Reading the Megillah
[7] (Halacha 1039)
Question: Are children obligated to hear the Megillah?
Answer: It is stated in the Talmud Yerushalmi1: 'Bar Kappara said: One must read it before women and before minors, for they too were in the danger. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did so, gathering his sons and the members of his household and reading it before them.'
From the plain meaning of the words of the Yerushalmi it appears that the obligation of minors regarding the Megillah is not like their obligation in the other mitzvos from the aspect of chinuch, but rather it is similar to the obligation of women, from the aspect that they were part of the same miracle. And so it is explained in the Behag2, who wrote: 'Women, slaves, and minors are exempt from reading the Megillah, but they are obligated to hear it. Why? Because all were in the danger of being destroyed, killed, and annihilated, and since all were in the danger, all are obligated to hear it. (Yerushalmi ch. 2) Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would gather all the members of his household and read the Megillas Esther before them. Rabbi Yonah, the father of Rabbi Muna, would make a point of reading it before the women of his household, for all were in the danger, and all are obligated to hear it — both women and slaves and minors.'
And these are the words of the Hagahos Maimoniyos3: In the Tosefta it is taught: All are obligated in the reading of the Megillah — Kohanim, Levi'im, and Yisraelim, etc., until: women, slaves, and minors are exempt and do not discharge the obligation of the public. And the Behag explains: women, slaves, and minors are exempt from reading the Megillah, but they are obligated to hear it. And so it is implied in the Yerushalmi, chapter 'One who reads the Megillah out of order': Bar Kappara says one must read it before men, women, and minors, for they too were part of the same miracle. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did so, gathering his sons and the members of his household and reading it before them. And so too Rabbeinu Chananel held that women are obligated to hear the reading of the Megillah, etc.
But the Rambam4 wrote: 'The reading of the Megillah in its time is a positive mitzvah of Rabbinic origin, and it is well known that it is an enactment of the Prophets, and all are obligated in its reading .. and we educate the minors to read it.'
And the Maggid Mishneh wrote: 'And the law of the minors, that we educate them, is explained in the sugya of the chapter "One who reads the Megillah out of order" (19b).'
The Abudraham5 [cited by the Kenesses HaGedolah6] wrote: 'And if you should say that even minors should be obligated in the Megillah, for it is written "children and women," and even though in the Yerushalmi it is taught that Bar Kappara said one must read it before women and before minors, for they too were in the danger. Nevertheless, in our Gemara it states only that women alone are obligated, and it disagrees with the Yerushalmi. And one may answer that since women are subject to the negative mitzvos, though not to the time-bound positive mitzvos, they imposed upon them the mitzvah of the Megillah even though it is a time-bound positive mitzvah, since they were part of the same miracle. But minors, who are not subject to mitzvos at all, we do not obligate even though they were part of the same miracle.' End quote.
The Tur7 also wrote like the words of the Rambam: 'All are obligated in the reading of the Megillah .. and we also educate the minor in it.'
[The Ritva8 wrote to explain that this is the reasoning behind the dispute of the Tannaim [to be cited in the following halachos] as to whether a minor may read the Megillah on behalf of an adult: 'But here they disagree in this: that Rabbi Yehudah holds that once he has reached the age of chinuch for the other mitzvos, it is fitting to obligate him in the Megillah, since he was part of the same miracle, similar to how they obligated in it the women, who were exempt from it by strict law since it is a time-bound positive mitzvah, and they obligated them since they were part of the same miracle. And the Rabbanan hold that women, who in general are subject to obligation, are obligated, treating it as though it were a mitzvah that is not time-bound; but a minor, who is exempt even from the severe Torah prohibitions and from punishments, even in this mitzvah we do not obligate him on the grounds that he was part of the same miracle, and this reason is sound, and the halacha is like the Rabbanan.']
> If so, the Rishonim disagree as to whether, since the minors too were part of the same miracle, there is upon them a mitzvah to hear the Megillah, or whether there is no special mitzvah upon them, but rather the law of chinuch as in all the mitzvos.
