obligation

like that which Rava said: [If one say to his fellow], "Here is an etrog [as a gift] on condition that you return it to me," and the latter took it and fulfilled his obligation with it, if he returned it, he has fulfilled his obligation, , but if he did not return it, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

like that which Rava said: [If one say to his fellow], "Here is an etrog [as a gift] on condition that you return it to me," and the latter took it and fulfilled his obligation with it, if he returned it, he has fulfilled his obligation, , but if he did not return it, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

like that which Rava said: [If one say to his fellow], "Here is an etrog [as a gift] on condition that you return it to me," and the latter took it and fulfilled his obligation with it, if he returned it, he has fulfilled his obligation, , but if he did not return it, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

They taught [that he is not liable] only when he had not yet fulfilled his obligation, but if he had fulfilled his obligation, he is liable. But once he lifts it up, he has fulfilled his obligation! Abaye answered: This is a case] where he held it upside down.

They taught [that he is not liable] only when he had not yet fulfilled his obligation, but if he had fulfilled his obligation, he is liable. But once he lifts it up, he has fulfilled his obligation! Abaye answered: This is a case] where he held it upside down.

They taught [that he is not liable] only when he had not yet fulfilled his obligation, but if he had fulfilled his obligation, he is liable. But once he lifts it up, he has fulfilled his obligation! Abaye answered: This is a case] where he held it upside down.

GEMARA. Is not this obvious? I might have said that, since a woman does not come under the obligation [of lulab] she may not take it, therefore he informs us [that she may].

A minor who knows how to shake the [lulav]. Our Rabbis taught, A minor who knows how to shake [the lulav] is subject to the obligation of the lulav; [if he knows how] to wrap himself [with a tallit] he is subject to the obligation of tzitzit; [if he knows how] to look after tefillin, his father must buy tefillin for him; if he is able to speak, his father must teach him Torah and the reading of the Shema.

A minor who knows how to shake the [lulav]. Our Rabbis taught, A minor who knows how to shake [the lulav] is subject to the obligation of the lulav; [if he knows how] to wrap himself [with a tallit] he is subject to the obligation of tzitzit; [if he knows how] to look after tefillin, his father must buy tefillin for him; if he is able to speak, his father must teach him Torah and the reading of the Shema.

Rather the first day, since the obligation to take the lulav is from the Torah even in the provinces the rabbis did not decree, but with regard to the other days for which there is no obligation from the Torah to take the lulav in the provinces, the Rabbis did decree.

Rather the first day, since the obligation to take the lulav is from the Torah even in the provinces the rabbis did not decree, but with regard to the other days for which there is no obligation from the Torah to take the lulav in the provinces, the Rabbis did decree.

From where do we derive that [the taking of the lulav] is Torah obligation in the Provinces? As it has been taught: "And you shall take" that the lulav must be taken in the hand by everyone of you; "for yourself" that it must be yours, thus excluding a borrowed or a stolen [lulav];

Abaye said to Rabbah: Why in the case of the lulav do we perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple, whereas in the case of the aravah we do not perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple? He answered him: Since one fulfils the obligation [of taking the aravah] with the aravah on the lulav. He said to him: But that one he does on account of the lulav? And if you will answer that one first raises it once and then raises it again, is it not a daily occurrence that we do not do so?

R. Ami said: The aravah must have a minimum size, it must be taken separately only, and one does not fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav. Since the Master said: It must be taken separately only is it not obvious that one cannot fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav?

R. Ami said: The aravah must have a minimum size, it must be taken separately only, and one does not fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav. Since the Master said: It must be taken separately only is it not obvious that one cannot fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav?

What might I have said? That that applies only where one does not lift [the lulav] a second time, but not where one does lift it a second time [he would fulfill his obligation], therefore he teaches us that it is not so. R. Hisda said in the name of R. Yitzchak: One may fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav.

What might I have said? That that applies only where one does not lift [the lulav] a second time, but not where one does lift it a second time [he would fulfill his obligation], therefore he teaches us that it is not so. R. Hisda said in the name of R. Yitzchak: One may fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav.

