Endings are not always like their beginnings #devartorah#parashat Vaera

By the end of his life, musician Giuseppe Verdi was recognized as a master of dramatic composition.  His works astonished the world of music with a power, subtlety, and brilliance that marked the ultimate in Italian grand opera.  But he didn’t begin his career with such success.  As a youth, he was denied entrance to the Milan Conservatory because he lacked the necessary training.  Although his musical abilities were apparent in childhood, as an innkeeper’s son he did not possess the formal training required.  Yet, time does strange things.  After Verdi’s fame had spread worldwide, the school was renamed the “Verdi Conservatory of Music.”  This turn of events is a reminder that endings are not always like their beginnings.

Verdi’s experience reminds me of the Jewish people’s experience in Egypt.  Pharaoh enslaved the Jewish people.  They built the store cities of Pitom and Raamses. (Exodus 1:11) After God sent Moses to tell Pharaoh, “Let my people go.” (Exodus 5:1), their situation became even worse.  “That same day Pharaoh charged the taskmasters and foremen of the people, saying, “You shall no longer provide the people with straw for the making of bricks as heretofore; let them go and gather straw for themselves.  But impose upon them the same quota of bricks as they have been making heretofore; do not reduce it, for they are shirkers; that is why they cry, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to our God!’  Let heavier work be laid upon the men; let them keep at it and not pay attention to deceitful promises.” (Exodus 5:6-9)  The Israelites’ spirits were crushed by the cruel bondage. (Exodus 6:7)

In this week’s Torah portion, God promised that their end will not be like their beginning.  He instructed Moses to tell the Children of Israel, “I am the Lord.  I will free you from the labors of the Egyptians and deliver you from their bondage.  I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and through extraordinary chastisements.  And I will take you to be My people, and I will be your God…I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will give it to you for a possession, I the Lord.”  (Exodus 6:6-8)  I know that I won’t be spoiling the end of the story if I tell you that God kept all of his promises.  We shall read about the first seven plagues this week. Next week we shall read about the last three and the grand exodus from Egypt on the first night of Passover.  In two weeks we shall read all about the splitting of the Red Sea and how the Israelites crossed over in safety.  Indeed our sojourn in Egypt ended very differently than its beginning.

Perhaps you find yourself in your own personal Egypt. No matter how many problems, troubles, and travails may fill your life now, God’s promises found in this week’s Torah portion gives all of us hope that we can look forward to a glorious happy ending.

Shabbat shalom and may 2022 be a better, happier, and healthier New Year,

Rabbi Gary Greene

 

 

When I celebrated Purim for two days TB Megillah 19

We’ve already learned that Jews in villages and towns celebrate Purim on the 14^th day of Adar and Jews living in cities that had a wall around it at the time of Joshua’s conquest of Canaan celebrate Purim on the 15^th day of Adar. Today’s daf TB Megillah 19 deals with the question what should a person do when he is traveling. Should the person celebrate Purim on the day where he comes from or should he celebrate Purim on the day where he is now located? The answer depends on how long the person plans be in his new location.

“Rava said: They taught the mishna that one who is destined to return to his own place reads according to the halakha governing his own place only with regard to one who is destined to return to his own place on the night of the fourteenth of Adar. But if he is not destined to return on the night of the fourteenth, although he does intend to return to his own place eventually, he reads with the residents of his current location. Rava said: From where do I say this? As it is written: “Therefore the Jews of unwalled towns, who dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth day of the month Adar a day of gladness and feasting” (Esther 9:19). Since it is already written: “The Jews of unwalled towns,” why do I need it to write further, “who dwell in the unwalled towns”? It comes to teach us this: That one who is in an unwalled town even for the day (ben yomo-בֶּן יוֹמוֹ) is also called one who lives in an unwalled town.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rashi defines ben yomo as a person who spends the night and at least through dawn in the place where he is located.

The Shulkhan Arukh poskins “Whether one goes from a city to a big city or a big city to a city - if it was his intention to return to his place at the time of the reading and he was delayed and did not return [to his usual place] reads according to his [usual] location. If it was his intention to return only after the time of the reading, he reads with the people of the place where he is currently. RAMA: And if one is in the desert or on a boat one reads on the 14th like the rest of the world. [Kol Bo]”  (Sefaria.org translation)

Purim is my favorite holiday by far. When I was in Israel during Purim as a student, I took advantage of celebrating the holiday twice! Since I lived in Jerusalem those years, I naturally celebrated Purim on the 15^th day of Adar. I made it my business to be out of town on the 14^th day of Adar so I could celebrate Purim again for the first time. The most memorable occasion was when I visited my friend Rachel Friedman on her kibbutz Kfar Etzion 46 years ago. Somewhere where I keep all my old slides, I have pictures of all the kibbutz children dressed up in costumes. Now those children have children of their own!

