גֶּרְמַמְיָא שֶׁל אֱדוֹם, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵי הֵן יוֹצְאִין, מַחֲרִיבִין כָּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ. Germamya of Edom, i.e., Germany, which is near the land of Edom, i.e., Rome. As, if the Germans would go forth, they would destroy the entire world.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי חָמָא בַּר חֲנִינָא: תְּלָת מְאָה קְטִירֵי תָגָא אִיכָּא בְּגֶרְמַמְיָא שֶׁל אֱדוֹם, וּתְלָת מְאָה וְשִׁיתִּין וְחַמְשָׁה מַרְזְבָּנֵי אִיכָּא בְּרוֹמִי, וּבְכׇל יוֹמָא נָפְקִי הָנֵי לְאַפֵּי הָנֵי וּמִקְּטִיל חַד מִינַּיְיהוּ, וּמִיטַּרְדִי לְאוֹקֹמֵי מַלְכָּא. And Rabbi Ḥama Bar Ḥanina said: There are three hundred young princes with crowns tied to their heads in Germamya of Edom, and there are three hundred and sixty-five chieftains [marzavnei] in Rome. Every day these go out to battle against those, and one of them is killed, and they are preoccupied with appointing a new king in his place. Since neither side is united, neither side is able to achieve a decisive victory. It is these wars between Rome and the Germanic tribes that act as a muzzle upon Esau-Edom-Rome and prevent it from becoming too strong.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק, אִם יֹאמַר לְךָ אָדָם: יָגַעְתִּי וְלֹא מָצָאתִי — אַל תַּאֲמֵן. לֹא יָגַעְתִּי וּמָצָאתִי — אַל תַּאֲמֵן. יָגַעְתִּי וּמָצָאתִי — תַּאֲמֵן. § Rabbi Yitzḥak said in the style of a previous passage: If a person says to you: I have labored and not found success, do not believe him. Similarly, if he says to you: I have not labored but nevertheless I have found success, do not believe him. If, however, he says to you: I have labored and I have found success, believe him.
הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֲבָל בְּמַשָּׂא וּמַתָּן — סִיַּיעְתָּא הוּא מִן שְׁמַיָּא. וּלְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לְחַדּוֹדֵי, אֲבָל לְאוֹקֹמֵי גִּירְסָא — סִיַּיעְתָּא מִן שְׁמַיָּא הִיא. The Gemara comments: This applies only to matters of Torah, as success with respect to Torah study is in accordance with the toil and effort invested. But with regard to success in business, it all depends upon assistance from Heaven, as there is no correlation between success and effort. And even with regard to matters of Torah, we said this only with regard to sharpening one’s understanding of Torah, as the more one labors, the deeper the understanding of the material he achieves. However, to preserve what one has learned, it is dependent upon assistance from Heaven. Not everyone achieves this, even with much effort.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: אִם רָאִיתָ רָשָׁע שֶׁהַשָּׁעָה מְשַׂחֶקֶת לוֹ — אַל תִּתְגָּרֶה בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אַל תִּתְחַר בַּמְּרֵעִים״. וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁדְּרָכָיו מַצְלִיחִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״יָחִילוּ דְּרָכָיו בְּכׇל עֵת״. וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁזּוֹכֶה בַּדִּין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מָרוֹם מִשְׁפָּטֶיךָ מִנֶּגְדּוֹ״. וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁרוֹאֶה בְּשׂוֹנְאָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כׇּל צוֹרְרָיו יָפִיחַ בָּהֶם״. And Rabbi Yitzḥak also said: If you see a wicked man whom the hour is smiling upon, i.e., who is enjoying good fortune, do not provoke him, as it is stated: “Contend not with evildoers” (Psalms 37:1). And not only that, but if you provoke him, his undertakings will be successful, as it is stated: “His ways prosper at all times” (Psalms 10:5). And not only that, but even if he is brought to court, he emerges victorious in judgment, as it is stated: “Your judgments are far above him” (Psalms 10:5), as though the trial is far removed from him and does not affect him. And not only that, but he will see his enemies fall, as it is stated: “As for all his enemies, he hisses at them” (Psalms 10:5).
