Siman 688

What is the time of its reading? As we learned in the Mishnah at the beginning of Megillah: The Megillah is read on the eleventh, on the twelfth, on the thirteenth, on the fourteenth, or on the fifteenth, no less and no more. And we derive this from that which is written: "to confirm these days of Purim in their times" – the sages ordained many times for them. And these are the times of its reading: Any city that was surrounded by a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, whether in the Land or outside the Land, even though it does not have a wall now – they read the Megillah in it on the fifteenth of Adar. And this is called a "kerach." And any city that was not surrounded by a wall from the days of Yehoshua, even though it is surrounded now – they read in it on the fourteenth, and this is called a "city." And Shushan the capital, even though it was not surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua – they read on the fifteenth, because the primary miracle occurred in it on the fifteenth, as it is written: "And the Jews who were in Shushan assembled... and rested on the fifteenth day of it."

The reason for the matter, that they divided this mitzvah between the open cities that are not surrounded by a wall and those surrounded by a wall, is because the primary miracle did not occur for both of them equally, as it is written: "And the rest of the Jews who were in the king's provinces gathered... on the thirteenth day of the month of Adar, and rested on the fourteenth day thereof, and made it a day of feasting and gladness. And the Jews who were in Shushan... and rested on the fifteenth day thereof, and made it a day of feasting and gladness. Therefore the Jews of the villages, who dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth day of the month of Adar a day of gladness and feasting and a yom tov, and of sending portions..." And this is what is written afterward: "And he sent letters to all the Jews... to enjoin them that they should keep the fourteenth day of the month of Adar, and the fifteenth day thereof, in every single year, as the days wherein the Jews rested from their enemies..." That is to say: they established upon themselves these two days, the fourteenth for the unwalled and the fifteenth for the walled. And it explains the reason: "as the days wherein they rested," meaning: since the miracle occurred for the unwalled on the fourteenth, and then they rested from their enemies. And for the walled the miracle occurred on the fifteenth, like Shushan, which did not rest until the fifteenth, and on the fifteenth they rested.

And perhaps you will say: in truth, why was the rest not equal? However, this matter is explained by the Megillah itself, as it is written: "And in the twelfth month... on the thirteenth day of it, on the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped... and it was overturned... the Jews gathered... and no man could withstand them." And automatically, they rested after this day, and they made the fourteenth day a day of feasting and gladness. However, afterward it is written: "And Esther said... let it be granted to the Jews who are in Shushan to do tomorrow also according to this day's decree... and the Jews who were in Shushan gathered also on the fourteenth day of the month of Adar..." And for this reason, since they were occupied with war on the fourteenth day as well, it follows that the rest did not occur until the fifteenth day. Therefore, all those in walled cities learned from Shushan, which was also surrounded by a wall, to observe Purim on the fifteenth, and the unwalled towns on the fourteenth. And even though we depend upon the walling from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun—this is for another reason, as will be explained. But nevertheless, the primary reason is: since Shushan was surrounded by a wall, all those in walled cities likened themselves to Shushan, and all the unwalled towns on the fourteenth. (And this is the intention of the Ran at the beginning of Megillah. And the difficulty of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, is well-settled; see there. Examine it and you will find it simple.)

And why did they link the wall-encirclement to the days of Yehoshua? For we should have linked it to the days of Achashverosh, like Shushan. Regarding this they said in the Yerushalmi: In order to accord honor to Eretz Yisrael; that is to say: Eretz Yisrael was desolate in those days. And since they needed to establish a distinction between walled cities and unwalled cities, if they had established the wall-encirclement from the days of Achashverosh—all of Eretz Yisrael would have been judged as unwalled cities, and there would not have been even one city within it, and you have no greater disgrace than this. Therefore, they established it for the days of Yehoshua. (And the Ramban, of blessed memory, wrote that at that time the majority of Israel were in Eretz Yisrael from the time of Koresh, and those in walled cities imagined that they were not in danger because they were closed in like fortresses. Therefore it is written only "Therefore the Jews of the unwalled cities...". And walled cities were not mentioned at all, until Hashem enlightened their eyes, and they found support from the Torah. Mordechai, Esther, and the Men of the Great Assembly arose and instituted for these on the fourteenth, and for those on the fifteenth. And the Ran, of blessed memory, rejected this, see there. And it seems to me that on the contrary: those in walled cities were in greater danger, and therefore they did not rest until the fifteenth.)