When silence is golden TB Megillah 18

We have previously learned in a baraita that one doesn’t fulfill his obligation by reading the Megillah and the Shema out of order. The Amidah is the next example of what must be recited in the correct order to fulfill the person’s obligation. Starting on yesterday’s daf TB Megillah 17b and continuing on today’s daf TB Megillah 18, the Gemara explains the logical and necessary order of each of the 19 blessings of the Amidah and who arranged them. The rabbis deemed that adding any more blessings to the Amidah would be the height of hutzpah on the part of the prayer leader. “The Gemara comments: These nineteen blessings are a fixed number, and beyond this it is prohibited for one to declare the praises of the Holy One, Blessed be He, by adding additional blessings to the Amida. As Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Who can utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Who can declare all His praise?” (Psalms 106:2)? It means: For whom is it fitting to utter the mighty acts of the Lord? Only for one who can declare all His praise. And since no one is capable of declaring all of God’s praises, we must suffice with the set formula established by the Sages.” (Sefaria.org translation)

If we think that our words are adequately able to praise God, you would be mistaken. The best way praising God is with silence. “The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehuda, a man of Kefar Gibboraya, and some say he was a man of Kefar Gibbor Ĥayil, taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For You silence is praise” (Psalms 65:2)? The best remedy of all is silence, i.e., the optimum form of praising God is silence. The Gemara relates: When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Israel to Babylonia, he said: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say an adage: If a word is worth one sela, silence is worth two.” (Sefaria.org translation)

One of the goals of meditation is to silence our minds. Rabbi Lawrence Kushner writes, “We humans are far better at making noise than silence. But silence is better than noise. Indeed, attaining silence they just be the reason for prayer. I don’t mean just not talking; I mean also stealing the inner dialogue.” (Silencing the Inner Voice (s) in Meditation from the Heart of Judaism edited by Avram Davis, page 36)

Why is this silence golden? What is the ultimate goal of silencing those inner voices or dialogue? “In the words of Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, ‘the core of a human being is his consciousness. Where one’s consciousness is, there is the whole person. Thus one who knows and reaches an understanding of the divine is really in the divine. The greater one’s knowing, more fully is he included in his root in God.’

“I am convinced that devekut is more than being one with God. Devekut is a theological metaphor for stopping the dialogue between the two invoices. Devekut is a metaphor for self -unification. Devekut is a time when the outer person is revealed to be illusory, a fragment of the language, and iron barrier separating us from God. Not only in unselfconscious awareness remains, and awareness that bears a wonderful similarity to the Divine…

“Devekut is when the one who asks and the one who hears become the same. We realize to our embarrassment that we have been who we were all along and that it was only linguistic convention that tricked us into thinking that we were someone else. We cannot make God do what we want, but thinking, doing, and praying what God wants, we become one with God and with ourselves.” (Ibid., Page 41-42)

Now you understand that there’s no better praise than silence just as Rabbi Yehuda, a man of Kefar Gibboraya, and some say he was a man of Kefar Gibbor Ĥayil and Rav Dimi taught.

How is the recitation of the Shema and the reading of the Megillah the same and different? TB Megillah 17

Daf TB Megillah 17 concludes the first chapter of our massekhet and begins the second chapter. The first chapter discusses when we read the Megillah before going on a series of tangents whether they are the ain bein (אין בין) mishnayot or the rabbinic explication of verses in the Megillah. The second chapter deals with how we read the Megillah. The Mishnah on our daf opens with “With regard to one who reads the Megilla out of order, reading a later section first, and then going back to the earlier section, he has not fulfilled his obligation.” (Sefaria.org translation) The Gemara learns that from this verse. “’And that these days should be remembered and observed throughout every generation” (Esther 9:28). Remembering is juxtaposed to observing, indicating: Just as observing cannot be out of order, as was derived from the words “That they should unfailingly observe these two days according to their writing, and according to their appointed times,” so too, remembering, by reading the Megilla, may not be out of order.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara cites other recitations that must be read in order. “The Sages taught in a baraita: This halakha of not reading out of order applies also to hallel, and also to the recitation of Shema, and also to the Amida prayer, meaning that to fulfill one’s obligation he must recite the text of each of these in order.” (Sefaria.org translation)

In the midst of proving that one must read the three paragraphs of the Shema in order, the rabbis say one may fulfill a person’s obligation to recite the Shema in any language he understands. The sages learned from “The verse states: “Hear, O Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4), which could also be translated, “Understand, O Israel,” indicating that you may recite these words in any language that you hear, i.e., understand.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rabbi Daniel Landes writes about reciting the Shema in any language: “Ritually speaking people who do not understand Hebrew, and so cannot attain intentionality (kavanah) when they read it, may use any language that they ‘hear,’ that is, ‘understand,’ but should use the Hebrew names for God. From a doctrinal point of view also, and exact rendering into another language fulfills the mitzvah, but a proper translation may be unavailable or even impossible in practice. Halakhah does prefers using the original liturgical Hebrew for doctrinal purposes. One need not know the exact translation of the words, since all that is required is a sense of the general content or what is being said, and the liturgical context alone is assumed to provide that basic understanding, since one recognizes at least that this is the liturgical place where we affirm God’s unity.” (My People’s Prayer Book: the Sh’ma in Its Blessings, volume 1, page 95)

Even though one may recite the Shema in any language, the prayer in Hebrew packs emotional power and resonates more when recited in Hebrew than singing “Hear O’ Israel the Lord your God the Lord is one.”

