part 2 of study guide about 95 lines remain.
2,4 the first opinion limits that a deaf cannot perform the rreading ceremony, for purim, but who? we know r' meir and hence not go like him as explained with surces in part one in previous samples. r' juda remains who allowed a child "a child may read the scroll" even for an adult. despite the talmud in sukka, still the commentary hagahot mordecai is brought by an orthodox rabbi that a child may perform a biblical ceremony for an adult... and after r' meir is rejected, truly no source to limit a child so the leneincy of h.m. and r.j. are only in response to the rejected opinion. once the leaders publicised not to go like r' meir, no source for "same degree of obligation" ergo no need for r' juda and h.m. we can skip that leniency.
what about deaf? a deaf can read but wait? tradition usualy defines deaf as unable to spek?? if truly unable to speak then he is not reading... if the one considered deaf is reading then he is NOT deaf and even r' meir said it counts this whole segment is ugly mess. we can check and see next is 3,2
5&6 meir end chapter.
chapter 3 in talmud this is chapter 4 to delay the law of purim til the end but mishna order better.
despite quickly reaching the third chapter we saw certain issues needed elaboration and more discussion follows so we should study now long before purim in order to have time to analyze and finish in time and reach the topics related to reading the book of ester before purim.
1 meir. 2 r' juda but against majority. so what? leaders for example r' isac rif said go like majority rejecting the prohibition. with no source to prohibit then "whatever" the issue is in category of optional. no law to forbid so can.
3,3 has a law but even if we assume that law prohibits some "selling" still sale is not even near the topic of the scroll of ester nor even purim in general. nor even about festivals ergo does not belong in "seder moed" about festivals. the topic is far from the topic not even near! and does not belong here.
the editor should find a relevant place but not here. we have justification to skip "unrelated" prohibitions for the purpose of reaching laws nearer the topic of purim. will we find one? let's inspect. next rabbi si 4,6 and worse:
3,4 not topic. until 3,5
3,5 about adar is near topic. who? meir.
although we could rely on this to jump ahead to the topic and not delay the topic of mgila in the next chapter, still due to fast advances we can pause to fix the corruption:
if halaka would obligate to obey such a mishna then what about the law "return to the order" that means they changed until returning, meaning did not "continue the order those weeks" but the special reading replaced. the issue is not "consistency" but truth. if truly must obey such a mishna then "returning" teaches a change which they do not obey... revealing truth is not go like r' meir and similarly the third week is not always obeyed, revealing truly not go like r' meir in a mishna that hid the name, so they should know to stop lying about similar mishna and stop teaching the lie to go like r' meir.
3,6 this one seems like a good match but the later rabbis already established not to go like r' meir. despite r' yohanan said go like a "hid" mishna meaning with no name we see here that abaye did not accept r.y. and said a different custom is valid... now we can test if abaye agreed he would ADD to the reading in mishna but instead they show the truth "free from such a mishna" they do not read both, truly free, in action not include these showing in action free. truly we are free from r' meir so teach the truth and stop lying that shabat has many "forbidden crafts 40 less one". if you want tradition then the orthodox rabbis stubbornly lead you away from the thing you want.
3,7 the claim to read on "monday and thursday" lacks a source due to these laws from r' meir and the leaders of halaka already decided not go like r' meir.
chapter 4 this is chapter 3 in talmud
4,1 is the topic but meir. despite all these quick advances very much remains and the discussions were detailed as above... almost as long but more urgent to untangle deception to fix the corrupt lessons of orthodox rabbis which is not easy but possible.
4,2 meir therefore not only not obligated to read each week on shabat, but the claim to read publicly lacks a source, now that the leaders taught not to go like r' meir. it is as unjewish as the "unlazy" fast of ramadan month.
mishna 3 until 6 meir.
despite fast advances we see these discussions took time so good we started far before purim.
next 4,6 has r' juda but not topic of scroll not even near topic purim. editors should find a relevant place but not here.
4,7 meir
4,8 relevant. related to reading scroll we have reading. r' juda allowed something but f no source to forbid that is a waste of time delaying r' eliezer.
r' eliezer forbids reading the section hoda in ezekiel. if nobody argued to allow maybe we should accept his prohibition? even when someone argues sometimes the religious law prohibits certainly when nobody argued? rabbi juda prnce rejected anybody who argued we can forget about them! wrong.
even r' moshe rambam who forbade too much and more than truly forbidden wrote to read "hoda" showing the truth in ACTION free from single opinions even when nobody bothered to argue so not only do the talmudic rabbis free from r' meir but even the holy ramabam freed from "lone prohibitors" even when not against majority...
if only the teachers would teach this SOONER we could save time and not risk being tricked to accept a prohibition from a lone source simply because no majority argued. now that we know we are truly free from singles most of the remaining laws of shabat not r' meir are TRULY free same as free from the prohibition of reading hoda from ezekiel. for example a mishna in mishna shabbat from r' nehemia. that can fool people same as they would be fooled by this r' eliezer. only by a miracle did i recall that we DO read hoda! and hunted the source in rambam to see singles truly do not obligate even when no majority argued... and same for r' nehemia in shabat and other examples. i feel sad that this sample is only at then end of mishna mgila... we must know this SOONER and teach this in an introduction to mishna shabat to warn people that we are fee from singles even when no majority argued.
end mishna megillah.