And they expounded in the Gemara ibid.: that besides the fourteenth and fifteenth—there are three additional times: the eleventh, the twelfth, and the thirteenth. And this is for the villagers, who do not have a fixed beit knesset. And they only gather in the city on Monday and Thursday for the reading of the Torah, and also to be judged, because the beit din sits on Monday and Thursday according to the enactment of Ezra in Bava Kamma (82a). And the people of the villages are not proficient in reading the Megillah, and they require one of the city dwellers to read it for them, and the sages did not burden them to delay and come on the fourteenth day. And sometimes the day of entry falls on the eleventh, and sometimes on the twelfth, and sometimes on the thirteenth, as will be explained (Rashi at the beginning of Megillah).

How so? If the fourteenth falls on a Monday or a Thursday—they read on that day like all of Israel. However, if it falls on another day—they move it earlier and read on the day of entry adjacent to the fourteenth. How so? If the fourteenth falls on the first day of the week—they move it earlier and read on Thursday, which is the eleventh day. If it falls on Tuesday—they read on the preceding day of entry, which is the thirteenth day. If it falls on Wednesday—they move it earlier and read on Monday, which is the twelfth day. And similarly, if it falls on Friday, and they read on Thursday—it is also on the thirteenth day. And more than this is not found, obviously. And know: that all those who move it earlier—are not permitted to read it with fewer than ten, which is not the case for its proper time, as I will write in siman 692.

Since the reason is because of the day of entry, therefore, when it is not the custom of the villagers to enter the city on Monday and Thursday—they only read it at its time, on the fourteenth. And what is the definition of a "city" and the definition of a "village"? We learned in the Mishnah (5a): What is a large city? Any that has ten batlanim. Fewer than this—it is considered a village. And batlanim—these are those who sit day and night in the beit knesset, and are sustained by the community, so that there will be ten available for prayer in the beit knesset. And even a metropolis which is a place of markets, and many people come to it from outside, if it does not have ten batlanim—it is judged as a village (3a). The Rambam omitted this, and his reason will be explained in section 10. And so we say in the Gemara ibid.: A metropolis that was settled and afterwards walled—it is judged as a village. And this too the Rambam did not bring, because he holds like the explanation of Rashi, that it does not deal with the matter of Megillah but rather with the matter of houses in walled cities. However, the Tosafot there wrote that this is for Megillah, see there.

The Rambam wrote that if there are not ten men there—its remedy is its ruin, and they are like the residents of a large city, and they only read on the fourteenth. Thus far his words. The Ra'avad complained about this, see there. However, it is explicitly stated so in the Yerushalmi (chapter one, halacha 4), and the matter is as follows: for the Yerushalmi and the Rambam do not hold according to the approach of Rashi and Tosafot, that the day of assembly for the villages is when they enter the city, as we have explained. Rather, they themselves have a synagogue, only they do not gather there except on Monday and Thursday. Therefore, there must be ten Israelites in the village, for if not—even on Monday and Thursday they will not gather. Consequently, their status is like a city, and they only read on the fourteenth. And this is what it says: its remedy is its ruin. That is to say: even though when there are not ten—it is a remedy to be judged as a village, as I wrote regarding a city that does not have ten batlanin, but here it is a ruin, since there are not ten there at all. And even though from our Shas it seemingly appears like Rashi and Tosafot, nevertheless the Rambam was not concerned by it, and he holds that our Shas also explains like the Yerushalmi.

