Daf Yomi - Megillah 9 - Highlights

The Mishna states: There is no difference between the Books of Scripture and tefillin and mezuzos, except that the Books of Scripture may be written in any language, and tefillin and mezuzos are written only in Ashurit (the Hebrew script that is used in our Torah scrolls). Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The Books of Scripture may be written only in Greek (not any foreign language).

The Gemora infers from the Mishna that with regard to sewing them with sinews and rendering the hands tamei, they are both identical. (8a)


The Mishna had stated that the Books of Scripture can be written in any language. The Gemora asks from a braisa which states: If one wrote a Hebrew text in Aramaic or an Aramaic text (certain words in the Torah that are Aramaic) in Hebrew (from any Scripture Book) or he used the Ivri script (instead of Ashuris), the scroll is not sacred and does not render the hands tamei. The scrolls must be written with the Ashuris script on parchment and with ink. It is evident from this braisa that a Book of Scripture must be written in Ashuris.

Rava answers: Our Mishna is referring to a case where the Scriptures were written in a different language but it was transliterated in the Ashuris script; that is why the Book is sacred. The braisa is referring to a case where the Scriptures were written using the Ivri script; this is why the Book is not sacred.

Abaye questions Rava’s answer: If the reason the braisa states that the Scripture scrolls are not sacred is because they were not written in Ashuris script, why does the braisa mention cases of writing Hebrew texts in Aramaic or vice versa? Even a Hebrew text written in Hebrew or an Aramaic text written in Aramaic will not be sacred if it is not written with the Ashuris script?

The Gemora answers that the braisa is following the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel of the Mishna, who maintains that the Scriptures can be sacred even if they are not written in Ashuris.

The Gemora asks: The braisa states that the scrolls must be written with the Ashuris script on parchment and with ink. According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, it will be sacred even if it is written in Greek?

The Gemora offers another answer. The braisa is referring to tefillin and mezuzos, which everyone agrees, must be written in Hebrew and with the Ashuris script. This is learned from the verse [Devarim 6:6]: and they shall be, which means that they should stay as they are; their language and script should not be changed.
The Gemora questions this: The braisa states a case where Aramaic text was written in Hebrew; this is understandable if it is referring to the Torah, where there are Aramaic words (yegar sahadusa Breishis 8:48), but there are no Aramaic words mentioned in tefillin and mezuzos?

The Gemora presents a final answer: The braisa is referring specifically to a Megillah and that must be written in Hebrew and with Ashuris script. (8b – 9a)

Rav Ashi answers that the braisa is referring to the other Books of Scripture (the Prophets and the Writings, not the Torah), and it is following the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda who explains the viewpoint of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabbi Yehuda said: Although Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permitted using Greek, this is only in regards to the Torah, but not for the other books of Scripture; they must be written in Hebrew and in Ashuris.

The Gemora explains: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permitted a Torah scroll to be written in Greek based on the incident that occurred with King Talmai, an Egyptian king. Talmai gathered the seventy-two Elders of Israel and placed them in seventy-two chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one's room and said: “Write for me a Greek translation of the Torah.” Hashem put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did. The Gemora proceeds to illustrate the changes that these Elders made in the Torah in order not to anger Talmai or to prevent a denigration of the Torah, Heaven forbid. (9a – 9b)

The Mishna had stated: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The Books of Scripture may be written only in Greek (not any foreign language).

Rabbi Avahu says in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that the halacha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
Rabbi Yochanan offers a reason explaining Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s viewpoint. It is written [Breishis 9:27]: May Hashem extend Yefes and He will dwell in the tents of Shem. We can interpret these words as follows: The language of Yefes (Greek) will be in the tents of Shem (the Torah). (9b)

The Mishna states: There is no difference between a Kohen Gadol who is anointed with the oil of anointing (shemen hamishchah) and the Kohen Gadol whose dignity was marked with a larger number of garments (ribuy begadim, when the oil was lacking), except the bull which comes for all the mitzvos (a Kohen Gadol that was anointed will bring a bull chatas if he issued an erroneous ruling, however, a kohen gadol appointed through the extra garments will bring a regular chatas).

The Mishna continues: There is no difference between a serving Kohen Gadol and one who has retired except for the bull of Yom Kippur and the tenth of the efah (which is offered every day).

The Gemora states that the first part of our Mishna does not subscribe to Rabbi Meir’s viewpoint for he states in a braisa that a kohen gadol appointed through the extra garments will bring the bull which comes for all the mitzvos.

The Gemora infers from the end of the Mishna that a serving Kohen Gadol and a retired Kohen Gadol are identical and both would be permitted to perform the service in the Beis Hamikdosh while wearing the eight garments (reserved for the Kohen Gadol). This would be in accordance with the viewpoint of Rabbi Meir cited in the following braisa. The braisa states: Rabbi Meir maintains that if the Kohen Gadol became temporarily disqualified and another Kohen Gadol was appointed to replace him, when the first Kohen Gadol becomes fit again, he returns to his service, but the second Kohen Gadol still has all the mitzvos of a Kohen Gadol upon him i.e. he cannot let his hair grow very long, he cannot tear his garments in mourning, he cannot become tamei to deceased relatives, he cannot marry a widow, and when he performs the service in the Beis Hamikdosh, he must wear the eight vestments of a Kohen Gadol. Rabbi Yosi, however, maintains that the first Kohen Gadol returns to his service when he becomes fit again, but the substitute Kohen Gadol can no longer serve in the Beis Hamikdosh as a Kohen Gadol wearing eight vestments or as an ordinary Kohen wearing four vestments. He cannot serve as a Kohen Gadol because this will cause hard feelings for the first Kohen Gadol, and he cannot serve even as an ordinary Kohen because there is a rule that one can ascend in matters of sanctity but one cannot descend in matters of sanctity.

The Gemora asks: It emerges that the first part of the Mishna does not follow Rabbi Meir’s opinion and the end part of the Mishna follows his view? Rav Chisda states that indeed, this is the explanation of the Mishna. Rav Yosef says that the Mishna is actually the opinion of Rebbe; he agrees with the Chachamim in the first part and with Rabbi Meir in the end part. (9b)