What about the Torah? May it be read in any language to fulfill our obligation? Tosefot ד"ה כׇּל הַתּוֹרָה כּוּלָּהּ בְּכׇל לָשׁוֹן נֶאֶמְרָה is astonished that Rashi says yes one may read the weekly Torah portion in any language one understand because reading the Torah is only a rabbinic institution and not a mitzvah of the Torah with the exception of parashat zakhor (remembering Amalek). However, those passages which are a mitzvah to be recited like halitza (the ritual when a brother does not want to marry his deceased sibling’s wife who has no children), the ritual of the eglah arufa (the ritual when a dead bodies found at the border of two towns and the murderer is unknown), and the confession of ma’aser and bikkurim (first fruits) as taught in TB Sukkah 32a.

Rabbi David Hartman gives another reason why we don’t recite Hallel on Purim.TB Megillah 14

 Rabbi David Hartman in his book A Living covenant: The Innovative Spirit in Traditional Judaism gives another reason why we don’t recite Hallel on Purim.

“The above contrast between Purim and Sinai is paralleled in the Babylonian Talmud by the contrast between Purim and the Exodus from Egypt. At Passover, which commemorates the Exodus, the ordinary prayers are augmented by the singing of Hallel, the Psalms of praise and thanksgiving, but this is not done at Purim.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said that they reasoned as follows: If, when recalling the exodus from Egypt, in which the Jews were delivered from slavery to freedom, we recite songs of praise, the Song of the Sea and the hymns of Hallel, then, in order to properly recall the miracle of Purim and commemorate God’s delivering us from death to life, is it not all the more so the case that we must sing God’s praise by reading the story in the Megilla…

Rav Naḥman said an alternative answer as to why Hallel is not recited on Purim: The reading of the Megilla itself is an act of reciting Hallel. Rava said a third reason why Hallel is not recited on Purim: Granted that Hallel is said there, when recalling the exodus from Egypt, as after the salvation there, they could recite the phrase in Hallel: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord” (Psalms 113:1); after their servitude to Pharaoh ended with their salvation, they were truly servants of the Lord and not servants of Pharaoh. But can it be said here, after the limited salvation commemorated on Purim: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord,” which would indicate that after the salvation the Jewish people were only servants of the Lord and not servants of Ahasuerus? No, even after the miracle of Purim, we were still the servants of Ahasuerus, as the Jews remained in exile under Persian rule, and consequently the salvation, which was incomplete, did not merit an obligation to say Hallel. (TB Megillah 14a, Sefaria.org translation)

“Of the various answers given, the last is the one relevant to the new theology of history that merged out of the rabbinic response to Purim. Rava was living in Babylonia, which was still ruled by Persia several centuries after the time of Esther. The existence of the Jewish community was still depended upon the goodwill of the Persian court. Ahasuerus had initially agreed to the genocidal plan of Haman; if one of the successors of Ahasuerus should acquiesce in a similar scheme, who could be sure that he will also providentially have a Jewish wife? We celebrate Purim, but without singing the Hallel, because we are celebrating a reprieve from death in a world where murderous evil forces continue to be a threat.” (Page 220)

 

What’s the connection between Torah, festivals, and circumcision and the miracle of Purim? TB Megillah 16

Today’s daf TB Megillah 16 continues to explicate verses from chapter six, seven, and eight. Anybody who recites havdalah will recognize the next verse explained on today’s daf. Before the leader finishes the first paragraph of havdalah, he stops and the congregation says out loud “The Jews had light and gladness, and joy and honor” (Esther 8:16) and then the leader repeats the verse and concludes with “so may it be for us.”

 “§ The Gemara returns to its explanation of the Megilla (just as Esther revealed her true identity to the king at the party, the Gemara goes off on a tangent and explains what happened when Joseph revealed his true identity to his brothers. Although included in this tangent is a drash that does link Benjamin to his descendent Mordechai-gg). The verse states: “The Jews had light and gladness, and joy and honor” (Esther 8:16). Rav Yehuda said: “Light”; this is referring to the Torah that they once again studied. And similarly it says: “For the mitzva is a lamp and the Torah is light” (Proverbs 6:23). “Gladness” [simḥa]; this is referring to the Festivals that they once again observed. And similarly it says: “And you shall be glad [vesamakhta] on your Festival” (Deuteronomy 16:14). “Joy” [sasson]; this is referring to circumcision, as they once again circumcised their sons. And similarly it says: “I rejoice [sas] at Your word” (Psalms 119:162), which the Sages understood as referring to David’s rejoicing over the mitzva of circumcision.”