אִינִי? וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: מוּתָּר לְהִתְגָּרוֹת בָּרְשָׁעִים בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עוֹזְבֵי תוֹרָה יְהַלְלוּ רָשָׁע וְשׁוֹמְרֵי תוֹרָה יִתְגָּרוּ בָם״, וְתַנְיָא, רַבִּי דּוֹסְתַּאי בַּר מָתוּן אָמַר: מוּתָּר לְהִתְגָּרוֹת בָּרְשָׁעִים בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, וְאִם לְחָשְׁךָ אָדָם לוֹמַר ״אַל תִּתְחַר בַּמְּרֵעִים וְאַל תְּקַנֵּא בְּעוֹשֵׂי עַוְלָה״ — מִי שֶׁלִּבּוֹ נוֹקְפוֹ אוֹמֵר כֵּן. The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: It is permitted to provoke the wicked in this world, as it is stated: “They that forsake the Torah praise the wicked; but they who keep the Torah contend with them” (Proverbs 28:4)? And furthermore, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Dostai bar Matun said: It is permitted to provoke the wicked in this world, and if a person whispers to you to say that this is not so, relying on the verse: “Contend not with evildoers, nor be envious against the workers of iniquity” (Psalms 37:1), know that only one whose heart strikes him with pangs of conscience over sins that he committed says this.
אֶלָּא: ״אַל תִּתְחַר בַּמְּרֵעִים״ — לִהְיוֹת כַּמְּרֵעִים, ״וְאַל תְּקַנֵּא בְּעוֹשֵׂי עַוְלָה״ — לִהְיוֹת כְּעוֹשֵׂי עַוְלָה. וְאוֹמֵר: ״אַל יְקַנֵּא לִבְּךָ בַּחַטָּאִים וְגוֹ׳! Rather, the true meaning of that verse is: “Contend not with evildoers,” to be like the evildoers; “nor be envious against the workers of iniquity,” to be like the workers of iniquity. And it says elsewhere: “Let not your heart envy sinners, but be in the fear of the Lord all the day” (Proverbs 23:17). In this context, to be envious of sinners means to desire to be like them. Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Dostai indicate that one is permitted to provoke the wicked, against the opinion of Rabbi Yitzḥak.
לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּמִילֵּי דִידֵיהּ, הָא בְּמִילֵּי דִשְׁמַיָּא. The Gemara explains: This is not difficult, as it can be understood that this, Rabbi Yitzḥak’s statement that one may not provoke the wicked, is referring to his personal matters, while that, the statements of Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Dostai that it is permitted to provoke them, is referring to matters of Heaven, i.e., religious matters.
וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא בְּמִילֵּי דִידֵיהּ. וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּצַדִּיק גָּמוּר, הָא בְּצַדִּיק שֶׁאֵינוֹ גָּמוּר. דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״לָמָּה תַבִּיט בּוֹגְדִים תַּחֲרִישׁ בְּבַלַּע רָשָׁע צַדִּיק מִמֶּנּוּ״, צַדִּיק מִמֶּנּוּ — בּוֹלֵעַ, צַדִּיק גָּמוּר — אֵינוֹ בּוֹלֵעַ. And if you wish, say: Both this statement and that statement are stated with regard to his own affairs, and still it is not difficult. This statement, that it is permitted to provoke the wicked, applies to a completely righteous individual; that statement, that one may not provoke them, applies to an individual who is not completely righteous. As Rav Huna said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Why do you look upon them that deal treacherously, and remain silent when the wicked devours the man that is more righteous than he” (Habakkuk 1:13)? This verse indicates that the wicked devours one who is more righteous than he; however, he does not devour one who is completely righteous.
וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: שָׁעָה מְשַׂחֶקֶת לוֹ שָׁאנֵי. And if you wish, say instead: When the hour is smiling upon him, i.e., when the wicked individual is enjoying good fortune, it is different. He is receiving divine assistance, and even the completely righteous should not provoke him.
