whereas the Sages declare it pure. According to them, it is still considered a broken utensil. Rabbi Meir himself lived after the destruction of the Second Temple. The festive day commemorating the annulling of the decree of Rome was instituted as a result of an incident involving his student, Rabbi Yehuda ben Shammua. From this, it is clear that Megillat Ta’anit had not yet been nullified.
תַּנָּאֵי הִיא דְּתַנְיָא הַיָּמִים הָאֵלּוּ הַכְּתוּבִין בִּמְגִילַּת תַּעֲנִית בֵּין בִּזְמַן שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ קַיָּים בֵּין בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ קַיָּים אֲסוּרִין דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר בִּזְמַן שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ קַיָּים אֲסוּרִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׂמְחָה הִיא לָהֶם אֵין בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ קַיָּים מוּתָּרִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵבֶל הוּא לָהֶם
The Gemara answers: The question whether or not Megillat Ta’anit has been nullified is the subject of a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: These days, which are written in Megillat Ta’anit, both when the Temple is standing and when the Temple is not standing, are days on which fasting is prohibited; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: When the Temple is standing, these days are prohibited for fasting because these days are a source of joy for Israel. But when the Temple is not standing, these days are permitted for fasting because these days are a source of mourning for them.
וְהִלְכְתָא בָּטְלוּ וְהִלְכְתָא לֹא בָּטְלוּ קַשְׁיָא הִלְכְתָא אַהִלְכְתָא לָא קַשְׁיָא כָּאן בַּחֲנוּכָּה וּפוּרִים כָּאן בִּשְׁאָר יוֹמֵי:
The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that these days were nullified, and the halakha is that they were not nullified. The Gemara asks: This is difficult, as one halakha contradicts the other halakha. The Gemara answers: It is not difficult. Here, it is referring to Hanukkah and Purim. These Festival days were never nullified, and Hanukkah is listed among the Festivals of Megillat Ta’anit. There, the halakha is referring to the rest of the days listed in Megillat Ta’anit, all of which were nullified.
עַל אֱלוּל מִפְּנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְעַל תִּשְׁרִי מִפְּנֵי תַּקָּנַת הַמּוֹעֲדוֹת כֵּיוָן דְּנָפְקִי לְהוּ אַאֱלוּל אַתִּשְׁרִי לְמָה לְהוּ
§ The mishna taught: Messengers go out to inform about the sanctification of the New Moon in Elul, due to Rosh HaShana, and in Tishrei, due to the need to establish the correct dates on which to celebrate the Festivals of Tishrei. The Gemara asks: Once the messengers have gone out in the month of Elul to inform the people when the New Moon was declared, why do they need to go out again in Tishrei, as the New Moon of Tishrei always falls on the thirtieth day after the New Moon of Elul?
וְכִי תֵּימָא דִּלְמָא עַבְּרוּהּ לֶאֱלוּל וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי חִינָּנָא בַּר כָּהֲנָא אָמַר רַב מִימוֹת עֶזְרָא וְאֵילָךְ לֹא מָצִינוּ אֱלוּל מְעוּבָּר
And if you say that messengers must go out for Tishrei as well, as perhaps the court added another day to the month of Elul, so that Rosh HaShana occurs on the thirty-first day after the New Moon of Elul, there is a difficulty. Didn’t Rabbi Ḥinnana bar Kahana say that Rav said: From the days of Ezra and onward, we have never found that the month of Elul had an additional day. Consequently, it is simple to calculate the days on which the Festivals of Tishrei occur, and there should be no need to send out messengers in Tishrei.
לֹא מָצִינוּ דְּלָא אִיצְטְרִיךְ הָא אִיצְטְרִיךְ מְעַבְּרִינַן לֵיהּ
The Gemara answers: When we say: We have not found that the month of Elul ever had an additional day, this does not mean that Elul cannot have an additional day, but only that it never happened because it was not necessary to add a day. But if it had been necessary, they would have added an additional day. Since it is possible that the month of Elul could have had another day added, there is reason to send out messengers for the month of Tishrei, so that all will know when to celebrate the Festivals.