What’s the connection between these mitzvot and the Purim miracle? Some akhronim explain that Haman prohibited these commandments. When Haman expired, these prohibitions expired. Since many pagans throughout King Ahasuerus’ kingdom converted to Judaism as it is written, “And many of the people of the land professed to be Jews, for the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them” (Esther 8:17), the Maharsha and others write these are the mitzvot that these converts accepted upon themselves.

Rabbi David Hartman provides a different answer. He quotes TB Shabbat 88a to teach “What began at Sinai as an externally imposed system of norms have become a successful internalization of these norms when forum was identified as the celebration of the free acceptance of the Torah.” (A Living covenant: The Innovative Spirit in Traditional Judaism, page 219) ““And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the lowermost part of the mount” (Exodus 19:17). Rabbi Avdimi bar Ḥama bar Ḥasa said: the Jewish people actually stood beneath the mountain, and the verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above the Jews like a tub, and said to them: If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there will be your burial. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From here there is a substantial caveat to the obligation to fulfill the Torah. The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding. Rava said: Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Ahasuerus, as it is written: “The Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them” (Esther 9:27), and he taught: The Jews ordained what they had already taken upon themselves through coercion at Sinai.” (Sefaria.org translation) These mitzvot symbolize all the different aspects of Judaism which we now accept happily, lovingly, and freely.

 

You can bring our final redemption closer in more ways than one TB Megillah 15

 Today's daf TB Megillah 15 explain the meaning of various verses found in chapters four and five of Megillat Esther. With a close reading of the verse and noticing a word difficulty, Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Ḥanina explains that Queen Esther was endowed with divine inspiration to achieve her goals of saving the Jewish people.“The verse states: “And it came to pass on the third day, that Esther clothed herself in royalty” (Esther 5:1). The Gemara asks: It should have said: Esther clothed herself in royal garments. Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Ḥanina said: This teaches that she clothed herself with a divine spirit of inspiration, as it is written here: “And she clothed herself,” and it is written elsewhere: “And the spirit clothed Amasai” (I Chronicles 12:19). Just as there the reference is to the spirit of divine inspiration, so too here, the term royalty is referring to the spirit of divine inspiration ” (Sefaria.org translation)

Once the Gemara quotes Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Ḥanina, it continues to quote them seven more times even though some of the statements have nothing to do with Purim or the Megillah. I'll share just two more of their wisdom.

Why does the Gemara include the chain of tradition of all the rabbis before a statement? Probably Rabbi Elazar in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina answers this question. “And Rabbi Elazar further said that Rabbi Ḥanina said: Whoever reports a saying in the name of he who said it brings redemption to the world. As it is stated with respect to the incident of Bigthan and Teresh: “And Esther reported it to the king in the name of Mordecai” (Esther 2:22), and this eventually brought redemption, as Mordecai was later rewarded for saving the king’s life, paving the way for the miraculous salvation.” (Sefaria.org translation) When we give correct attribution of our statements, we bring a final redemption closer.

Even though King Ahasuerus has not called for Queen Esther, she risks her life by going to him. If he extends his scepter, she may join him. If he doesn't, her death sentence is sealed. Of course the king is dazzled by her beauty and extends his scepter. The Gemara recounts the miracle of the scepter. “How much was it stretched? Rabbi Yirmeya said: The scepter was two cubits, and he made it twelve cubits. And some say that he made it sixteen cubits, and yet others say twenty-four cubits. It was taught in a baraita: He made it sixty cubits. And similarly you find with the arm of Pharaoh’s daughter, which she stretched out to take Moshe. And so too, you find with the teeth of the wicked, as it is written: “You have broken the teeth of the wicked” (Psalms 3:8), with regard to which Reish Lakish said: Do not read it as “You have broken [shibbarta],” but as: You have enlarged [sheribavta]. Rabba bar Oferan said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, who heard it from his teacher, who in turn heard it from his teacher: The scepter was stretched two hundred cubits.”

In the spirit of reporting a teaching in the name of the one who said it in order to bring redemption to the world,I want to share with you something I learned from Danny Siegel. The above text speaks of Pharaoh's daughter's arm stretching miraculously long in order to reach Moses’ casket. The verse under consideration is "And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to bathe at the river and her maidens walked along by the river side; and she saw the ark among the flags, and she sent her handmade and she took it." (Exodus 2:5) Rashi explains: "her handmaid- אֲמָתָהּ (means) her maid servant. And our Rabbis said (TB Sota 12) " אֲמָתָהּ denotes a 'hand'." But according to the grammar of the Holy Language, it should have been vocalized אֲמָּתָהּ with a degash in the mem. And they interpreted את אמתה (as) "her hand," and her hand was increased (in length, in order that she might easily reach the cradle) many "cubits" (amah, a cubit)

Too often when we are facing an overwhelming and urgent need, we become paralyzed and think that we can't do anything. And whatever little we can do really won't make any difference anyway. Pharaoh's daughter teaches us that if we stretch ourselves just a little bit and lend a hand, we can perform miracles. There are so many problems in our world that we need to roll up our sleeves and stretch out our arms to help those in need. The life you say save could just be the very one who is destined to redeem this world just like Moses redeemed the Israelites out of Egypt. As the Nike advertisement encourages us, "Just do it!"