אָמַר עוּלָּא: אִיטַלְיָא שֶׁל יָוָן, זֶה כְּרַךְ גָּדוֹל שֶׁל רוֹמִי. וְהָוְיָא תְּלָת מְאָה פַּרְסָה עַל תְּלָת מְאָה פַּרְסָה. וְיֵשׁ בָּהּ שְׁלוֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שִׁשִּׁים וַחֲמִשָּׁה שְׁווֹקִים, כְּמִנְיַן יְמוֹת הַחַמָּה. וְקָטָן שֶׁבְּכוּלָּם שֶׁל מוֹכְרֵי עוֹפוֹת, וְהָוְיָא שִׁשָּׁה עָשָׂר מִיל עַל שִׁשָּׁה עָשָׂר מִיל. וּמֶלֶךְ סוֹעֵד בְּכׇל יוֹם בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶן. § Having mentioned Rome, the Gemara cites what Ulla said. Greek Italy, i.e., southern Italy, is the great city of Rome, and it is three hundred parasang [parsa] by three hundred parasang. It has three hundred and sixty-five markets, corresponding to the number of days in the solar year, and the smallest of them all is the market of poultry sellers, which is sixteen mil by sixteen mil. And the king, i.e., the Roman emperor, dines every day in one of them.
וְהַדָּר בָּהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹלָד בָּהּ — נוֹטֵל פְּרָס מִבֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ. וְהַנּוֹלָד בָּהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ דָּר בָּהּ — נוֹטֵל פְּרָס מִבֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ. וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת אֲלָפִים בֵּי בָנֵי יֵשׁ בּוֹ, וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת חַלּוֹנוֹת מַעֲלִין עָשָׁן חוּץ לַחוֹמָה. צִדּוֹ אֶחָד יָם וְצִדּוֹ אֶחָד הָרִים וּגְבָעוֹת, צִדּוֹ אֶחָד מְחִיצָה שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל וְצִדּוֹ אֶחָד חוֹלְסִית וּמְצוּלָה. And one who resides in the city, even if he was not born there, receives an allowance for his living expenses from the king’s palace. And one who was born there, even if he does not reside there, also receives an allowance from the king’s palace. And there are three thousand bathhouses in the city, and five hundred apertures that let the smoke from the bathhouses out beyond the walls in a way that doesn’t blacken the walls themselves. One side of the city is bordered by the sea, one side by mountains and hills, one side by a barrier of iron and one side by gravel [ḥulsit] and swamp.
מַתְנִי׳ קָרְאוּ אֶת הַמְּגִילָּה בַּאֲדָר הָרִאשׁוֹן וְנִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה — קוֹרִין אוֹתָהּ בַּאֲדָר שֵׁנִי. אֵין בֵּין אֲדָר הָרִאשׁוֹן לַאֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי אֶלָּא קְרִיאַת הַמְּגִילָּה וּמַתָּנוֹת לָאֶבְיוֹנִים. MISHNA: If the people read the Megilla during the first Adar and subsequently the year was then intercalated by the court and now the following month will be the second Adar, one reads the Megilla again during the second Adar. The Sages formulated a principle: The difference between the first Adar and the second Adar with regard to the mitzvot that are performed during those months is only that the reading of the Megilla and distributing gifts to the poor are performed in the second Adar and not in the first Adar.
גְּמָ׳ הָא לְעִנְיַן סֵדֶר פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת, זֶה וָזֶה שָׁוִין. GEMARA: The Gemara infers that with regard to the matter of the sequence of Torah portions read each year on two Shabbatot before Purim, the portions of Shekalim and Zakhor, and on two Shabbatot after Purim, Para and HaḤodesh, this, the first Adar, and that, the second Adar are equal, in that reading them during the first Adar exempts one from reading them in the second Adar.
