Megillah 18a (יח.) — the Talmud in English

“Afterward the children of Israel will return [

to the Land of Israel],

and seek the Lord their God and David their king.”

This is why we say here the blessing: “May You speedily cause the shoot of David Your servant to flourish.”

And once David comes—

the prayer comes.

For we hold that it is a mitzva to appoint a king before the building of the Temple. And since

it is stated: “And I will bring them to My holy mountain and gladden them in My house of prayer,”

and “My holy mountain” means the Temple, it necessarily follows that the son of David will already have come beforehand. Therefore, here we say the blessing “Hear our voice” after the blessing “The shoot of David.”

And once the prayer comes—

the Temple service comes. As it is stated

in the latter part of the verse cited above:

“Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon My altar.”

For David placed prayer, which is service of the heart, before the service on the altar. Therefore, after the blessing of prayer we say the blessing “Be favorable, etc., and restore the Temple service, etc.”

And once the Temple service comes—

the thanksgiving comes. As it is stated: “Whoever sacrifices a thanksgiving offering honors Me.”

We see that thanksgiving follows slaughtering, and slaughtering is Temple service. Therefore, here we say “We give thanks.”

And why did they see fit to recite the Priestly Blessing after thanksgiving?

As it is written: “And Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people

and blessed them, and he descended from performing the sin-offering, the burnt offering, and the peace-offering.”

And we challenge this: If so,

say

the Priestly Blessing

should come before the Temple service?

And we answer:

It should not enter your mind, as it is written: “And he descended from performing the sin-offering, etc.”

For

is it written “to perform”?

Rather,

it is written “from performing,”

which indicates that he had already performed the service. If so, the blessing follows the service!

And we challenge this:

Let us say

the Priestly Blessing

after the Temple service

and before thanksgiving?

And we answer:

It should not enter your mind, as

it is

written: “Whoever sacrifices a thanksgiving offering,”

which indicates that thanksgiving follows the Temple service.

And we wonder:

What have you seen that makes you rely on this verse

“Whoever sacrifices a thanksgiving offering”?

Rely instead on this

verse, “And he descended from performing, etc.,” which indicates that the blessing follows the Temple service and precedes thanksgiving!?

And we answer: In any event,

it stands to reason

that

the Temple service and thanksgiving are one matter,

as thanksgiving too is service of God. Therefore, we do not interrupt between them with the Priestly Blessing.

And why did they see fit to recite

the blessing

“Grant peace”—

after the Priestly Blessing?

As it is written

after the Priestly Blessing:

“And they shall place My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them.”

And the

blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He

is peace

.

As it is stated: “The Lord will bless His people with peace.”

And we wonder:

But since one hundred and twenty Elders, among them several prophets, had already instituted the prayer in its proper order, what did Shimon HaPakuli arrange?

already

the prayer in its proper order?

And we answer: After the Elders had instituted the prayer,

they forgot it, and Shimon HaPakuli returned

the prayer

and arranged it .

From this point onward,

after they had instituted these eighteen blessings—

it is prohibited to speak of the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He

by establishing a blessing .

For Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Who can utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Who can make heard all His praise”? To whom is it fitting to utter the mighty acts of the Lord—

to one who can make heard all His praise,

but there is no one who can make heard all His praise! Therefore, one may not add praises of God on his own initiative; rather, one may say only those instituted by the Sages .

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One who speaks of the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, excessively—

is uprooted from the world .

As it is stated: “Can it be told to Him when I speak? If a man speaks, he will be swallowed up.”

And this is how he expounds the verse: Can all the praise of God be told if I increase my words of praise?! And if, despite this, he says he will do so—“he will be swallowed up”!

Rabbi Yehuda of Kefar Gibboraya expounded, and some say: of Kefar Gibbor Ḥayil: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For You silence is praise”?

For

the remedy for everything,

the choicest of all remedies—

is silence,

not to speak excessively. And this is the meaning of the verse, “For You silence is praise.”

When Rav Dimi came, he said: In the West they say: A word—

is worth one sela; silence—

is worth two!

That is to say, if you wish to purchase a word for one sela, purchase silence for two .

We learned in our Mishna:

If one read it by heart, he has not fulfilled his obligation, etc.

From where do we derive this?

Rava said: It is derived by means of the verbal analogy “remembering”—

“remembering.” It is written here

in the Megilla:

“And these days are remembered,” and it is written there

in the passage concerning Amalek:

“Write this as a remembrance in the book” .

Just as there—

in a book, so too here—

in a book,

specifically.

And we challenge this:

And from where do you know that this “remembering”

there—

is reading? Perhaps it is merely study

?

And we answer:

It should not enter your mind. For it was taught in a beraita:

It is written:

“Remember

what Amalek did to you.”

One might have thought

that this remembering—

in the heart

is meant.

When it says: “You shall not forget,” the forgetting of the heart has already been stated.

already.

How, then, do I fulfill “Remember”? Orally!

We learned in our Mishna:

If one read it in translation, he has not fulfilled his obligation, etc.

And we inquire:

What are the circumstances? If it was written in the original language, and he read it in translation, that is reading by heart!

For he is not reading it as it is written in the book!?

And we explain:

No, it is necessary only in a case where it was written in translation and he also read it

as

a translation.

We learned in our Mishna:

But one may read it to foreign speakers in a foreign language, etc.

And we wonder:

But you said

at the beginning that if

he read it in any language—

he has not fulfilled his obligation?

