in Greek’. Let them then say, The halachah is as stated by Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel? — Had they said, The halachah is as stated by Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, I should have understood them to mean that this is the case with other books of the Scriptures but not with the Megillah, of which it is written, according to the writing thereof. Therefore we are told [that this is not so]. IF ONE WHO DOES NOT UNDERSTAND HEBREW HEARD IT READ IN HEBREW, HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION. But he does not know what they are saying? — he is on the same footing as women and ignorant people. Rabina strongly demurred to this saying; And do we know the meaning of ha-ahashteranim bene ha-ramakim? But all the same we perform the precept of reading the Megillah and proclaiming the miracle. So they too perform the precept of reading the Megillah and proclaiming the miracle. IF ONE READS IT WITH BREAKS [SERUGIN], HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION. The Rabbis did not know what was meant by serugin, until one day they heard the maidservant of Rabbi's household, on seeing the Rabbis enter at intervals, say to them, How long are you going to come in by serugin? The Rabbis did not know what was meant by haluglugoth, till one day they heard the handmaid of the household of Rabbi, on seeing a man peeling portulaks, say to him, How long will you be peeling your haluglugoth? The Rabbis did not know what was meant by, salseleah and it shall exalt thee. One day they heard the handmaid of the house of Rabbi say to a man who was curling his hair, How long will you be mesalsel with your hair? The Rabbis did not know what was meant by, Cast upon the Lord thy yehab and he shall sustain thee. Said Rabbah b. Bar Hanah: One day I was travelling with a certain Arab and was carrying a load, and he said to me, Lift up your yehab and put it on [one of] the camels. The Rabbis did not know what was meant by, we-tetethia bematate of destruction, till one day they heard the handmaid of the household of Rabbi say to her companion, Take the tatitha [broom] and tati [sweep] the house. Our Rabbis taught: If one reads it with breaks, he has performed his obligation;
—
if with omissions, he has not performed it. R. Muna said in the name of R. Judah: Even with breaks, if he stops long enough to finish the whole of it, he must go back to the beginning. R. Joseph said: The halachah is as stated by R. Muna in the name of R. Judah. Abaye inquired of R. Joseph: [When it says] ‘long enough to finish the whole of it’, does it mean from where he is to the end, or from the beginning to the end? He replied: It means from the beginning to the end, as otherwise there would be no fixed standard. R. Abba said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba who said it in the name of Rab: The halachah is as stated by R. Muna. Samuel, however, said: The halachah is not as stated by R. Muna. This is the version given in Sura. In Pumbeditha the following version is given: R. Kahana said in the name of Rab: The halachah is as stated by R. Muna, but Samuel said that the halachah does not follow R. Muna. R. Bibi reverses the statement, [making] Rab say that the halachah does not follow R. Muna and Samuel that it does follow R. Muna. R. Joseph said: Adopt the version of R. Bibi, since it is Samuel who takes note of the view of an individual authority, as we have learnt: ‘If a woman was waiting for the levir [to make his decision], and a [younger] brother of his became affianced to her sister, the rule was laid down in the name of R. Judah b. Bathyra that the Beth din say to him, Wait till your elder brother acts [one way or the other]; and Samuel said, The halachah is as stated by R. Judah b. Bathyra’. Our Rabbis taught: If the scribe had omitted letters or verses and the reader read them like the translator when he is translating, he has performed his obligation. The following was cited in objection to this: ‘If letters in it [the scroll] are partially effaced or torn, if they are still legible, it may be used, but otherwise it may not be used’! — There is no contradiction: the one statement refers to the whole of it, the other to part of it. Our Rabbis taught: If the reader omitted one verse, he must not say, I will finish reading it [the Megillah] and I will then read that verse, but he must read [again] from that verse. If a man enters the synagogue and finds that the congregation has read half, he must not say, I will read half with the congregation and then I will read the other half, but he must read it from the beginning to the end. IF HE WAS HALF-ASLEEP, HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION. What is meant by ‘half-asleep’? — R. Ashi said: He is asleep and not asleep, awake and not awake; if he is called he responds, but he cannot give a rational answer, though if he is reminded [of what has been said] he remembers. IF ONE WAS WRITING IT, EXPOUNDING IT, OR CORRECTING IT, IF HE PUT HIS MIND TO IT etc. How are we to understand this? If he was conning each verse and then writing it, what does it matter if he did put his mind to it? He is writing by heart! We must suppose therefore that he writes each verse and then recites it. But does he thereby perform his obligation? Has not R. Helbo said in the name of R. Hama b. Guria who said it in the name of Rab, The halachah follows the view of him who says that all of it [must be recited], and even according to the one who says that it is sufficient [to recite] from ‘A Jew was’, it is necessary that the whole should be [already] written? We must suppose therefore that a Megillah lies before him and he reads from it, verse by verse, and then writes. Shall we then say that this supports Rabbah b. Bar Hanah, for Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Johanan. It is forbidden to write one letter [of the Megillah], save from a copy? Perhaps [the Mishnah speaks only of a case] where he just happened [to have a copy before him]. The text [above states]: ‘Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Johanan, It is forbidden to write one letter save from a copy’. The following was cited in opposition to this: ‘It happened once that R. Meir went to prolong the year in Assia, and there was no Megillah there and he wrote one out by heart’! — R. Abbahu said: R. Meir is different, because to him could be applied the verse, Thine eyelids shall look straight before thee. Rami b. Hama asked R. Jeremiah from Difti: What is the meaning of ‘thine eyelids [‘af'apeka] shall look straight before thee’? — He replied: This refers to the words of the Torah, of which it is written, Wilt thou direct [ta'if] thine eyes from it? it is gone. And even so, R. Meir could produce them correctly. R. Hisda found R. Hananel writing scrolls without a copy. He said to him: You are quite qualified to write the whole Torah by heart, but thus have the Sages ruled: It is forbidden to write one letter save from a copy. Seeing that he said, ‘You are qualified to write the whole Torah by heart’, we may conclude that he could produce them correctly, and we see that R. Meir actually did write? — In case of emergency it is different — Abaye allowed the members of the household of Bar Habu to write tefillin and mezuzoth without a copy. What authority did he follow? — The following Tanna, as it has been taught: R. Jeremiah says in the name of our Teacher: Tefillin and mezuzoth may be written out without a copy, and do not require to be written upon ruled lines. The law, however, is that tefillin do not require lines, but mezuzoth do require lines, and both may be written without a copy. What is the reason? — They are well known by heart. IF IT WAS WRITTEN WITH SAM etc. SAM: this is paint. SIKRA: this is vermilion. Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said: It is what we call sekarta [vermilion]. KUMUS: this is gum
—