מַנִּי מַתְנִיתִין? לָא תַּנָּא קַמָּא, וְלָא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְלָא רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. דְּתַנְיָא: קָרְאוּ אֶת הַמְּגִילָּה בַּאֲדָר הָרִאשׁוֹן וְנִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה — קוֹרִין אוֹתָהּ בַּאֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי, שֶׁכׇּל מִצְוֹת שֶׁנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן, חוּץ מִמִּקְרָא מְגִילָּה. The Gemara asks: If so, whose opinion is taught in the mishna? It is neither the opinion of the anonymous first tanna of the following baraita, nor that of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, nor that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a baraita: If they read the Megilla during the first Adar and the year was then intercalated, they read it during the second Adar, as all mitzvot that are practiced during the second Adar are practiced in the first Adar, except for the reading of the Megilla.
רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵין קוֹרִין אוֹתָהּ בַּאֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי, שֶׁכׇּל מִצְוֹת שֶׁנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן. Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, says: They do not read it again during the second Adar, as all mitzvot that are practiced during the second Adar are practiced during the first Adar. Once the Megilla was read during the first Adar, one need not read it again during the second Adar.
רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: אַף קוֹרִין אוֹתָהּ בַּאֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי, שֶׁכׇּל מִצְוֹת שֶׁנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי אֵין נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן. וְשָׁוִין בְּהֶסְפֵּד וּבְתַעֲנִית שֶׁאֲסוּרִין בָּזֶה וּבָזֶה. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: They even read it again during the second Adar, as all mitzvot that are practiced during the second Adar are not practiced during the first Adar. And they all agree with regard to eulogy and with regard to fasting that they are prohibited on the fourteenth and the fifteenth days of this month of the first Adar and on that month of the second Adar.
רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַיְינוּ תַּנָּא קַמָּא? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: סֵדֶר פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ, דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר לְכַתְּחִילָּה בַּשֵּׁנִי, וְאִי עֲבוּד בָּרִאשׁוֹן — עֲבוּד. בַּר מִמִּקְרָא מְגִילָּה, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּקָרוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹן — קָרוּ בַּשֵּׁנִי. The Gemara analyzes the baraita. The opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is identical to that of the first tanna. What novel element does he introduce? Rav Pappa said: There is a practical difference between them with regard to the sequence of four Torah portions, as the first tanna maintains: They should read those portions during the second Adar, ab initio. However, if they did so during the first Adar, they did so; and they fulfilled their obligation and need not read them again during the second Adar, except for the reading of the Megilla, as even though they already read it during the first Adar, they read it again during the second Adar.
וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר: אֲפִילּוּ מִקְרָא מְגִילָּה לְכַתְּחִילָּה בָּרִאשׁוֹן. וְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל סָבַר: אֲפִילּוּ סֵדֶר פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת, אִי קָרוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹן קָרוּ בַּשֵּׁנִי. And Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, maintains that even the reading of the Megilla may be performed during the first Adar, ab initio, and they need not read it again during the second Adar. And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains: Even with regard to the sequence of four Torah portions, if they read them during the first Adar, they read them again during the second Adar.
מַנִּי? אִי תַּנָּא קַמָּא — קַשְׁיָא מַתָּנוֹת, אִי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — קַשְׁיָא נָמֵי מִקְרָא מְגִילָּה, אִי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל — קַשְׁיָא סֵדֶר פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת! Returning to the original question, according to whose opinion is the mishna taught? If it is the opinion of the first tanna, the halakha of gifts to the poor is difficult. The first tanna does not mention these gifts, indicating that he maintains that if gifts were distributed during the first Adar one need not distribute gifts to the poor during the second Adar. And if the mishna was taught according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, the reading of the Megilla is also difficult. And if it is the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, the sequence of Torah portions is difficult.
