על כן קראו לימים האלה פורים על שם הפור וכו' מהראוי לתת לב מה נשתנה קריא' שם המועד הזה מן כל השמות של כל המועדים שהשמות של כל המועדים נקראים על שם הנס היינו חג הפסח ע"ש הפסיח' והדילוג וכן השם הנקרא בתורה חג המצות על שלא הספיק בצקם של אבותינו וכו' ואכלו מצות חג הסוכו' כי בסוכות הושבתי את ב"י וכו' וכן הוא מהראוי שיהיה המועד נק' על שם הישועה והנס ולא ע"ש השעבוד והיסורין והצר' לשונאי ישראל
בֶּן עִיר שֶׁהָלַךְ לִכְרַךְ וּבֶן כְּרַךְ שֶׁהָלַךְ לְעִיר, אִם עָתִיד לַחֲזֹר לִמְקוֹמוֹ, קוֹרֵא כִמְקוֹמוֹ. וְאִם לָאו, קוֹרֵא עִמָּהֶן. וּמֵהֵיכָן קוֹרֵא אָדָם אֶת הַמְּגִלָּה וְיוֹצֵא בָּהּ יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, כֻּלָּהּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מֵאִישׁ יְהוּדִי (אסתר ב ה). רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, מֵאַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה (אסתר ג׳:א׳):
With regard to a resident of an unwalled town who went to a walled city, where the Megilla is read on the fifteenth of Adar, and conversely, a resident of a walled city who went to an unwalled town where it is read on the fourteenth, the following distinction applies: If he is destined to return to his original place, he reads it according to the halakha governing his own place, and if not, i.e., if he is not destined to return to his place, he reads with them, the residents of his current location. Beginning from where must a person read the Megilla in order to fulfill his obligation? Rabbi Meir says: He must read all of it. Rabbi Yehuda says: He need read only from “There was a certain Jew” (Esther 2:5). Rabbi Yosei says: From “After these things” (Esther 3:1).
מהיכן קורא אדם את המגילה וכו': תניא רשב"י אומר מבלילה ההוא א"ר יוחנן וכולן מקרא אחד דרשו ותכתב אסתר המלכה ומרדכי היהודי את כל תוקף מאן דאמר כולה תוקפו של אחשורוש ומאן דאמר מאיש יהודי תוקפו של מרדכי ומ"ד מאחר הדברים האלה תוקפו של המן ומ"ד מבלילה ההוא תוקפו של נס
§ The mishna teaches that three Sages disagree about the question: Beginning from where must a person read the Megilla in order to fulfill his obligation? It is taught in a baraita that there is a fourth opinion as well: Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai says: One must start to read from “On that night” (Esther 6:1). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And all of these tanna’im, in arriving at their respective opinions, were expounding the same verse. As it is stated: “Then Esther the queen, the daughter of Abihail, and Mordecai the Jew, wrote about all the acts of power to confirm this second letter of Purim” (Esther 9:29). The one who said that the Megilla must be read in its entirety interprets “acts of power” as referring to the power of Ahasuerus, and so the Megilla must be read from the beginning, where the power of Ahasuerus is recounted. And the one who said that it needs to be read from “There was a certain Jew” explains that “acts of power” is referring to the power of Mordecai. And the one who said that it needs to be read from “After these things” maintains that “acts of power” is referring to the power of Haman. And the one who said that it needs to be read from “On that night” understands that the expression is referring to the power of the miracle, which began on that night when Ahasuerus could not sleep, and therefore one must begin reading the Megilla from there.
אָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אָמַר רַב חָמָא בַּר גּוּרְיָא אָמַר רַב: הֲלָכָה כְּדִבְרֵי הָאוֹמֵר כּוּלָּהּ. וַאֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מֵ״אִישׁ יְהוּדִי״ — צְרִיכָה שֶׁתְּהֵא כְּתוּבָה כּוּלָּהּ.
Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Rav Ḥama bar Gurya said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the statement of the one who says that the Megilla must be read in its entirety. And moreover, even according to the one who said that it need be read only from “There was a certain Jew” and onward, the Megilla itself must nevertheless be written in its entirety.
כַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידֵּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה — הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי. הַשְׁתָּא בִּמְקוֹם רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לֵיתָא, בִּמְקוֹם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מִיבַּעְיָא?!
Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: In the case of a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda; in the case of a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei; and, needless to say, in the case of a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yosei, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. As now, if in disputes with Rabbi Yehuda, the opinion of Rabbi Meir is not accepted as law, need it be stated that in disputes with Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Meir’s opinion is rejected? Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is not accepted in disputes with Rabbi Yosei.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בַּר חֲנִינָא: גָּלוּי וְיָדוּעַ לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁאָמַר וְהָיָה הָעוֹלָם שֶׁאֵין בְּדוֹרוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי מֵאִיר כְּמוֹתוֹ, וּמִפְּנֵי מָה לֹא קָבְעוּ הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ? שֶׁלֹּא יָכְלוּ חֲבֵירָיו לַעֲמוֹד עַל סוֹף דַּעְתּוֹ.
On the topic of Rabbi Meir and his Torah study, the Gemara cites an additional statement. Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that in the generation of Rabbi Meir there was no one of the Sages who is his equal. Why then didn’t the Sages establish the halakha in accordance with his opinion? It is because his colleagues were unable to ascertain the profundity of his opinion. He was so brilliant that he could present a cogent argument for any position, even if it was not consistent with the prevalent halakha. As he would state with regard to a ritually impure item that it is pure, and display justification for that ruling, and likewise he would state with regard to a ritually pure item that it is impure, and display justification for that ruling. The Sages were unable to distinguish between the statements that were halakha and those that were not.
מתת אלקים on megillah asks why with megillah we hold like Rebbe Meir.
2nd q: Of all the mitzvos on Purim, MAtonos L'Evyonim is the most important.
Why is it connected to Purim so intrinsically?!
וַיִּירָ֧א יַעֲקֹ֛ב מְאֹ֖ד וַיֵּ֣צֶר ל֑וֹ וַיַּ֜חַץ אֶת־הָעָ֣ם אֲשֶׁר־אִתּ֗וֹ וְאֶת־הַצֹּ֧אן וְאֶת־הַבָּקָ֛ר וְהַגְּמַלִּ֖ים לִשְׁנֵ֥י מַחֲנֽוֹת׃
Jacob was greatly frightened; in his anxiety, he divided the people with him, and the flocks and herds and camels, into two camps,
ויירא ויצר. וַיִּירָא שֶׁמָּא יֵהָרֵג, וַיֵּצֶר לוֹ אִם יַהֲרֹג הוּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים (בראשית רבה ותנחומא):
ויירא...ויצר HE FEARED GREATLY AND WAS DISTRESSED — He was afraid lest he be killed, and he was distressed that he might have to kill someone (Genesis Rabbah 76:2).
ואף על גב דבאו להורגו – ואמרינן 'הבא להרגך השכם להורגו'
נֵירוֹן קֵיסָר כִּי קָאָתֵי שְׁדָא גִּירָא לְמִזְרָח אֲתָא נְפַל בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם לְמַעֲרָב אֲתָא נְפַל בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם לְאַרְבַּע רוּחוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם אֲתָא נְפַל בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְיָנוֹקָא פְּסוֹק לִי פְּסוּקָיךְ אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְנָתַתִּי אֶת נִקְמָתִי בֶּאֱדוֹם בְּיַד עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגוֹ׳ אָמַר קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא בָּעֵי לַחֲרוֹבֵי בֵּיתֵיהּ וּבָעֵי לְכַפּוֹרֵי יְדֵיהּ בְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא עֲרַק וַאֲזַל וְאִיגַּיַּיר וּנְפַק מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי מֵאִיר
The Roman authorities then sent Nero Caesar against the Jews. When he came to Jerusalem, he wished to test his fate. He shot an arrow to the east and the arrow came and fell in Jerusalem. He then shot another arrow to the west and it also fell in Jerusalem. He shot an arrow in all four directions of the heavens, and each time the arrow fell in Jerusalem. Nero then conducted another test: He said to a child: Tell me a verse that you learned today. He said to him as follows: “And I will lay My vengeance upon Edom by the hand of My people Israel” (Ezekiel 25:14). Nero said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, wishes to destroy His Temple, and He wishes to wipe his hands with that man, i.e., with me. The Romans are associated with Edom, the descendants of Esau. If I continue on this mission, I will eventually be punished for having served as God’s agent to bring about the destruction. So he fled and became a convert, and ultimately Rabbi Meir descended from him.