And we answer:

Rav and Shmuel both say

that here the matter concerns

Greek.

And we inquire:

What are the circumstances? If it was written in Assyrian script and he read it in Greek, that is reading by heart!

For he is not reading it as it is written in the book!?

Rabbi Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: It means that it was written in Greek.

And Rabbi Aḥa said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: From where is it derived that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob “El”?

As it is stated

concerning Jacob: “And he erected there an altar

and called it ‘El, God of Israel.’ If it should enter your mind

that the verse is saying that

Jacob called the altar ‘El,’

if so,

“And Jacob called it

El”

should have been

what the verse said!

Rather,

the verse must be saying as follows:

He called Jacob “El.” And who called him El? The God of Israel .

A refutation was raised against Rav and Shmuel, who said that one fulfills his obligation with Greek:

If one read it in Egyptian, Hebrew, Elamite, Median, or Greek—

he has not fulfilled his obligation.

We see that even with Greek one has not fulfilled his obligation!? And we answer:

This

statement of the Mishna

is comparable only to this

beraita, as it was taught: If one read it

in Egyptian—

for Egyptians; in Hebrew—

for Hebrews; in Elamite—

for Elamites; in Greek for Greeks—

he has fulfilled his obligation.

The Mishna too is speaking of a similar case, in which he read it to foreign speakers. For we learned: “But one may read it to foreign speakers in their foreign language.”

And we wonder:

If so, why did Rav and Shmuel interpret the Mishna as referring specifically to Greek

?

Let them interpret it as referring to any foreign language,

for this law applies to every language: If he read it to those who speak that language, he has fulfilled his obligation!?

Rather,

we retract this explanation. In truth, the

Mishna—

even

is like the beraita,

and speaks of every language: If he read it in Egyptian for Medians, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But one may read it to foreign speakers in their foreign language. There is no disagreement between the beraitot, and the Mishna follows both of them.

And when Rav and Shmuel stated their ruling—

they stated it generally,

not with reference to the Mishna. And this is what they said:

Rav and Shmuel both say: Greek —

is valid for everyone,

even for those whose language it is not .

And we challenge this:

But it was taught

in a beraita:

“Greek for Greeks,”

which implies that for Greeks—

yes,

he has fulfilled his obligation, but

for everyone—

no?

And we answer:

They,

Rav and Shmuel,

spoke in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. For we learned: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even the books they permitted to be written only in Greek,

we see that he holds that Greek is valid for everyone.

And

we challenge this: If so,

let Rav and Shmuel say

:

The halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel?

And we answer:

If

they had

said, “The halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,” I would have said: This applies

to

the other books, but

with regard to

the Megilla, in which it is written: “According to their writing,” I would say

that

he has not

fulfilled his obligation if he wrote it in Greek.

Therefore, it teaches us

that he has fulfilled his obligation .

We learned in our Mishna:

And a foreign speaker who heard it in Assyrian script has fulfilled his obligation, etc.

And we challenge this:

But he does not know what they are saying?

And we answer:

It is analogous to women and uneducated people,

who likewise do not know what they are saying, yet they fulfill their obligation.

Ravina challenges him:

What difficulty did you initially have, and why was it necessary to offer a resolution based on the case of women?

Are we,

the Torah scholars , familiar with the verse beginning

“Ahashteranim

sons of the remakhim”—

do we know

its meaning ?

Rather, the mitzva of reading and publicizing the miracle

is,

here too,

when a foreigner hears it in the Assyrian script,

the mitzva of reading

is fulfilled,

and publicizing the miracle

is also achieved, since although they do not understand the reading, they ask those who heard it what the miracle was, and they inform them.

We learned in our Mishna:

“If one read it intermittently, he has fulfilled his obligation,” and so on.

The Sages

of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi

did not know what “intermittently” meant .

They heard Rabbi’s maidservant say to the Sages who were entering Rabbi’s house in intervals:

They would enter a little, then stop, and enter a little more, then stop:

“How long will you continue entering intermittently, intermittently?!”

This is likewise the meaning of “intermittently” in the Mishna: He reads a little and stops, then reads a little more and stops.

The Sages did not know what “haluglogot” meant

which are mentioned in several places, for example: “Throughout all seven days he would not eat garlic or haluglogot.” Yoma 18a.

They heard Rabbi’s maidservant say to a man who was scattering parpakhinim

a type of herb:

“How long will you continue scattering your haluglogot?”

The Sages did not know what

the meaning of this verse was: “Acquire wisdom, and so on,

“cultivate it, and it will exalt you.”

They heard Rabbi’s maidservant say to a man who was arranging his hair: She said to him, “How long will you continue arranging your hair?”

And they learned from this that silsul—cultivation or arranging—is an expression of searching and turning over .

The Sages did not know what

the meaning of this verse was:

“Cast your burden upon the Lord.”

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: Once I was traveling with an Ishmaelite

an Arab,

and I was carrying a load

and was bearing a burden.

And

that Ishmaelite

said to me:

“Take your burden—and throw it onto my camels.”

This taught us that “your burden” is an expression meaning a load .

The Sages did not know what

the meaning of this verse was:

“I will sweep it away with the broom of destruction.”

They heard Rabbi’s maidservant say to her colleague: “Take the broom and sweep the house.”

The Sages taught: If one read it intermittently—

he has fulfilled his obligation.

If one read it

in reverse order

backward—

he has not fulfilled his obligation .