In practice the Mechaber9 wrote: 'And we educate the minors to read it.'
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe10: 'For Birkas HaMazon is not similar to the Megillah and Hallel and the brochos of Krias Shema and the other mitzvos whose essence is of Rabbinic origin, in which a minor who has reached the age of chinuch does not discharge the obligation of an adult, because the minor in himself, as he is now, is entirely exempt, except that we educate him so that he should become accustomed to this mitzvah and so that he should be habituated as his practice when he grows up; therefore it is not proper that he should discharge the obligation of one who is already an adult, even though his obligation is only of Rabbinic origin, since the minor too is not obligated in this obligation except for the sake of habituating him for when he grows up, at which point he will become subject to this obligation of Rabbinic origin.'
And the Mishnah Berurah11 wrote: 'The minors — that is, one who has reached the mitzvah of chinuch, and see further in subsection 6. And since women too are obligated, it is obvious that with girls too there is the matter of the mitzvah of chinuch.'
> If so, in practice, boys and girls who have reached the age of chinuch must be educated to hear the reading of the Megillah12. In the following halacha we will see the law of minors who have not reached the age of chinuch, and whether the obligation of chinuch includes hearing it amid a large gathering.
Notes:
1 מגילה פ"ב ה"ה ↩
2 סי' יט הל' מגילה ↩
3 הל' מגילה פ"א [א] ↩
4 הל' מגילה פ"א ה"א ↩
5 ברכת המצות ומשפטיהם ↩
6 הגהב"י או"ח סי' תרפט ס"ק ד ↩
7 או"ח סי' תרפט ↩
8 מגילה יט, ב ↩
9 שו"ע או"ח סי' תרפט ס"א ↩
10 שו"ע או"ח סי' קפו ס"ג ↩
11 סי' תרפט ס"ק ג ↩
12 וראה לקו"ש חי"ז ע' 235 הערה 32 ↩
[8] (Halacha 1040)
Minors in the reading of the Megillah (2)
In the previous halacha we saw two reasons for minors hearing the Megillah: a) since they were part of the same miracle. b) from the aspect of chinuch. And in practice it was ruled that there is an obligation of chinuch from the age of chinuch.
Question: Must one educate also children below the age of chinuch in hearing the Megillah, and bring them to the synagogue on account of the first reason mentioned above?
Answer: It is written in the Talmud Yerushalmi1: 'Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did so, gathering his sons and the members of his household and reading it before them.'
And the Korban HaEdah explained: 'Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. He did so and gathered his young sons and the young members of his household and read before them.'
And the Ravyah2 wrote: 'We have the version in the Yerushalmi .. Bar Kappara said one must read it before men and women and before minors, for they too were part of the same miracle, in the danger of being destroyed, killed, and annihilated. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did so, gathering the members of his household and reading it before them; and this is as I explained above; and this is why he does not raise a difficulty from the Tosefta against Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. However, it appears to me that since the reason is given because they were in the danger, even a minor who has not reached the age of chinuch, provided that he knows how to understand, must hear the reading of the Megillah, as we say "just as it is with men and the ignorant," and we conclude "rather, the publicizing of the miracle" — meaning one who knows how to ask, and we publicize the miracle to them.'
> If so, it is explained in the Ravyah that one must educate also minors below the age of chinuch in hearing the Megillah, since they too were part of the same miracle.
And some have written that this is also the intent of the words of the Tur and the Mechaber, as follows:
The Tur3 wrote: Yerushalmi — Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would gather the members of his household and read before them; from here it is the practice in some places to bring boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah.'
And so the Mechaber4 ruled in practice: 'It is a good minhag to bring boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah.'
And the Levush5 wrote: 'It is the practice to bring boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah, to educate them in the mitzvah of publicizing the miracle. And for this reason it is the practice of the congregation to read these verses aloud, for they are the essence of the beginning of the miracle and its end, namely: "איש יהודי," "ומרדכי יצא," "ליהודים," "כי מרדכי," in order to rouse the minors so that they should not sleep and should set their hearts upon the reading, and we have them read these verses in order to educate them.'
