Megillah 18b — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Mona says in the name of Rabbi Judah: Even with interruptions, if he paused

during the reading for the amount of time that he was in it

sufficient to finish all of it —

he returns to the beginning.

Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Mona, who said it in the name of Rabbi Judah.

Abaye said to Rav Yosef:

This that we said, that if he paused

sufficient to finish all of it

he returns to the beginning—is the intention that he paused for enough time to finish

from where he is standing

now

until the end, or perhaps

enough time to finish

from the beginning

of the Megilla

until the end?

He said to him: From the beginning until the end. For

if we say that the intention is from where he is standing until the end,

then you have rendered your words subject to varying measures!

For the measure of “sufficient to finish all of it” is not equal in every case: there is one who pauses at this place in the Megilla for one amount of time, and there is one who pauses at another place for another amount of time.

Rabbi Abba said that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

And Shmuel said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

In Sura they taught it in this manner,

as we said above.

In Pumbedita they taught it in this manner: Rav Kahana said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

And Shmuel said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

Rav Bibi taught it oppositely: Rav said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Mona, and Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

Rav Yosef said: Take Rav Bibi’s version in your hand ,

for

this

is Shmuel who is concerned with the

opinion of a

single authority.

For we learned in the Mishna: A woman awaiting levirate marriage,

whose husband died without children—and she is bound to levirate marriage, and he had several brothers, and the law is that it is a mitzva for the eldest to perform levirate marriage—

whose brother betrothed

of the levir, who was the eldest of the brothers,

her sister

after she had fallen before them for levirate marriage.

In the name of Rabbi Judah ben Beteira they said: They say to him

to the brother who betrothed her:

Wait

before marrying her

until your elder brother performs an act

with his yevama, whether he performs levirate marriage or release.

But before his elder brother performed an act, she is, for each of the brothers, like his wife, by virtue of the bond of levirate marriage. And if so, he is forbidden to her sister because of the prohibition of a wife’s sister.

And the Sages disagree with Rabbi Judah, and hold that since there are two brothers, her bond is not imposed upon each one of the brothers so as to make her like his wife, and if so, he is permitted to her sister.

And

Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Judah ben Beteira.

We see that he is concerned with the opinion of a single authority.

The Sages taught: If the

in the Megilla the

scribe

omitted letters or verses, and the reader read them as a translator translates,

that is, he read them by heart, just as the translator says his words by heart —

he has fulfilled his obligation.

He objected: If there were in it

in the Megilla

blurred letters ,

or torn letters, if their form is recognizable—

it is fit; but if not—

it is unfit.

We see that reading by heart is not effective!? And we answer:

It is not difficult. This

which we said is unfit—is in a case where

the whole

Megilla has blurred or torn letters.

Whereas

this

which we said is fit when he omitted letters or verses—is in a case where he omitted only

part of it .

The Sages taught:

If

the reader omitted one verse ,

he may not say: I will read

now

all of it

from here onward,

and afterward I will read

that

verse; rather, he reads from that verse onward.

One entered the synagogue and found

the

community had read

already

half

of the Megilla,

he may not say: I will read

now

half

that remains

with the community, and afterward I will read half

the first half,

but he reads it from its beginning until its end .

We learned in our Mishna:

“If he was dozing, he has fulfilled his obligation,” etc.

What are the circumstances of “dozing”?

Rav Ashi said: He is asleep

[sleeping]

but not asleep, awake

[awake, as we translate “and he awoke” as “and he became awake”]

but not awake,

that they call him—

and he answers

[and responds].

But he does not know how to return the reasoning

when they ask him,

but when they remind him of the reasoning

the reasoning—

he remembers .

We learned in our Mishna:

“If he was writing it, expounding it, or correcting it, if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation,” etc.

And we raise an objection concerning it:

What are the circumstances? If he arranges verse by verse

by heart

and writes it

afterward,

since he directed his heart—

what is there,

this

is by heart!?

But

rather, he wrote verse by verse—

and read it

that verse which he wrote, and afterward continued writing.

And did he fulfill his obligation

in such a manner?

But Rabbi Helbo said that Rav Hama bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the statement of the one who says

that he must read

all of it. And even according to the one who says

that it is sufficient to read it

from “A Jewish man,”

nevertheless

it must be entirely written

before him when he reads it, whereas here, at the time that he read, the entire Megilla was not written before him!?

Rather,

here we are dealing with a case

where a complete Megilla is placed

before him

and

he copies from it, by

reading from it verse by verse—

and writing it

that verse . In such a manner he has fulfilled his obligation, for he is reading from a complete Megilla.

Shall we say

that our Mishna

supports Rabba bar bar

Hana. For Rabba bar bar Hana said that Rabbi Yohanan said: It is forbidden

for a scribe

to write even one letter not from writing.

For this is what is necessarily demonstrated by the Mishna, that it can only be established as referring to one who writes from writing!

And we reject this: You cannot prove it. For

perhaps

in truth there is no prohibition against writing not from writing, but the Mishna is speaking of a case

where it happened to him to happen in this manner,

where a Megilla was before him and he copied from it. And the Mishna comes to teach us that if he directed his heart to fulfill his obligation through reading, he has fulfilled his obligation.

As to the main matter, Rabba bar bar Hana said that Rabbi Yohanan said: It is forbidden to write even one letter not from writing.

He objected: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: An incident occurred with Rabbi Meir, who went to intercalate the year in Asia, and there was no Megilla there, and he wrote it

from memory—

and read it.

We see that it is permitted to write a Megilla not from writing!?

Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Meir is different, for

the verse

“And your eyelids shall direct themselves before you” is fulfilled in him.

was fulfilled in him.

Just as

Rami bar Hama said to Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti: What is the meaning of “And your eyelids shall direct themselves before you”?

He said to him: These are words of Torah ,

as it is written concerning them: “When you close your eyes upon it

it is gone.”

That is, if you fold and close your eyes from it, it is forgotten from you in the blink of an eye.

And even so, they are directed for Rabbi Meir.

Rav Hisda found Rav Hananel writing scrolls not from writing.

He said to him: The entire Torah is fit to be written upon your mouth, but thus the Sages said: It is forbidden to write even one letter not from writing.

And we wonder:

Since he said to him

Rav Hisda

“The entire Torah is fit to be written upon your mouth,” it follows that it is directed for him! But Rabbi Meir wrote

not from writing because it was directed for him?

And we answer: That incident involving Rabbi Meir was a time of emergency, for there was no written Megilla there, and

a time of emergency—

is different.

That is, Rav Hisda disagreed with Rabbi Abbahu and held that even when it is directed for him, one may not write without writing before him.

Abaye permitted the household of Bar Havu,

who was a seller of tefillin,

to write tefillin and mezuzot not from writing.

In accordance with whom?

In accordance with this tanna. For it was taught: Rabbi Yirmeya says in the name of our Master: Tefillin and mezuzot—

are written not from writing, and they do not require ruling.

And the halakha is,

thus it is a halakha given to Moses at Sinai, that

tefillin—

do not require ruling ,

mezuzot—

require ruling .

Both this and that

—tefillin and mezuzot—

are written not from writing.

What is the reason?

Because

they are well learned by repetition,

for these passages are fluent in everyone’s mouth .

We learned in our Mishna:

It was written with sam, etc.

And we explain: what are these words:

Sam —

sama is

it [arsenic. Rashi].

Sikra —

Rabba bar bar Hanna said: Its name is sikarta.

And it is a red dye with which they color shields.

Kumos —

that is

kuma,

tree sap.