הָא מִיקַּלְקַל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה מוּטָב תִּיקַּלְקֵל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְלֹא יִתְקַלְקְלוּ כּוּלְּהוּ מוֹעֲדוֹת
The Gemara asks: But if Elul has an additional day Rosh HaShana will be ruined, because people will celebrate it thirty days after the New Moon of Elul, when its real date is on the thirty-first day. The Gemara answers: Better that Rosh HaShana be ruined, and all the Festivals, i.e., Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and the Eighth Day of Assembly, not be ruined.
דַּיְקָא נָמֵי דְּקָתָנֵי עַל תִּשְׁרִי מִפְּנֵי תַּקָּנַת הַמּוֹעֲדוֹת שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ:
The language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Messengers go out in the month of Tishrei due to the need to establish the correct dates on which to celebrate the Festivals of Tishrei. The Gemara summarizes: Indeed, conclude from here that this is the correct understanding.
וְעַל כִּסְלֵיו מִפְּנֵי חֲנוּכָּה וְעַל אֲדָר מִפְּנֵי הַפּוּרִים וְאִילּוּ נִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה יוֹצְאִין אַף עַל אֲדָר שֵׁנִי מִפְּנֵי הַפּוּרִים לָא קָתָנֵי מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי דְּתַנְיָא רַבִּי אוֹמֵר אִם נִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה יוֹצְאִין אַף עַל אֲדָר הַשֵּׁנִי מִפְּנֵי הַפּוּרִים
§ The mishna taught: Messengers go out in Kislev, due to Hanukkah, and in Adar, due to Purim. Whereas, it is not taught: If the year was a leap year, with an additional month of Adar, the messengers go out also in the second Adar due to Purim, which is celebrated in the second Adar. This indicates that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: If the year was a leap year, the messengers go out also in the second Adar, due to Purim.
לֵימָא בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי דְּמָר סָבַר כׇּל מִצְוֹת הַנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן וּמָר סָבַר כׇּל מִצְוֹת הַנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי אֵין נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that they disagree about this. One Sage, the author of this mishna, holds that all the mitzvot observed in the second Adar, i.e., the special Torah readings and the mitzvot of Purim, are also observed in the first Adar. If they were observed in the first Adar and not in the second, the people have fulfilled their obligation. Therefore, there is no need to send messengers in the second Adar. And one Sage, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, holds that all the mitzvot observed in the second Adar are not observed in the first. It is therefore necessary to send messengers in the second Adar, so that people will know when to keep the mitzvot of Adar.
לָא דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִצְוֹת הַנּוֹהֲגוֹת בַּשֵּׁנִי אֵין נוֹהֲגוֹת בָּרִאשׁוֹן וְהָכָא בְּעִיבּוּר שָׁנָה קָמִיפַּלְגִי דְּתַנְיָא כַּמָּה עִיבּוּר שָׁנָה שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר חֹדֶשׁ
The Gemara rejects this argument: No, everyone agrees that the mitzvot observed in the second Adar are not observed on the first, and here they disagree about the length of the additional month in the leap year, as it is taught in a baraita: How long is the additional month in a leap year? Thirty days. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A month. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and since the additional month does not have a fixed number of days, it is necessary to send messengers also for the second Adar, so that people will know when to celebrate Purim. However, according to the first tanna, since the first Adar is always a fixed length, there is no need to send messengers.
מַאי שְׁנָא שְׁלֹשִׁים דְּיָדְעִי חֹדֶשׁ נָמֵי יָדְעִי אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא מַאן דְּאָמַר חֹדֶשׁ רָצָה חֹדֶשׁ רָצָה שְׁלֹשִׁים
The Gemara asks: What is different about thirty days? It is different because people can count thirty days and know when the month ends and when Purim occurs. A month also, people know the length of it. The term month implies that it is a month of twenty-nine days, and based on that they know when to celebrate Purim. Rav Pappa said: The one who said that a month is added does not mean necessarily a month of twenty-nine days. Rather, if the judges of the court wish, they add a month of twenty-nine days; and if it wishes, they add thirty days. Therefore, it is necessary to send messengers also for the second Adar.