But one must understand what the novelty is in this halacha, for the Mechaber already wrote at the beginning of the siman6 that there is an obligation of chinuch in the reading of the Megillah7. And the Chelkas Yaakov8 wrote to explain that in this halacha the Mechaber is speaking about young children below the age of chinuch: 'Behold, regarding a minor it is explained at the end of siman 689, and these are his words: It is a good minhag to bring boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah; and its source is in the Tur in the name of the Yerushalmi, and this refers even to minors who have not reached the age of chinuch .. For if it referred to one who has reached the age of chinuch, the wording in siman 186 in the Tur and Mechaber is "a minor is obligated by Rabbinic law in order to educate him in Birkas HaMazon," and so too in the Rambam at the beginning of Hilchos Brochos chapter 5, the implication being that the obligation is upon the minor .. and here the wording is "it is a good minhag to bring the minors etc.," implying that the obligation is upon the father; whereas one who has reached the age of chinuch — the obligation is upon the child himself; and moreover, the wording "a good minhag" would not be fitting, for it is obvious that he is obligated in chinuch; rather here it refers even to one who has not reached the age of chinuch, only that on account of publicizing the miracle it is a mitzvah to bring the minors to the synagogue for the reading of the Megillah, and so too the wording in the Levush, "in order to educate them in the mitzvah of publicizing the miracle etc., in order to rouse the minors so that they should not sleep and should set their hearts upon the reading"; from this wording it is plainly evident that even regarding minors who have not reached the age of chinuch the obligation is on account of "a good minhag" to bring them on account of publicizing the miracle, (and it is somewhat astonishing regarding the Mishnah Berurah in the Biur Halacha at the end of siman 689, where he wrote that here it refers to one who has reached the age of chinuch, since with very young minors they only cause confusion, as the Magen Avraham wrote — and one who looks will see that here it refers even to one who has not reached the age of chinuch, and even so the father is obligated to bring them on account of publicizing the miracle, understood in a manner in which they do not cause confusion).'
And so wrote the Baalei Tamar9: 'Indeed it appears that the intent of the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch is like the words of the Ravyah, that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi read before the young members of his household who had not reached the age of chinuch but who knew how to understand and to ask; and know that this is so, for he wrote "from here it is the practice in some places," and if it referred to minors who have reached the age of chinuch it would be an obligation everywhere.'
And ostensibly so too it appears from the words of the Magen Avraham10, who wrote on the words of the Mechaber: 'Provided that they do not bring very young minors who confuse the minds of the listeners.'
This implies that he is speaking about minors below the age of chinuch, except that even so one should not bring very young minors who cause confusion.
And on what the Magen Avraham wrote, not to bring children who disturb the hearing of the Megillah, the Mishnah Berurah11 wrote: 'And nowadays, in our many sins, the opposite is the case, for besides that they do not listen, they cause such confusion that even the adults are unable to listen, and their whole coming is only to strike Haman; and in this the father fulfills no mitzvah of chinuch at all, and in truth, from the aspect of the mitzvah of chinuch, every father must keep his young sons next to him and watch over them that they hear the reading, and when the reader reaches the mention of the name of Haman the Agagite the minor may strike it as is his custom, but not that this should be the essence of bringing the minor to the beis hamidrash'12.
The Rebbe, in the sicha of Motzaei Shabbos Kodesh Vayakhel 573813, aroused on the importance of bringing young children to the synagogue despite the noise they make at the blotting out of Haman: 'One must bring the boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah, and even though the Acharonim (the Shelah and the Magen Avraham) warn that the minors can disrupt the hearing of the Megillah, then even if for some reason they do in fact cause confusion .. there is indeed an available remedy (as is the practice in several places) of waiting until the boys and girls finish striking Haman with the simplicity and earnestness that they have, and only afterward to continue the reading of the Megillah in a manner in which there is no concern that they will disturb the reading of the Megillah'14.