And all of this was during the time when Israel dwelt upon their land, and the years were according to their proper order, and the messengers of the beit din would go out to inform the people when Purim was and when Pesach was, so that they would not come to a stumbling block regarding chametz on Pesach. But in this time when Israel is scattered and separated, and our eyes are lifted toward the reading of the Megillah, and everyone knows that the time for reading the Megillah is on the fourteenth of Adar, and from there it is thirty days until the eve of Pesach—they do not read it even in the villages except in its proper time. And that practice of reading before the time on the day of assembly has been nullified. Rather, the majority of the world reads on the fourteenth, and walled cities on the fifteenth.

It has already been explained that walled cities surrounded by a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, even if they are not surrounded now, read on the fifteenth, and even if they are outside of the Land. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch wrote in section 1: even if they do not have ten batlanim, see there. And even though it is stated in the Gemara (3b) that it is judged as a village—this refers to one not surrounded from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun, for then its law is to read on the fourteenth like a city. Therefore, when there are not ten batlanim there, it is like a village. But in a surrounded city, where its law is on the fifteenth, it never becomes like a village. Thus wrote the Tosafot and the Rosh there. And this is also the opinion of the Rambam, who omitted this law, as I wrote in section 7. However, the Ramban and the Rashba hold that this law applies even in a city surrounded by a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun. (See there in the Maggid Mishneh and in the Beit Yosef. And the Ran agreed with the Tosafot, see there. And proof for this is from the fact that in the Land of Israel they read in several places on the fifteenth, even though there are not ten batlanim there. However, one could say that since there are ten who go to pray every single day, morning and evening, it is like ten batlanim).

Our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, wrote: Specifically where it was fenced and afterwards settled, or if he settled initially with the intent to fence it afterwards. This is to exclude where he settled initially with the intent not to fence it; however, ordinarily, it is fenced and afterwards settled. Thus far his words, for such is the way of most provinces: they fence a wall initially, and afterwards they settle them (Ran). And they raised a difficulty regarding this: for above in siman 401 it was explained to the contrary, that first they build the houses and afterwards they fence the wall (Magen Avraham subsection 2). However, this is not a contradiction, for certainly at the beginning they build some houses, and afterwards they fence the wall, and afterwards the main settlement increases. Therefore above, where we only require a fence for a dwelling – it is called "settled and afterwards fenced." For since there were some houses – the fence is for a dwelling. But here regarding a walled city – we require fenced and afterwards settled, meaning: the main increase of the settlement, and this is after the fencing (Taz subsection 2). And the truth is so, for therefore in Eruvin the language "fenced for a dwelling" and "not fenced for a dwelling" is common. And in Megillah the language is: "settled and afterwards fenced," "fenced and afterwards settled," because this refers to the main settlement, and not just to the name of a mere dwelling. (And so in Eruvin 24a it says: opened and afterwards fenced, fenced and afterwards opened. And it did not use the language "settled" but rather "opened" regarding a minority of houses. Examine and you will find it simple.)

We say in the Gemara there: A walled city and everything adjacent to it, and everything visible with it—is judged like a walled city. And adjacent even though it is not visible, such as if the village sits in a valley. And visible even though it is not adjacent, such as if it sits on a mountain. Provided that they are not further than a mil, and this is regarding adjacent and not visible. But visible and not adjacent—even more than a mil. And some say that in both of them it is a mil, but that on a mountain one does not measure the incline (Taz, subsection 3).