For example follow this link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/12/24/teacher-learned-her-student-might-go-hungry-over-winter-break-she-now-feeds-thousands-kids-each-year/?fb_news_token=Dpk2HH6lf6nxwiCo9THE9A%3D%3D.kS7FxuEDkV%2B3YelkLK2RU4Lv1ipTo7cfkIlsTJqBuNB72B6tsAfLzsjvlQQccuBt%2BnLFFSEsQXn2RlV0oqKt2z8pyd%2BuOOfXcu2wHrm6YsZ8gu3IJYV1pQX993DosxTBpvDG4AwwMtaSxmhnsli9Dc9FMb6VS5MWpyf3TTtPjJTHQcDdhwWJvwfmO0NjOCSJeDC3QbWm%2FhBc44TarqvAaRHkOD%2BJgONhuGR6oNzP2iPkm8tBadKlFlbf3LZyJ%2BPefe5R3zM0Mf0j4pj5%2B4quwNXPHY1fKSkfPqITQSlwTvIZE3uajDeI9hdtNyO87eBBtmBaUfso0eY31bR%2BK0nFFHJWMzGCwZHnRpQfMEeJ%2FW0JqcTFt5JGoH8JBr0aYmB5ADezBPWxfXFGmh8Jm8QdbJPZpXbAxM0%2B56pxkBkCcVY%2BafHMao4ANNMtZ3Zw2XTp&fbclid=IwAR3waFV8QIvJlArY1scfzhlcm5LLfcWQOc_cpmmXIJmLsoS7l7qOIfFaR2E

Why don’t we say hallel on Purim? TB Megillah 14

 In the course of today’s daf TB Megillah 14, the Gemara provides three different reasons why hallel isn’t recited on Purim.

“The Sages taught in a baraita: Forty-eight prophets and seven prophetesses prophesied on behalf of the Jewish people, and they neither subtracted from nor added onto what is written in the Torah, introducing no changes or additions to the mitzvot except for the reading of the Megilla, which they added as an obligation for all future generations.

“The Gemara asks: What exposition led them to determine that this was a proper mode of action? On what basis did they add this mitzva? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said that they reasoned as follows: If, when recalling the exodus from Egypt, in which the Jews were delivered from slavery to freedom, we recite songs of praise, the Song of the Sea and the hymns of hallel, then, in order to properly recall the miracle of Purim and commemorate God’s delivering us from death to life, is it not all the more so the case that we must sing God’s praise by reading the story in the Megilla?

“The Gemara asks: If so, our obligation should be at least as great as when we recall the exodus from Egypt, and let us also recite hallel on Purim. The Gemara answers: Hallel is not said on Purim, because hallel is not recited on a miracle that occurred outside Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: If so, with regard to the exodus from Egypt as well, which was a miracle that occurred outside Eretz Yisrael, how are we able to recite songs of praise?

“The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita: Prior to the time when the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, all lands were deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within their borders, as all lands were treated equally. But after the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, that land became endowed with greater sanctity, and all the other lands were no longer deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within them.

“Rav Naḥman said an alternative answer as to why hallel is not recited on Purim: The reading of the Megilla itself is an act of reciting hallel. Rava said a third reason why hallel is not recited on Purim: Granted that hallel is said there, when recalling the exodus from Egypt, as after the salvation there, they could recite the phrase in hallel: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord” (Psalms 113:1); after their servitude to Pharaoh ended with their salvation, they were truly servants of the Lord and not servants of Pharaoh. But can it be said here, after the limited salvation commemorated on Purim: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord,” which would indicate that after the salvation the Jewish people were only servants of the Lord and not servants of Ahasuerus? No, even after the miracle of Purim, we were still the servants of Ahasuerus, as the Jews remained in exile under Persian rule, and consequently the salvation, which was incomplete, did not merit an obligation to say hallel.

“Gemara asks: Both according to the opinion of Rava and according to the opinion of Rav Naḥman, this is difficult. Isn’t it taught in the baraita cited earlier: After the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, that land became endowed with greater sanctity, and all the other lands were no longer deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within them. Therefore, there should be no hallel obligation on Purim for the miracle performed outside of the land of Israel, and Rav Naḥman’s and Rava’s alternative explanations are incorrect. The Gemara answers: They understood differently, as it can be argued that when the people were exiled from Eretz Yisrael, the other lands returned to their initial suitability, and were once again deemed fit for reciting hallel on miracles performed within them.” (Sefaria.org translation)

To summarize the three positions: 1, we only recite hallel over miracles that happen in the land of Israel; 2, the Megillah is an act of praise comparable to reciting hallel; 3, the redemption in Shushan was incomplete since the Jewish people remained in exile under the complete control of King Ahasuerus.