> If so, we have seen that several of the poskim wrote that there is value in having even children below the age of chinuch hear the Megillah, and it is important to take them to the synagogue for this purpose, and one need not be concerned about the noise they make at the blotting out of Haman.
Notes:
1 מגילה פ"ב ה"ה ↩
2 מגילה סי' תקסט ↩
3 או"ח סי' תרפט ↩
4 שו"ע או"ח סי' תרפט ס"ו ↩
5 או"ח שם ס"ג ↩
6 ראה הלכה מספר 1039 ↩
7 המשנ"ב ביאר שהמחבר בה"א דיבר על ילדים מגיל חינוך, והחידוש בהלכה זו הוא שיש להביאם ג"כ לביהכנ"ס, ונראה את הפרטים בזה בהלכה הבאה. וראה מה שביאר הרבי בשיחת ש"פ ויקהל תשל"ח דלקמן ↩
8 שו"ת או"ח סי' רלב אות א ↩
9 על הירושלמי במגילה שם ↩
10 שם ס"ק יא ↩
11 שם ס"ק יח ↩
12 וראה חזון עובדיה פורים מהל' מקרא מגילה דין ה והערה כו ↩
13 שיחו"ק מהדו"ח ע' 162 ואילך ↩
14 וראה שיחת ש"פ שלח תש"מ (שיחו"ק ח"ג ע' 380). ושיחת ש"פ צו תשמ"א (שיחו"ק ח"ב ע' 735) ↩
[9] (Halacha 1041)
Minors in the reading of the Megillah (3)
In the previous halacha we saw what the Tur and the Mechaber wrote1: 'It is a good minhag to bring boys and girls to hear the reading of the Megillah.'
And we saw that some explained that the Mechaber was speaking about young children below the age of chinuch; however, some explained that the Mechaber is speaking regarding bringing children of the age of chinuch to the synagogue, as follows:
The Hagahos Ashri2 wrote, and the Darkei Moshe3 cited it: 'Therefore, those people who leave the synagogue and read the Megillah in their homes are not doing well, but rather one must come with his wife and his children to the synagogue to hear the reading of the Megillah. From the Or Zarua.'
It is explained from their words that people were accustomed to read the Megillah at home, and on this they wrote that this is not a good practice, but rather one must go to the synagogue to hear it with the congregation.
And the Mishnah Berurah wrote in the Biur Halacha4 that this too is the Mechaber: 'Behold, surely the intent of the Mechaber is specifically regarding minors who have reached the age of chinuch, for the very young minors only cause confusion, as the Magen Avraham wrote, and if so, how is "a good minhag" relevant — for by strict law one is obligated to educate them in the reading of the Megillah or at least in hearing it, as above; and perhaps in this he would have fulfilled the obligation had he read before them in their home, but in order to publicize the miracle more, it is the practice to bring them to the beis hamidrash so that they should hear it with the congregation, in order to educate them, so that in their adulthood too they should hear it with the congregation.'
> If so, according to the Mishnah Berurah, at first the Mechaber wrote the very obligation of chinuch for children of the age of chinuch to hear the Megillah, and now in this halacha he added that there is also a minhag to educate them to hear it with the congregation, even though this is not part of the obligation of chinuch.
However, many Acharonim have commented on the words of the Mishnah Berurah. The Baalei Tamar5 wrote: 'And it is astonishing, for the source of the words of the Tur is from Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, and he was reading in his home.'
And the Chelkas Yaakov6 commented: 'And it is somewhat astonishing regarding the Mishnah Berurah in the Biur Halacha at the end of siman 689, where he wrote that here it refers to one who has reached the age of chinuch, since with very young minors they cause confusion, as the Magen Avraham wrote; and one who looks will see that here it refers even to one who has not reached the age of chinuch, and even so the father is obligated to bring them on account of publicizing the miracle, understood in a manner in which they do not cause confusion.'
