Taanit 18a — the Talmud in English

Rav Pappa said: As Rav said

as he said above, regarding the first of Nisan:

It was necessary ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location")

only to prohibit the day preceding it.

Here too,

also here, concerning our matter, what we find in the Scroll of Fasts, that it is prohibited from the eighth of Nisan until the end of the festival,

it was necessary

it is not necessary only

to prohibit the day following it

after the festival.

And the Gemara raises a difficulty:

According to whom,

according to which view are you establishing the matter—

according to

the view of

Rabbi Yose, who says

that on those festival days mentioned in the Scroll of Fasts,

both before it

before the festival day

and after it—

it is prohibited

to eulogize and to fast!

If so,

if indeed the day following the festival day is also prohibited,

on the twenty-ninth

of Adar

as well,

as we said above, that for this reason we stated in the Scroll of Fasts that the first day of the month of Nisan is prohibited, even though the New Moon itself is a festival, in order to say that the twenty-ninth of Adar, which is the day preceding the festival day — is prohibited [for because of the festival of the New Moon it is not prohibited, since it is from the Torah and does not require reinforcement],

Why specifically,

why was it necessary to say that the reason is because

it is the day preceding the day on which the daily offering was established

which is the day preceding the festival, for on the first of Nisan the daily offering was established, as we said above?

In any event,

derive it

that it is prohibited because

it is the day following the twenty-eighth of it

which is the day following the twenty-eighth of Adar, which is a festival day! And why did they make it a festival day?

For it was taught: On the twenty-eighth of it

on its twenty-eighth, in the month of Adar,

good news came to the Jews

good news came to the Jews,

that they would not be removed from the Torah

that they would not be removed and prevented from studying Torah.

F

this is what happened:

Once, the wicked kingdom issued

a

persecution decree against Israel.

And what did they decree against them?—

A.

That they should not engage in Torah,

B.

and that they should not circumcise their sons,

C.

and that they should profane Shabbatot .

.

What did Judah ben Shamua and his colleagues do?

They went and sought advice from a certain matron

with whom all the great men of Rome were regularly present

accustomed to be with her, and they asked her what would be advisable to do in order to annul the decree.

She said to them: Arise and demonstrate

shout

at night .

.

They went and demonstrated at night.

They said

and cried out to the Holy One, blessed be He, concerning those harsh decrees:

Alas, O Heaven

as in: Alas, O Lord!

And directed toward those who had issued the evil decrees against them, they said: Are we not

brothers

to you?

Are we not children of one father? Are we not children of one mother?

After all, we are all the children of the same father and mother: Adam and Eve!

How have we differed from every nation and tongue, that you issue

only

evil decrees against us!?

The heads of the government heard Israel’s cry concerning the decrees—

and annulled them.

And that day

on which the news arrived that the decrees had been annulled—

they made it a festival day.

Thus, the twenty-eighth of Adar is a festival day. And if so, the twenty-ninth of Adar is prohibited for fasting because it is the day following the festival day!

Abaye said:

What we said above, that the twenty-ninth of Adar is prohibited because it is the day preceding the festival day, and not because it is the day following the festival day,

it was necessary

it is not necessary only

for

the case in which

the new

Adar

is intercalated.

That is, in a leap year , in which there are two months of Adar, the first deficient, consisting of twenty-nine days, and the second full, consisting of thirty days .

For then it emerges that the last day of the month of Adar is not the day following the twenty-eighth of Adar, but rather the day following its twenty-ninth, and it is not prohibited for fasting and eulogy because of the festival day of the twenty-eighth of Adar. For such a case, it was necessary to say that the first day of the month of Nisan is a festival day; therefore the last day of the month of Adar, its thirtieth day, is prohibited for eulogy and fasting, because it is the day preceding the festival day .

Rav Ashi said: You may even say for

the case in which

the month is deficient,

nevertheless it was necessary to say that the twenty-ninth of Adar is prohibited because it is the day preceding the first day of the month of Nisan, which is a festival day. It is not sufficient that it is the day following the festival day of the twenty-eighth of Adar.

Because

every

day

that follows it,

that follows the festival day,

is prohibited for fasting.

But for eulogy—

it is permitted.

And likewise, every day preceding a festival day is prohibited only for fasting, but eulogizing is permitted .

And

the day

this,

the twenty-ninth of Adar,

since

it is

placed between two festival days ,

for it is before the first day of Nisan, which is a festival day, and after the twenty-eighth of Adar, which is a festival day—

Therefore

they made it

stringent

like the festival day itself, and

therefore

even eulogizing is also prohibited.

The Master said: From the eighth of it until the end of the festival, the festival of Shavuot was restored, so as not to eulogize.

The Gemara asks:

Why do I need to say

and institute a festival day

from the eighth of it

from the eighth day of the month of Nisan?

Let us say

that it is a festival day only

from the ninth of it.

And the eighth itself

and the eighth day itself, in any event,

is prohibited, for

it is

the day on which the daily offering was established,

as we stated in the Scroll of Fasts, that from the New Moon until the eighth of Nisan it is a festival day, because at that time the daily offering was established in its proper place!