The Meiri draws the conclusion from Rav Naḥman’s position, the Megillah is an act of praise comparable to reciting the hallel, that in a place where a person does not have a Megillah he can fulfill his obligation by reciting hallel.

I like to add a fourth reason. Purim Morning services are long enough with the reading of the Megillah’s 10 chapters. We need time to fulfill the other three Purim mitzvot, giving tzedakkah to the poor (matanot l-evyonim), portions one to another (mishloakh manot), and the Purim feast.

What does Yehudi mean in the Megillah? TB Megillah 13

The Megillah informs us of Mordechai’s lineage. He is from the tribe of Benjamin “In the fortress Shushan lived a Jew by the name of Mordecai, son of Jair son of Shimei son of Kish, a Benjaminite. [Kish] had been exiled from Jerusalem in the group that was carried into exile along with King Jeconiah of Judah, which had been driven into exile by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon” (2:5-6). Kish was King Saul’s father and we know from I Samuel that Saul was a Benjaminite. However, the verse also describes him as a “Yehudi” which formally meant he was from the tribe of Judah.  The Gemara is sensitive to this dissonance and provides this answer on daf TB Megillah 13. “Rabbi Yoḥanan said a different explanation of the verse: Actually, Mordecai came from the tribe of Benjamin. Why, then, was he referred to as Yehudi? On account of the fact that he repudiated idol worship, for anyone who repudiates idolatry is called Yehudi. It is understood here in the sense of yiḥudi, one who declares the oneness of God, as it is written: “There are certain Jews [Yehuda’in] whom thou hast appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylonia, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego; these men, O king, have not regarded you: They serve not your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up” (Daniel 3:12). These three individuals were in fact Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were not all from the tribe of Judah but are referred to as Yehuda’in because they repudiated idol worship.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Adele Berlin explains in the New JPS Commentary of the book of Esther about this dissonance. “Not from the tribe of Judah, for he is from the tribe of Benjamin. Originally derived from ‘Judah,’ the name of the kingdom, it refers to all of Judah’s population no matter what the tribe of origin. It is an ethnic epithet, and is used in reference to Mordechai many times (5:13; 6:10; 8:7; 9:29, 31; 10:3). (Compare ‘the Moabitess’ used in reference to Ruth.) By placing this designation before Mordechai’s proper name, emphasis is given to this aspect of his identification, which becomes crucial as the story unfolds. In Babylonian sources, foreigners are sometimes mentioned by their ethnic identity, but this is not common. The ethnic designation ‘Judean’ is not found in Babylonian records from the Chaldean or Achaemenian periods except when referring to King Jehoiachin.” (Page 24) And “In the post-exilic period the tribal area of Benjamin remained closely associated with Judah, as it had been during the divided monarchy. In Ezra ‘Judah and Benjamin’ signify those returnees from Babylonia who have a legitimate claim to Judah; they constitute the authentic Jewish community (see Ezra 1:5; 4:1). This connotation may also adhere to Mordechai’s genealogy. By virtue of Mordechai’s being a Yehudi and a Benjaminite he is a symbol of the authentic exilic Jew.” (Page 25)

Now that we know what the term “Yehudi” means, you might be wondering what their nice Jewish girl like Esther eat in King Ahasuerus’s palace. The Gemara gives three different answers. ““And he advanced her and her maids to the best place in the house of the women.” Rav said: The advancement in the verse signals that he fed her food of Jews, i.e., kosher food.

“And Shmuel said an alternative understanding: The advancement was a well-intentioned act in that he fed her pig hinds, thinking she would view it as a delicacy, although in fact they were not kosher.

״. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said a third understanding: He gave her vegetables, which did not pose a problem with regard to the kosher laws. And so it states with regard to the kindness done for Daniel and his associates: “So the steward took away their food and the wine that they should drink; and gave them vegetables” (Daniel 1:16).” (Sefaria.org translation)

Did she really eat trief according to Shmuel? Rashi ד"ה קְדָלֵי דַחֲזִירֵי says yes she did, but she wasn’t punished because she had to eat it against her will. Tosefotד"ה קְדָלֵי דַחֲזִירֵי says absolutely not, God forbid.

Now you see where we have the custom of eating poppy seed delicacies on Purim. Thanks to Rabbi Yoḥanan we now enjoy mun hamentaschen.