[And to note that also from the words of the Leket Yosher7 it is explained that they were accustomed to bring minors below the age of chinuch to the synagogue: 'And a minor who has reached the age of chinuch, that is, one who is nine years old, as we say in Maseches Yoma, is obligated in the Megillah. Nevertheless, the minhag is to bring very young minors for the sake of joy to hear the Megillah.']
The Piskei Teshuvos8 further commented: 'And it requires investigation from the words of the Rashba9 that when educating a minor in the fulfillment of a mitzvah one must educate him to fulfill the mitzvah in fully valid form like an adult, and it is explained in the Shulchan Aruch siman 690:8 that the mitzvah is to read it amid a rov am (large public gathering).'
However, it should be noted that this is not a difficulty on the Mishnah Berurah, for the Mishnah Berurah10, regarding the fulfillment of the mitzvah of the Four Species by minors, cited that some have written11 that the father does not fulfill the obligation of chinuch thereby if he gives them to make a bracha on the Four Species without transferring ownership of them to them, but he wrote that there are those who disagree with this12, and in the Shaar HaTziyun13 he explains that so it appears from the plain meaning of the words of the Mechaber, who wrote that one fulfills the obligation of chinuch with the essence of the mitzvah even if one does not fulfill all the details; and if so, according to the Mishnah Berurah there is no difficulty on the Mechaber from the words of the Ritva.
> If so, according to the Mishnah Berurah, by strict law the obligation of chinuch is only upon the very hearing of the Megillah, and not upon the details such as hearing it with the congregation and the like; however, it is a good minhag to educate them in this too. But according to many of the Acharonim, the coming to the synagogue is already part of the obligation of chinuch, and the novelty of the Mechaber in this law is with respect to young children below the age of chinuch, whom it is also fitting to bring to the synagogue, as we saw in additional Rishonim. And we already saw in the previous halacha the words of the Rebbe on the matter.
Notes:
1 שו"ע או"ח סי' תרפט ס"ו ↩
2 מגילה פ"א סי' ג ↩
3 או"ח סי' תרצ ס"ק ח ↩
4 סי' תרפט ד"ה מנהג טוב ↩
5 ירושלמי מגילה פ"ב ה"ה ↩
6 או"ח סי' רלב אות א ↩
7 או"ח עמוד קנח ענין ג ↩
8 סי' תרפט אות ח הערה 34 ↩
9 וז"ל הריטב"א (חידושים אלו נדפסו בטעות ע"ש הרשב"א) סוכה ב, ב: 'אמר רבי יהודה מעשה בהילני וכו' עד כל מעשיה לא היתה עושה אלא ע"פ חכמים. מהא שמעינן דקטן שמחנכין אותו במצות [צריך] לעשות לו מצוה בהכשר גמור כגדול דהא מייתינן ראיה בשמעתין מסוכה של הילני משום דלא סגיא דליכא בבניה חד שהגיע לחינוך דבעי סוכה מעלייתא, מקרא מלא דבר הכתוב חנוך לנער על פי דרכו, וגדולה מזו אמרו במסכת עירובין (מ, ב) גבי זמן ביום הכפורים ליטעמיה לינוקא דלמא אתי למיסרך, והוצרכתי לכתוב זה לפי שראיתי חכמים טועים בזה' ↩
10 סי' תרנח ס"ק כח. וראה שו"ת אג"מ יו"ד ח"א סי' קלז ↩
11 ראה מג"א סי' תרנח ס"ק ח. וכן נקטו עוד הרבה מהאחרונים ↩
12 מרדכי סוכה פ"ג סי' תשנ"ט ואור זרוע ח"ב סי' שיח בשם ראב"ן קפא, ב, וכ"פ הבגדי ישע שם ס"ק ח ↩
13 שם ס"ק לו ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Customs'
Join the WhatsApp group