אמר להו רבי יוסי תורה מבחוץ ואנו מבפנים אמר להן רבן [שמעון בן] גמליאל ניעיילינהו מיהו ניקנסינהו דלא נימרו שמעתא משמייהו אסיקו לרבי מאיר אחרים ולר' נתן יש אומרים
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This mishna, i.e., the preceding baraita, was taught during the days of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was the Nasi, Rabbi Meir was the Ḥakham, and Rabbi Natan was the deputy Nasi. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was there, everyone would arise before him. When Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would enter, everyone would arise before them. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Shouldn’t there be a conspicuous distinction between me and them in terms of the manner in which deference is shown? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted the provisions delineated in this baraita that distinguish between the Nasi and his subordinates with regard to the deference shown them. That day, when Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted these provisions, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were not there. The following day when they came to the study hall, they saw that the people did not stand before them as the matter was typically done. They said: What is this? The people said to them: This is what Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted. Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Natan: I am the Ḥakham and you are the deputy Nasi. Let us devise a matter and do to him as he did to us. What shall we do to him? Let us say to him: Reveal to us tractate Okatzim, which he does not know. And once it is clear to all that he did not learn, he will not have anything to say. Then we will say to him: “Who can express the mighty acts of the Lord, shall make all His praises heard?” (Psalms 106:2), indicating: For whom is it becoming to express the mighty acts of the Lord? It is becoming for one who is capable of making all His praises heard, and not for one who does not know one of the tractates. We will remove him from his position as Nasi, and I will be deputy Nasi and you will be Nasi. Rabbi Ya’akov ben Korshei heard them talking, and said: Perhaps, Heaven forfend, this matter will come to a situation of humiliation for Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. He did not wish to speak criticism or gossip about Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan, so he went and sat behind the upper story where Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel lived. He explained tractate Okatzin; he studied it aloud and repeated it, and studied it aloud and repeated it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to himself: What is this that is transpiring before us? Perhaps, Heaven forfend, there is something transpiring in the study hall. He suspected that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were planning something. He concentrated and studied tractate Okatzin. The following day Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan said to him: Let the Master come and teach a lesson in tractate Okatzin. He began and stated the lesson he had prepared. After he completed teaching the tractate, he said to them: If I had not studied the tractate, you would have humiliated me. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel commanded those present and they expelled Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan from the study hall as punishment. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would write difficulties on a scrap of paper [pitka] and would throw them there into the study hall. Those difficulties that were resolved were resolved; as for those that were not resolved, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan wrote resolutions on a scrap of paper and threw them into the study hall. Rabbi Yosei said to the Sages: How is it that the Torah, embodied in the preeminent Torah scholars, is outside and we are inside? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to them: Let us admit them into the study hall. But we will penalize them in that we will not cite halakha in their names. They cited statements of Rabbi Meir in the name of Aḥerim, meaning: Others, and they cited statements of Rabbi Natan in the name of yesh omerim, meaning: Some say. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were shown a message in their dreams: Go, appease Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabbi Natan went. Rabbi Meir did not go. He said in his heart: Matters of dreams are insignificant. When Rabbi Natan went, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to him: Although the ornate belt, i.e., the importance, of your father was effective in enabling you to become deputy Nasi, as Rabbi Natan’s father was the Babylonian Exilarch, will it render you Nasi as well?
Many people say that the אֲחֵרִים that Yaakov was worried about was Rebbe Meir.