Ahasuerus’ themed party TB Megillah 12

 Yesterday’s daf TB Megillah 11 established that King Ahasuerus was consistently evil throughout his whole life. The Gemara also explains why the events in the Megillah only began in the third year of his reign. Both Jeremiah and Daniel prophesied that the Jewish people will be redeemed from the Babylonian exile 70 years after the destruction of the Temple. Being a wicked person the king did not want to lose control over his Jewish subjects so he waited until he thought that 70 years had passed and the Jews were not yet redeemed to celebrate his control over them. “The second verse in Esther states: “In those days when the king Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom” (Esther 1:2), implying that the events to follow took place during the first year of his reign; and one verse afterward it is written: “In the third year of his reign” (Esther 1:3), indicating that it was the third year, not the first. Rava said: There is no contradiction. What is the meaning of “when he sat” [keshevet]? It is intended to indicate that he acted not immediately upon his rise to the throne, but rather after his mind was settled [shenityasheva], and he overcame his anxiety and worry with regard to the redemption of the Jewish people. He said to himself as follows: Belshazzar, the king of Babylonia, calculated and erred with regard to the Jewish people’s redemption. I too will calculate, but I will not err.” (Sefaria.org translation) If you’re interested, the Gemara provides the math for three wrong calculations as well as the correct answer when the 70 years of exile are over.

When Ahasuerus thought the 70 years were over and the Jews were still not redeemed, he threw a themed party to celebrate. The theme of course was a parody of the Jewish Temple. You might say for him it was a costume party. “The verse states: “When he showed the riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness” (Esther 1:4). Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that Ahasuerus wore the priestly vestments. Proof for this assertion may be adduced from the fact that the same terms are written with regard to the priestly vestments, as it is written here: “The riches of his glorious [kevod] kingdom and the honor of his majestic [tiferet] greatness.” And it is written there, with regard to the priestly garments: “For glory [kavod] and for majesty [tiferet]” (Exodus 28:2).” (Sefaria.org translation)

Of course before Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the first Temple in Jerusalem, he ransacked it and removed all the valuable utensils. According to our tradition the first two Babylonian kings did not use them. The third king Belshazzar who immediately preceded Ahasuerus also miscalculated the end of the 70 years. He thought that based on his calculations God would not redeemed the Jewish people and allow them to rebuild the Temple. Consequently, he was the first to use these holy utensils for a profane party (See the book of Daniel). Now based on his own miscalculations, Ahasuerus profaned these holy utensils at the lavish party he threw to celebrate the never-ending Jewish exile. “The verse states: “And they gave them drink in vessels of gold, the vessels being diverse [shonim] from one another” (Esther 1:7). The Gemara asks: Why does the verse use the term shonim to express that they are different? It should have said the more proper term meshunim. Rava said: A Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: The early ones, referring to Belshazzar and his people, were destroyed because they used these vessels, the vessels of the Temple, and yet you use them again [shonim]?” (Sefaria.org translation)

To highlight that these utensils and vessels came from the Temple, the reader of the Megillah will chant the verse “in vessels of gold, the vessels being diverse [shonim] from one another” in the special mournful Eicha melody before returning back to the happier melody of Megillat Esther. Pay attention to the chanting of the Megillah and you’ll hear two other occasions when a verse is chanted in the Eicha melody.

Even the King’s advisors names alluded to the Temple’s sacrificial cult. ““And next to him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan” (Esther 1:14). Rabbi Levi said: This entire verse listing the names of the king’s advisors is stated on account of offerings. Each name alludes to an aspect of the sacrificial service that was unique to the Jewish people, which the ministering angels mentioned as merit for the Jewish people.

״‘Carshena’; the ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, did the gentiles ever offer before You lambs [karim] of the first year [shana], as the Jewish people have offered before You? ‘Shethar’; have they ever offered before You two turtledoves [shetei torim]? ‘Admatha’; have they ever built before You an altar of earth [adama]? ‘Tarshish’; have they ever ministered before You in the priestly vestments, as it is written that on the fourth of the four rows of precious stones contained on the breastplate were: “A beryl [tarshish], an onyx, and a jasper” (Exodus 28:20). “Meres”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the blood of the offerings before You? ‘Marsena’; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the meal-offering before You? ‘Memucan’; have they ever prepared [hekhinu] the table before You, on which the shewbread was placed” (Sefaria.org translation)

Censorship TB Megillah 11

Beginning with yesterday’s daf and continuing into the end of the first chapter, our massekhet begins to explicate midrashically word by word and sentence by sentence the actual Megillat Esther. An example found on today’s daf TB Megillah 11 explains the meaning of the redundant word “הוּא -hu” in the first sentence. The midrash will prove that when the word “hu” is used in this way, the person behaves consistently either for bad or for good throughout his life.

““This is [hu] Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:1); the term hu, this is, comes to teach that he remained as he was in his wickedness from beginning to end. Similarly, wherever the words “this is” appear in this manner, the verse indicates that the individual under discussion remained the same from beginning to end, for example: “This is [hu] Esau” (Genesis 36:43); he remained in his wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [hu] Dathan and Abiram” (Numbers 26:9); they remained in their wickedness from beginning to end. “This is [hu] the king Ahaz” (II Chronicles 28:22); he remained in his wickedness from beginning to end.

