Megillah, Daf Bet, Part 4

Introduction

In yesterday’s section we learned a mishnah in which R. Judah said that in his time, since people reckon the calendar from the day on which the Megillah is read, it is only read in the proper time, on the 14^th or 15th. In our sugya, R. Ashi cites a baraita which seems to have a different opinion, also attributed to R. Judah.

רב אשי קשיא ליה דרבי יהודה אדרבי יהודה, ומוקים לה לברייתא כרבי יוסי בר יהודה: ומי אמר רבי יהודה בזמן הזה הואיל ומסתכלין בה אין קורין אותה אלא בזמנה? ורמינהי, אמר רבי יהודה: אימתי – מקום שנכנסין בשני ובחמישי, אבל מקום שאין נכנסין בשני ובחמישי – אין קורין אותה אלא בזמנה. מקום שנכנסין בשני ובחמישי מיהא קרינן, ואפילו בזמן הזה! ומוקים לה לברייתא כרבי יוסי בר יהודה.

R. Ashi noted a contradiction between two statements of R. Judah, and therefore attributed the statement in the baraita to R. Yose son of R. Judah. [He said]: Can R. Judah really have said that in these days, since people reckon from it, it is read only on the proper day? And this is contradicted by the following:  R. Judah said, When [do they push forward the reading]? In places where the villagers go to town on Monday and Thursday; but in places where they do not go to town on Monday and Thursday, it is read only on the proper day.

In any case, in places where they do go to town on Monday and Thursday it is read [on the earlier dates] even in these times?

He accordingly ascribed the statement in the baraita  to R. Yose son of R. Judah.

In the first source, a mishnah from later in the Tractate, the one we learned yesterday, R. Judah stated that in his day, everyone reads the Megillah on the day on which it is supposed to be read, the 14^th or the 15^th. But in a baraita, R. Judah draws a distinction between places in which villagers go to town on Mondays and Thursdays and places where they do not. Where they do go to town on market days, they can read on an earlier day so that they have time to go to the towns and provide food and water for the townspeople. But if they are not going to town, then they should read it on its proper day.

This baraita implies that even in these days, there still are places that move up the reading to the earlier day. This contradicts his earlier opinion.

R. Ashi, a late Babylonian amora, resolves this difficulty by changing the ascription in the baraita. These weren’t the words of R. Judah. They were those of his son.

ומשום דקשיא ליה דרבי יהודה אדרבי יהודה מוקים לה לברייתא כרבי יוסי בר יהודה? – רב אשי שמיע ליה דאיכא דתני לה כרבי יהודה, ואיכא דתני לה כרבי יוסי בר יהודה, ומדקשיא ליה דרבי יהודה אדרבי יהודה אמר: מאן דתני לה כרבי יהודה – לאו דווקא, מאן דתני לה כרבי יוסי בר יהודה – דווקא.

And just because he finds a contradiction between two statements of R. Judah, he ascribe the baraitha to R. Jose son of R. Judah?

R. Ashi had heard that some transmit the statement in the name of R. Judah and some transmit it in the name of R. Yose son of R. Judah, and to avoid making R. Judah contradict himself he said that the one who ascribed the statement to R. Judah was not [reporting] accurately, while the one who ascribed it to R. Yose son of Judah was [reporting] accurately. 

The Talmud is surprised that R. Ashi can just change the ascription in a baraita. What gives him the right! Just because two sources contradict each other does not mean we change the name of the statement’s author? The Talmud answers that R. Ashi had heard that some people ascribe the baraita to R. Judah and some to R. Yose his son. In order to prevent them from contradicting each other, he accepted only the attribution to R. Yose son of R. Judah.