Hezekiah said in the name of R. Yirmiyah in the name of R. Shimon b. Yohai: For all of the commandments, one does not fulfil one’s obligation unless [the objects involved] are in the same condition as when they grow, for it is said, “Acacia wood standing up” (Exodus 26:15).

He who makes a lulav for his own use says, “Blessed [are You, O Lord our God, King of the Universe] who has kept us in life, and has preserved us, and enabled us to reach this season.” When he takes it to fulfill his obligation, he says, “Blessed [are You, O Lord our God, King of the Universe] who hast sanctified us by His commandments, and commanded us concerning the taking of the lulav” And even though he has recited the blessing on the first day, he must again recite it on all seven days. He who makes a Sukkah for his own use says, “Blessed [are You, O Lord our God, King of the Universe] who has kept us in life, and sustained us etc.” When he enters the Sukkah to dwell in it he says, ‘. . . Who has sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us to dwell in the Sukkah.” And once he has recited the blessing on the first day, he does not bless again.

The following dispute is based on the same principles] as the one between R. Yohanan and Resh Lakish. For it was stated: If one set apart seven etrogs for the seven days: Rav said: He may fulfil his obligation with each one and eat it immediately. R. Assi said: He may fulfil his obligation with each one and eat it the next day. What do they argue about? One Master holds that it is set apart for its mitzvah while the other holds that it is set apart for the whole day.

The following dispute is based on the same principles] as the one between R. Yohanan and Resh Lakish. For it was stated: If one set apart seven etrogs for the seven days: Rav said: He may fulfil his obligation with each one and eat it immediately. R. Assi said: He may fulfil his obligation with each one and eat it the next day. What do they argue about? One Master holds that it is set apart for its mitzvah while the other holds that it is set apart for the whole day.

If so, is not the seventh day of Pesah also different in respect of the commandment to eat matzah, since the Master said, On the first night it is an obligation [to eat matzah], from that point onward it is voluntary? How now! here it is different from the first night, but not from the day whereas in the case of the Eighth Day, it is different even from the preceding day.

like a slender snout, one being wide and the other narrow so that both emptied at the same time. The one on the west was for water and the one on the east for wine. If he poured the flask of water into the bowl for wine, or that of wine into that for water, he has fulfilled his obligation.

[But they looked silver] because their surfaces were darkened. It is well [as regards the flagon of the wine] since wine darkens, but how was that of the water darkened? Since the Master has said, if one poured the flagon of water into the bowl for wine, or that of wine into that for water, he has fulfilled his obligation, the [flagon] of water may also become darkened.

What might you have thought? That it is also in agreement with the view of the rabbis, and that it excludes the view of R. Yohanan who said that if a man heard the nine tekiahs in nine hours during the day he has still fulfilled his obligation.

Rav ruled, [The blessing of] the Sukkah [comes first] and then that of the season, since the obligation of the day is more important. Rabbah b. Bar Hannah said: [The blessing of] the season [is first], since that which is frequent precedes that which is infrequent.

Rava asked: Is between the reading of the Megillah and [attending to] a met mitzvah, which takes precedence? Shall I say that the reading of the Megillah takes precedence in order to publicize the miracle, or does perhaps [the burying of] the met mitzvah take precedence because of the respect due to human beings? After he asked the question, he himself answered it saying, Burying] the met mitzvah takes precedence, since a Master has said: Great is the [obligation to pay due] respect to human beings, since it overrides a negative precept of the Torah.

But with regard to the bringing the wood for the priests, the [fast of] Tisha B’Av, the hagigah (the festival sacrifice), and assembling the people they postpone [until after Shabbat] and they do not move them up. [The reason for the Fast of] Tisha B’av is that we do not hasten the approach of punishment. [The reason for] the festival sacrifice and the assembling of the people is that the time for their obligation has not yet arrived.