הֵעִיד רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מִשּׁוּם קְהָלָא קַדִּישָׁא דִּירוּשָׁלַיִם עַל שְׁנֵי אֲדָרִים שֶׁמְּקַדְּשִׁין אוֹתָם בְּיוֹם עִיבּוּרֵיהֶן
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi testified in the name of the holy community of Jerusalem about the two months of Adar, that they are sanctified on the day that could have been added to make them a full month, i.e., the thirtieth day after the previous New Moon. That is to say, the thirtieth day after the New Moon of the first Adar is always the New Moon of the second Adar, and thirty days after the New Moon of the second Adar is always the New Moon of Nisan.
לְמֵימְרָא דַּחֲסֵרִין עָבְדִינַן מְלֵאִין לָא עָבְדִינַן לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּדָרֵשׁ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר חִסְדָּא הֵעִיד רַבִּי סִימַאי מִשּׁוּם חַגַּי זְכַרְיָה וּמַלְאָכִי עַל שְׁנֵי אֲדָרִים שֶׁאִם רָצוּ לַעֲשׂוֹתָן שְׁנֵיהֶן מְלֵאִין עוֹשִׂין שְׁנֵיהֶן חֲסֵרִין עוֹשִׂין אֶחָד מָלֵא וְאֶחָד חָסֵר עוֹשִׂין וְכָךְ הָיוּ נוֹהֲגִין בַּגּוֹלָה וּמִשּׁוּם רַבֵּינוּ אָמְרוּ לְעוֹלָם אֶחָד מָלֵא וְאֶחָד חָסֵר עַד שֶׁיִּוּוֹדַע לָךְ שֶׁהוּקְבַּע רֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ בִּזְמַנּוֹ
The Gemara comments: That is to say that they make the two months of Adar short months, of twenty-nine days, but they do not make them full months, of thirty days. This is to the exclusion of what Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda taught, as Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda taught: Rabbi Simai testified in the name of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi about two months of Adar in a leap year, that if the members of the court wish to make them both full, they may do so; and if they wish to make them both short, they may do so; and if they wish to make one full and one short, they may do so. And this is what they would do in the Diaspora, when they did not know which day was established as the New Moon. And in the name of our teacher, Rav, they said: The two months of Adar are always observed, one full and one short, unless it is known to you that the New Moon was fixed in its proper time, i.e., the first Adar is also short.
שְׁלַחוּ לֵיהּ לְמָר עוּקְבָא אֲדָר הַסָּמוּךְ לְנִיסָן לְעוֹלָם חָסֵר
A ruling was sent from Eretz Yisrael to Mar Ukva, the Exilarch in Babylonia: The Adar that immediately precedes Nisan is always short, both in a regular year and in a leap year. But the first Adar in a leap year, which does not immediately precede Nisan, is sometimes full.
מֵתִיב רַב נַחְמָן עַל שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים מְחַלְּלִין אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת עַל נִיסָן וְעַל תִּשְׁרִי אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא זִמְנִין מָלֵא זִמְנִין חָסֵר מִשּׁוּם הָכִי מְחַלְּלִינַן
Rav Naḥman raised an objection from what was taught in a mishna: Witnesses who saw the new moon may desecrate Shabbat for the fixing of the New Moon of two months, for the month of Nisan and for the month of Tishrei, due to the important Festivals that occur in them. Granted, if you say that the Adar immediately preceding Nisan is sometimes full and sometimes short, due to that reason the witnesses may desecrate Shabbat, as if the witnesses come on the thirtieth, the month will be made short and that day will be declared the New Moon; otherwise, the month will be made full and the next day will be declared the New Moon.