“The Gemara continues: The word hu is also used to recognize sustained righteousness. “Abram, this is [hu] Abraham” (I Chronicles 1:27); this indicates that Abraham didn’t change, as he remained in his righteousness from beginning to end. Similarly, “This is [hu] Aaron and Moses” (Exodus 6:26); they remained in their righteousness from the beginning of their life to the end of their life. Similarly, with respect to David: “And David, this was [hu] the youngest” (I Samuel 17:14), indicates that he remained in his humility from beginning to end. Just as in his youth, when he was still an ordinary individual, he humbled himself before anyone who was greater than him in Torah, so too, in his kingship, he humbled himself before anyone who was greater than him in wisdom.” (Sefaria.org translation) King Ahasuerus is depicted in the Megillah itself as either a very gullible, manipulable, or silly person. The rabbis in the Talmud paint him as a very evil anti-Semite.

Obviously, before the printing press all copies of the Talmud were written by hand. Comparing these copies of the Talmud, we can see different versions of the same text. Based on a commentator’s explanation, sometimes scholars believe that his version of the Gemara is different than our printed text.

In the Middle Ages some texts were changed because of church censorship. “The words to be expurgated were scored through more or less heavily with pen and ink, and sometimes were rendered quite illegible by means of crosslines. In consequence of this heavy crossing with acid ink, the paper in the course of time frequently crumbled, as was especially the case with prayer-books, Bible commentaries, and liturgic works, wherein many so-called anti-Christian passages were treated with unusual severity. At the same time, in many other cases, the ink of the expurgator has in the course of centuries gradually faded and revealed the original text. The application of printing-ink, to render the passage completely and permanently illegible, seems to have been an invention of nineteenth-century censorship. Occasionally the objectionable passage was emended, not by being stricken out, but by the addition of one or more words, such as   after  , "worshipers of the stars and constellations"), in order to exclude any possibility of applying the word   to the holy images of the Christians. Sometimes a totally unobjectionable word was substituted for that erased by the reviser: thus, instead of  , that might be referred to the Christians, was inserted the word   ("Cuthean") or   ("Babylonian"); and for  , abbreviated into   ("strange rite"), which might also mean Christianity, was substituted  , abbreviated   ("idolatry"). Still, such emendations can hardly have been made by the Christian revisers, on account of the trouble connected therewith; they were probably undertaken by the Jewish owners themselves, either under compulsion or as a precaution. From the end of the sixteenth century, whenever a large part of the text of a folio, of a page, or even of a column was considered objectionable, the reviser, not taking the trouble to strike out the several expressions and passages, preferred to deal summarily by cutting or tearing out the whole folio or a part of it. This explains for example the absence of several folios from the middle (ch. iii., § 25) of Joseph Albo's "'Iḳḳarim" in most of the Italian copies of the first three editions.

"In several cases it has been definitely stated that the revisers lightened their work either by correcting only one copy of each book, and using that as a pattern for all the other copies of the same edition, or by employing the so-called "Index Expurgatorius" ( ), a list of passages to be expunged, prepared either by themselves or other experts.” (https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4170-censorship-of-hebrew-books)

Two examples can be found on today’s daf.

The first example: “And Shmuel said his introduction from here: “And yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them, nor will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break My covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God” (Leviticus 26:44). Shmuel explains: “I will not reject them”; this was in the days of the Greeks. “Nor will I abhor them”; this was in the days of Vespasian. “To destroy them utterly”; this was in the days of Haman. “To break My covenant with them”; this was in the days of the Persians. “For I am the Lord their God”; this is in the days of Gog and Magog.” (Sefaria.org. translation) Vespasian was the general who began to put down the first Jewish rebellion against Rome in the year 66 CE. In the course of events he was made Caesar and his son Titus led the Roman troops to victory and destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem. In the margins there is a list of variant versions of this text. One names him Caesar Vespasian. The second changes Vespasian to Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed the first Temple, and acknowledges that this was changed because of censorship.

The second example: “An alternative understanding was taught in a baraita: “I will not reject them”; this was in the days of the Chaldeans, when I appointed for them Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to pray on their behalf. “Nor will I abhor them”; this was in the days of the Greeks, when I appointed Shimon HaTzaddik for them, and the Hasmonean and his sons, and Mattithiah the High Priest. “To destroy them utterly”; this was in the days of Haman, when I appointed for them the righteous leaders Mordecai and Esther. “To break My covenant with them”; this was in the days of the Romans, when I appointed for them the Sages of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Sages of other generations. “For I am the Lord their God”; this will be in the future, when no nation or people of a foreign tongue will be able to subjugate them further.” (Sefaria. org translation) Instead of “in the days of the Romans, when I appointed for them,” a version reads “in the days of the Persians, when I appointed them” with the same reason for the scribal change, censorship.

I think even though at this time period alluded to, the Romans were pagans and not Christians, I think the church was sensitive and felt these versions could be understood as anti-Christian because the head of the church was in Rome. Therefore, the antagonists became either Babylonians or Persians instead of Romans.