Rava said: If one eats his Purim feast on the night [of the fourteenth], he does not fulfill his obligation. What is the reason? It is written, “Days of feasting and gladness” (Esther 9:22). R. Ashi was sitting before R. Kahana. It grew late, and still the Rabbis did not arrive. He said to him: Why have the Rabbis not yet come? Perhaps they are busy with the Purim feast. He said to him: Could they not have had it last night? He replied Is the master not familiar with the statement, “If one eats his Purim feast on the night [of the fourteenth], he does not fulfill his obligation”? He said to him; Did Rava really say so? (He replied Yes). He then repeated it after him forty times, until he had safely stored it in his mind.

Rava said: If one eats his Purim feast on the night [of the fourteenth], he does not fulfill his obligation. What is the reason? It is written, “Days of feasting and gladness” (Esther 9:22). R. Ashi was sitting before R. Kahana. It grew late, and still the Rabbis did not arrive. He said to him: Why have the Rabbis not yet come? Perhaps they are busy with the Purim feast. He said to him: Could they not have had it last night? He replied Is the master not familiar with the statement, “If one eats his Purim feast on the night [of the fourteenth], he does not fulfill his obligation”? He said to him; Did Rava really say so? (He replied Yes). He then repeated it after him forty times, until he had safely stored it in his mind.

If one reads the Megillah out of order, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he reads it by heart, if he reads it in a translation [targum], or in any other language, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But they may read it to those who do not understand Hebrew in a language other than Hebrew. One who doesn't understand Hebrew who heard it in Assyrian [Hebrew], has fulfilled his obligation.

If one reads the Megillah out of order, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he reads it by heart, if he reads it in a translation [targum], or in any other language, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But they may read it to those who do not understand Hebrew in a language other than Hebrew. One who doesn't understand Hebrew who heard it in Assyrian [Hebrew], has fulfilled his obligation.

If one reads the Megillah out of order, he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he reads it by heart, if he reads it in a translation [targum], or in any other language, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But they may read it to those who do not understand Hebrew in a language other than Hebrew. One who doesn't understand Hebrew who heard it in Assyrian [Hebrew], has fulfilled his obligation.

If one reads it with breaks, or naps [in between readings], he has fulfilled his obligation. If he was copying it, explaining it or correcting [a scroll of Esther], if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

If one reads it with breaks, or naps [in between readings], he has fulfilled his obligation. If he was copying it, explaining it or correcting [a scroll of Esther], if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

If one reads it with breaks, or naps [in between readings], he has fulfilled his obligation. If he was copying it, explaining it or correcting [a scroll of Esther], if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

If it was written with arsenic, with red chalk, with gum or with sulfate of copper, or on paper or on scratch paper, he has not fulfilled his obligation, unless it is written in Assyrian on parchment and in ink.

But Rabbi also—is it not written, “hear”? — He requires that word to teach: Let your ear hear what comes out of your mouth. The Sages hold like the one who says: One who recites the Shema without making it heard by his ears, he has performed his obligation.

If he read it by heart, he has not fulfilled his obligation. From where do we know this? Rava said: The word “zekhirah” in one passage is derived from “zekhirah” in another. It is written here, “And these days shall be nizkarim [remembered]” (Esther 9:28) and it is written elsewhere, “Write this lezikaron [for a memorial] in the book” (Exodus 17:14). Just as there it was to be in a book, so here it must be in a book.

If he read it in translation, he has not fulfilled his obligation. How so? If you say that it was written in Hebrew and he read it in a translation? This is the same as reading by heart! It was only necessary for the case where it was written in a translation and he reads it in a translation.

But they may read it to those who do not speak Hebrew in a language other than Hebrew. But you have just said: If he read it in any other language, he has not fulfilled his obligation? Rav and Shmuel both said: In the Greek vernacular.

They objected [against Rav and Shmuel]: “If one reads it in Coptic, in Hebrew, in Elamean, in Median, in Greek, he has not fulfilled his obligation”!

This means only as in following: “If one reads it in Coptic to the Copts, in Hebrew to the Hebrews, in Elamean to the Elameans, in Greek to the Greeks, he has fulfilled his obligation.”

If one who does not understand Hebrew heard it read in Hebrew, he has fulfilled his obligation. But he does not know what they are saying? — He is like women and amei haaretz.