A walled city that is in doubt whether it was surrounded by a wall in the days of Yehoshua or not – they read on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth. And on their nights, and one should not recite the blessing except on the fourteenth, which is the time of reading for the majority of the world, and we follow the majority. And regarding this, the law of "kavuah" does not apply, for "kavuah" only applies when all the doubts are in one place, like the nine shops (Eliyah Rabbah). Furthermore: for even "kavuah" is considered like half-and-half, and how could one recite a blessing out of doubt? And it is not similar to the second day of Yom Tov, which is an enactment of the sages for the entire world. But here the sages did not enact, because it is a matter that is not common at all, and for a remote occurrence it is not appropriate to make an enactment (and the difficulty of the Rashal, brought by the Taz and the Magen Avraham subsection 6, is settled). And in the diaspora this doubt is not found, and specifically all of our countries which certainly did not exist at all in the days of Yehoshua. And regarding Tveryah, we say in the Gemara (5b) that there is a doubt whether the sea adjacent to it is judged as a wall or not, and therefore they read on both of them. And likewise, one should not recite the blessing except on the fourteenth, like the majority of the world. (And it is possible that in Tveryah, since it is a legal doubt – they should not recite the blessing neither on the fourteenth nor on the fifteenth, according to the opinion of the Ri in the Tur regarding other doubts as well, see there.)

A resident of a town who went to a walled city, and a resident of a walled city who went to a town: if when he went it was his intention to return to his home on the night of the fourteenth before the day dawns – he reads like the people of his own place, even if he was delayed there. And if it is not his intention to return until the day of the fourteenth dawns – he reads like the people of the place where he went. How so? A resident of a walled city who went to a town, if it was his intention to return to his place on the night of the fourteenth – he reads like the people of his own place, even if he was delayed afterwards in the town. But if his intention is to stay there for part of the fourteenth, since it is his intention to stay there for part of the time of the day's reading – the obligation of their time of reading falls upon him, and he reads with them. And so too a resident of a town who went to a walled city: if his intention is to return to his home on the night of the fourteenth, before the day dawns – he reads like the people of his own place. But if it was his intention to stay there for part of the fourteenth, since it was not his intention to return to his place at the time of the obligation of the people of his own place – the obligation of the reading of the people of his own place is removed from him, and he is considered like the residents of the place where he stayed, to become obligated at the time of their reading (Tur). And this matter, that it depends on part of the day of the fourteenth and not on the night, is because the primary obligation of its reading is in the day, as I wrote in siman 687. Furthermore: behold in all matters, when one goes from his place to another city – it depends only on his intention to return or his lack of intention to return, and the return is even after a long time; why then here does the return depend only on part of the day of the fourteenth? Rather, our sages, of blessed memory, expounded this from a verse in Megillah (19a), as it is written: "Therefore the Jews of the villages, who dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth day..." And this "who dwell in the unwalled towns" is superfluous, for since it is written "the Jews of the villages" – it is understood of itself that they are the ones dwelling there. Rather, it comes to teach us that a villager for a day is called a villager, meaning: that even if he dwells only for his day of the fourteenth in a city that is not surrounded by a wall – his law is like a villager. And part of the day is like the whole of it. And automatically, a resident of a walled city for a day or part of a day – is called a resident of a walled city, and therefore we require specifically part of the day.

However, according to this, it would seem that a resident of a town who went to a walled city, in order to be judged like the people of the walled city, would need to have the intention to be for part of the fifteenth day in the walled city. For then the obligation of a walled city takes effect upon him, and not based on his intention to be there for part of the fourteenth day. And indeed, Rashi, of blessed memory, explained thus: that a resident of a walled city who went to a town depends on part of the fourteenth day, and a resident of a town who went to a walled city depends on part of the fifteenth day; see there. Only the Rosh, of blessed memory, disagrees with him, and he holds that even regarding a resident of a town who went to a walled city, it depends on part of the fourteenth day. For when his intention was to be for part of the fourteenth day in the walled city, the obligation of a resident of a town departs from him, and the obligation of a resident of a walled city takes effect upon him; even if he left from there and was in his town on the fifteenth day, he reads in his town on the fifteenth, as if he were in the walled city. And in this path the Tur followed; see there.