לְעוֹלָם תַּנָּא קַמָּא, וּתְנָא מִקְרָא מְגִילָּה וְהוּא הַדִּין מַתָּנוֹת לָאֶבְיוֹנִים, דְּהָא בְּהָא תַּלְיָא. The Gemara answers: Actually, the mishna is according to the opinion of the first tanna, and he taught the halakha with regard to the reading of the Megilla, and the same is true with regard to gifts to the poor, as this mitzva is dependent upon that one. The Gemara already explained that the gifts to the poor are distributed on the day that the Megilla is read.
וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לְעוֹלָם רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הִיא, וּמַתְנִיתִין חַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: אֵין בֵּין אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁבַּאֲדָר הָרִאשׁוֹן לְאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁבַּאֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי אֶלָּא מִקְרָא מְגִילָּה וּמַתָּנוֹת. הָא לְעִנְיַן הֶסְפֵּד וְתַעֲנִית — זֶה וָזֶה שָׁוִין, וְאִילּוּ סֵדֶר פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת לָא מַיְירֵי. And if you wish, say instead: Actually, the mishna is according to the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and the mishna is incomplete and is teaching the following: The difference between the fourteenth day of the first Adar and the fourteenth day of the second Adar is only with regard to the reading of the Megilla and distributing gifts to the poor. The Gemara infers that with regard to the matter of eulogy and fasting, this, the first Adar, and that, the second Adar are equal, while about the sequence of Torah portions, the mishna does not speak at all. The mishna limits its discussion to the halakhot of Purim.
אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הִלְכְתָא כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שֶׁאָמַר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said it in the name of Rabbi Yosei.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מִקְרָא אֶחָד דָּרְשׁוּ: ״בְּכׇל שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה״, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי סָבַר: ״בְּכׇל שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה״, מָה כׇּל שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה — אֲדָר הַסָּמוּךְ לִשְׁבָט, אַף כָּאן — אֲדָר הַסָּמוּךְ לִשְׁבָט. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And both of them, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, interpreted the same verse differently, leading them to their conclusions. It is written: “To enjoin upon them that they should keep the fourteenth day of the month of Adar and the fifteenth day of the same, in each and every year” (Esther 9:21). Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, maintains: “In each and every year” teaches that Purim must be celebrated the same way each year, even if it is intercalated: Just as each and every year Purim is celebrated during Adar that is adjacent to Shevat, so too here in an intercalated year Purim is celebrated during Adar that is adjacent to Shevat.
וְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל סָבַר: ״בְּכׇל שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה״, מָה כָּל שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה — אֲדָר הַסָּמוּךְ לְנִיסָן, אַף כָּאן — אֲדָר הַסָּמוּךְ לְנִיסָן. And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains: “In each and every year” teaches that just as each and every year Purim is celebrated in Adar that is adjacent to Nisan, so too here, in an intercalated year, Purim is celebrated during Adar that is adjacent to Nisan.
בִּשְׁלָמָא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי מִסְתַּבֵּר טַעְמָא, דְּאֵין מַעֲבִירִין עַל הַמִּצְוֹת. אֶלָּא רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מַאי טַעְמָא? The Gemara asks: Granted, according to Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, the reason for his opinion is logical, based on the principle that one does not forego performance of the mitzvot; rather, when presented with the opportunity to perform a mitzva, one should do so immediately. However, with regard to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, what is the reason for his opinion?
אָמַר רַבִּי טָבִי: טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, מִסְמָךְ גְּאוּלָּה לִגְאוּלָּה עָדִיף. Rabbi Tavi said: The reason for the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is that juxtaposing the celebration of one redemption, Purim, to the celebration of another redemption, Passover, is preferable.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר: טַעְמָא דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מֵהָכָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״לְקַיֵּים אֵת אִגֶּרֶת הַפּוּרִים הַזֹּאת הַשֵּׁנִית״. Rabbi Elazar said: The reason for the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is derived from here, as it is written: “To confirm this second letter of Purim” (Esther 9:29), indicating that there are circumstances where the Megilla is read a second time (Jerusalem Talmud), i.e., when the year was intercalated after the Megilla was read in the first Adar.
וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב The Gemara comments: And it was necessary to write