If one reads it with interruptions [serugin], he has fulfilled his obligation. The Rabbis did not know the meaning of serugin. They heard the maidservant of Rabbi’s household, saying to the rabbis on seeing them enter at intervals, “How long are you going to come in serugin serugin?

Our Rabbis taught: If the scribe had omitted letters or verses and the reader read them like the translator when he is translating, he has fulfilled his obligation.

If he napped he has still fulfilled his obligation What is considered napping? R. Ashi said: Sleeping, but not really sleeping. Awake, but not really awake. If they call him, he would answer. But he would not know how to offer a reasonable response, but when they remind him, he remembers.

If one was writing it, expounding it, or correcting it, if he directed his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation. How so? If he was arranging each verse and then writing it, what does it matter if he had intention? He is reciting it by heart! Rather he writes each verse and then recites it.

But does he thereby fulfill his obligation? Has not R. Helbo said in the name of R. Hama b. Guria who said it in the name of Rav, The halakhah is according to the one who says that all of it [must be recited], and even according to the one who says that it is sufficient [to recite] from "A Jew was" (Esther 2:5), it is necessary that the whole should be [already] written?

From where does a man read the Megillah and thereby fulfil his obligation? Rabbi Meir says: all of it. Rabbi Judah says: from “There was a Jew” (Esther 2:5). Rabbi Yose says: from “After these things” (3:1).

R. Judah said in the name of Shmuel: If one reads from a Megillah written among the rest of the Writings, he has not fulfilled his obligation. Rava said: This is the case only if it is not a little shorter or longer than the rest, but if it is a little shorter or longer than the rest, there is no problem with it.

which was written among the Writings. He said to him: Behold they have said: ‘If one reads from a Megillah written among the Writings, he has not fulfilled his obligation.

R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: One who reads the Megillah written among the rest of the Writings, he has not fulfilled his obligation; and he at once protested against this remark: [This was stated in reference to reading]: In a congregation.

GEMARA. Who is the Tanna that holds that [even if] the deaf person has read, it does not count? R. Matanah said: R. It is R. Yose, as we have learned: One who read the Shema but doesn’t make it heard to his ears, he has fulfilled his obligation. R. Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.

GEMARA. Who is the Tanna that holds that [even if] the deaf person has read, it does not count? R. Matanah said: R. It is R. Yose, as we have learned: One who read the Shema but doesn’t make it heard to his ears, he has fulfilled his obligation. R. Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.

What then will you say? That it follows R. Judah, and that he allows it even ab initio? What about this which has been taught: One should not bless birkat hamazon in his heart, but if he does do so, he has fulfilled his obligation. Whose opinion is this? It is neither that of R. Judah nor that of R. Yose. For if it were R. Judah, it would allow this even ab initio, and if R. Yose, it would disallow it even ex post facto.

He who reads the Megillah may either stand or sit. Whether one read it or two read it [together] they [those listening] have fulfilled their obligation. In places where it is the custom to say a blessing, they say the blessing, and where it is not the custom they do not say the blessing.

Whether one reads it or two read it, they have fulfilled their obligation.

One who makes his tefillin [for the head] round, it is dangerous and has no religious value. Shall we say that that we have already taught this, as our Rabbis taught: [The obligation for] tefillin to be square is a law set down by Moses at Sinai. And Rava explained [this refers] to their stitching and their diagonal.

And why do I find the expression, v'eth ha-aretz? To shew that the heaven preceded the earth. "And the earth was chaos and desolation" (Gen. i. 2). Assuredly He began with heaven at first. What reason then was there for His considering the affairs of the earth? The house of R. Ishmael teaches thus, He is like a king of flesh and blood, who saith to his servants, Rise up early and come to my door. He himself rises early, and finds women and men. Whom does he praise? Him who was under no obligation to rise early, yet did rise early.

Rava returned and said: "I said nothing! [This is what I should have said:] 'When he comes with his friend into a forest' (Deuteronomy 19:5). What [does it mean] 'forest'? If he goes or if he didn't go [i.e. it's an optional act]. And if you were to think it were a mitzvah, could he be sufficient [in meeting his obligation] if he didn't go?"