And the Gemara explains:

Since, if an incident should occur

and we annul the seven

if something should occur, such as an evil decree being issued against Israel, and because of this some of those festival days from the New Moon of Nisan would be annulled, and once some of them are annulled, all of them would be annulled, since there is no partial annulment. If so, all eight days from the beginning of the month of Nisan would be permitted for eulogy and fasting,

in such a case, although the days of rejoicing at the beginning of the month of Nisan had been annulled, the

eighth itself

the eighth day of the month of Nisan itself

would remain prohibited,

because

it would be the first day on which the festival of Shavuot was restored

because independently of the days of rejoicing at the beginning of the month of Nisan, it is the first of the days of rejoicing established because the festival of Shavuot was restored to its proper place .

On the basis of these matters, the Gemara continues and says:

Now that you have arrived at this

now that you have reached this conclusion, this reasoning can also be applied to the question we asked above concerning the twenty-ninth of the month of Adar: Why was it necessary to say that it is prohibited because it is the day preceding the first of Nisan? Derive it from the fact that it is the day following the twenty-eighth of Adar, which is a festival day! For

the twenty-ninth day

of Adar

also, since, if an incident should occur and we annul the twenty-eighth

if an event should occur and the rejoicing of the twenty-eighth of Adar should be annulled, the

twenty-ninth

of Adar

itself

itself

would remain prohibited,

because

it would be the day preceding the day on which the daily offering was established

which is the day preceding the day on which the days of rejoicing begin because the daily offering was established in its proper place.

It was stated: Rabbi Hiyya bar Asi said in the name of Rav: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yose

mentioned in our Mishna, who holds that on those festival days mentioned in the Scroll of Fasts on which one may not eulogize [and certainly fasting is prohibited on them, as was explained above in the Mishna], eulogizing is prohibited both on the days preceding them and on the days following them.

But on days concerning which it is written in the Scroll of Fasts only that one may not fast on them, since they are less stringent, fasting is prohibited only before them, but after them it is permitted.

And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir,

who is more lenient and holds that on days concerning which it is stated that eulogizing is prohibited, it is prohibited only on the day preceding them, but after them it is permitted.

But on days concerning which it is stated that only fasting is prohibited, they are permitted both before them and after them.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

And did Shmuel say this,

that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir?

But it was taught: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: And what does the text come to teach,

what does that which is stated in the Scroll of Fasts come to teach us: “These are the days on which one may not fast on them [these, the festival days mentioned below, one does not fast on them], and some of them on which one may not eulogize on them, etc. [and some of the festival days, one may not even eulogize on them]”? Why did the Sages state

“on them, on them” twice?

Rather, the word “on them,” whose meaning is “on them,” comes to emphasize and

to tell you that

specifically

they,

those festival days themselves,

are prohibited. But the days

that are

before them and after them—

are permitted.

And Shmuel said,

since those good days are rabbinic, they are not treated so stringently, and therefore they rule

that the halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,

that both those before them and those after them are permitted.

But here Shmuel said that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir, according to whom those before them are forbidden!

The Gemara answers: Shmuel proceeded from the premise that since these good days are rabbinic, one must be lenient with regard to them as much as possible.

And therefore

initially

[at first], when he had not yet heard the view of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,

he reasoned: since there is no tanna who is lenient like Rabbi Meir

[since there is no tanna who is lenient at least as Rabbi Meir], who holds that those after them are permitted,

he said

that

the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir,

because this is the most lenient opinion.

But ultimately,

since he heard that Rabban Shimon was more lenient

[since he heard the view of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who is more lenient], and holds that even those before them are permitted—

he said

that

the halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

The Gemara continues and discusses the ruling of the halakha concerning the dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yosei.

And likewise,

just as Rabbi Hiyya bar Asi said earlier in the name of Rav that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei, so

said

also

Bali

[the name of a Sage]

said Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba said Rabbi Yohanan

[in the name of Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba, who said it in the name of Rabbi Yohanan]:

the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei,

that both before it and after it are forbidden.

Rabbi Hiyya said to Bali: I will explain it to you

[I will explain the matter to you].

When Rabbi Yohanan said

that

the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei—

with regard to not fasting

[with regard to those good days concerning which it is stated in Megillat Ta'anit that one does not fast on them—he said his words]: it is forbidden to fast both before them and after them.

But with regard to those days concerning which we learned that it is forbidden to deliver eulogies on them, the halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Yosei, who said that both before them and after them it is forbidden. Rather, the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir, according to whom only those before them are forbidden. But those after them are permitted.

The Gemara wonders:

And did Rabbi Yohanan say this

[did Rabbi Yohanan indeed say this]?

For Rabbi Yohanan said:

it is a general principle in determining the halakha:

the halakha is according to an anonymous Mishna

[the halakha is according to that Mishna which was taught anonymously, without the name of the tanna who said the statements taught in it being specified] .

And

behold,

we learned

in tractate Megilla, concerning the reading of the Megilla:

Even though they said

the Sages that although the fixed time for reading the Megilla is on the fourteenth of Adar for the residents of unwalled towns, and on the fifteenth of Adar for the residents of walled cities, there are cases in which they

advance

its reading, such as the residents of the villages [as explained there, at the beginning of tractate Megilla],