From the words of the Rambam in the first chapter, law 10, it is explained like Rashi, for he wrote: A resident of a town who went to a walled city, or a resident of a walled city who went to a town: if it was his intention to return to his place at the time of reading, and he was delayed and did not return – he reads according to his place. And if it was not his intention to return until after the time of reading – he reads with the people of the place where he is. Thus far his words, and "time of reading" implies explicitly like the reading of the place. And this is like Rashi and not like the Rosh, for according to the Rosh he should have said "at the time of the reading of the fourteenth." And so wrote the Maggid Mishneh and the Kesef Mishneh, see there. And this is also the intention of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in section 5. (And the words of the Taz, subsection 6, are not clear to me, see there). And our teacher, the Rema, wrote: that if he is in the desert or on a ship – he reads on the fourteenth like the majority of the world. Thus far his words. That is to say: that a resident of a walled city who was in the desert or on a ship – does not read on the fifteenth, for it is no better than if he were in a town on the fourteenth. And regarding this matter, the desert and a ship are like a town and not like a walled city, because the majority of the world is so. Nevertheless, in this it seems to me: that if he is destined to come home on the fifteenth – he should not read on the fourteenth. For it is well when he is in a town on the fourteenth – the obligation of the people of the place falls upon him. But at sea or in the desert – there is no obligation there, rather if he is there also on the fifteenth, it follows that his obligation is like the majority of the world. And this is the intention of our teacher, the Rema.

And behold, according to our fixed calendar, it is impossible for the fourteenth day to fall on Shabbat. However, the fifteenth can fall on Shabbat, and the sages forbade those in walled cities from reading the Megillah on Shabbat, as a decree lest one carry it four cubits in the public domain, just as they abolished shofar and lulav when they fall on Shabbat. And how shall those in walled cities act? They shall read the Megillah on the fourteenth on the eve of Shabbat, and they shall also give matanot la'evyonim then, for on Shabbat it is impossible to give money, as it is muktzeh. And on the preceding Shabbat, they read Parashat "Zakhor" with the haftarah of "Pakad Pakadeti." And in a place where they are accustomed to collect money for the poor and distribute it—they collect and distribute on the fourteenth on the eve of Shabbat. And on Shabbat they take out two scrolls, and read in one the order of the day, and in the second "Vayavo Amalek," and the haftarah is "Pakad Pakadeti." And they say "Al HaNissim." And the seudah is after the Shabbat. So it is stated in the Yerushalmi, and consequently, mishloach manot is also on the following day. And there is one who disagrees with this, but one should not deviate from the words of the Yerushalmi. And even though they do not read the Megillah on Shabbat, nevertheless they ask and expound upon the matters of the day. And there is one who says that the Megillah is muktzeh, and it is forbidden to handle it (Pri Chadash). And it is a wonder: Is it then not fit to study from it, and behold they ask and expound upon the matters of the day? And so too on all Shabbats, it is like all the Prophets and Writings (and so wrote the author of Machatzit HaShekel).

One who sets sail on the sea, or one who departs with a caravan, and will not have a megilla on Purim – shall read it on the thirteenth, or on the twelfth, or on the eleventh, which are the times of the villages as has been explained. And he shall read without a berakha, as this is merely for a general remembrance. And there is one who says that he requires ten, according to the law of a reading not in its time which requires ten (Magen Avraham subsection 13). And I do not understand: since it is without a berakha it is nothing more than general study, and behold it is not a rabbinic enactment at all. Therefore, some say that if it is impossible for him to wait until these days – he may read even from Rosh Chodesh, for a general remembrance. However, if a megilla happens to be available to him afterwards on the fourteenth – he returns and reads it with a berakha, for the previous reading is nothing, and as I have written. And even if he read it on the thirteenth – it is nothing, for it was not in its time. And so too a resident of an unwalled city who was on the road on the fourteenth, and did not have a megilla in his hand, and afterwards it became available to him on the fifteenth – he reads it on the fifteenth, since it is a time for walled cities. And it seems to me that he reads without a berakha, and automatically he does not require ten. And some say that he reads with a berakha (Taz subsection 9), and in my humble opinion it does not appear so.