חתם סופר: Biggest nes of Purim is that as we do the aveiro which causes לְהַשְׁמִ֡יד לַהֲרֹ֣ג וּלְאַבֵּ֣ד, Hashem prepares the yeshuoh - of Ester becoming queen and this supports R'Meir who says:
בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ אַתֶּם קְרוּיִם בָּנִים
And Rabbi Meir says: Either way you are still called sons, as it is stated: “They are foolish sons” (Jeremiah 4:22). And it also states: “Sons in whom there is no faithfulness” (Deuteronomy 32:20). And it states: “A seed of evildoers, sons who deal corruptly” (Isaiah 1:4). And it states: “And it shall come to pass that, instead of what was said to them: You are not My people, it shall be said to them: Sons of the living God” (Hosea 2:1).
rashbo in 194 & 242 we pasken like rebbe Meir as he has pesukim like him.
R'Yaakov Shaltiel Niniel in Emes L'Yaakov (MEkubal): Hashem understands his daas, so regarding H' we pasken like R'Meir.
Satmar rov: וְאִם כַּעֲבָדִים עֵינֵֽינוּ לְךָ תְלוּיוֹת - as you understand shitas R'Meir.
So there is only one exception to the rule not to pasken like R'Meir.
Poroshas derochim says that the following gemoro proves you must hold like R'Meir to give Tzedoko:
וְזוֹ שְׁאֵלָה שָׁאַל טוֹרָנוּסְרוּפוּס הָרָשָׁע אֶת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אִם אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אוֹהֵב עֲנִיִּים הוּא מִפְּנֵי מָה אֵינוֹ מְפַרְנְסָם אָמַר לוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁנִּיצּוֹל אָנוּ בָּהֶן מִדִּינָהּ שֶׁל גֵּיהִנָּם אָמַר לוֹ [אַדְּרַבָּה] זוֹ שֶׁמְּחַיַּיבְתָּן לְגֵיהִנָּם אֶמְשׁוֹל לְךָ מָשָׁל לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה לְמֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁכָּעַס עַל עַבְדּוֹ וַחֲבָשׁוֹ בְּבֵית הָאֲסוּרִין וְצִוָּה עָלָיו שֶׁלֹּא לְהַאֲכִילוֹ וְשֶׁלֹּא לְהַשְׁקוֹתוֹ וְהָלַךְ אָדָם אֶחָד וְהֶאֱכִילוֹ וְהִשְׁקָהוּ כְּשֶׁשָּׁמַע הַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא כּוֹעֵס עָלָיו וְאַתֶּם קְרוּיִן עֲבָדִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כִּי לִי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבָדִים אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֶמְשׁוֹל לְךָ מָשָׁל לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה לְמֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁכָּעַס עַל בְּנוֹ וַחֲבָשׁוֹ בְּבֵית הָאֲסוּרִין וְצִוָּה עָלָיו שֶׁלֹּא לְהַאֲכִילוֹ וְשֶׁלֹּא לְהַשְׁקוֹתוֹ וְהָלַךְ אָדָם אֶחָד וְהֶאֱכִילוֹ וְהִשְׁקָהוּ כְּשֶׁשָּׁמַע הַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא דּוֹרוֹן מְשַׁגֵּר לוֹ וַאֲנַן קְרוּיִן בָּנִים דִּכְתִיב בָּנִים אַתֶּם לַה׳ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם
§ It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: An opponent may bring an argument against you and say to you: If your God loves the poor, for what reason does He not support them Himself? In such a case, say to him: He commands us to act as His agents in sustaining the poor, so that through them we will be credited with the performance of mitzvot and therefore be saved from the judgment of Gehenna. And this is the question that Turnus Rufus the wicked asked Rabbi Akiva: If your God loves the poor, for what reason does He not support them Himself? Rabbi Akiva said to him: He commands us to sustain the poor, so that through them and the charity we give them we will be saved from the judgment of Gehenna. Turnus Rufus said to Rabbi Akiva: On the contrary, it is this charity which condemns you, the Jewish people, to Gehenna because you give it. I will illustrate this to you with a parable. To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a king of flesh and blood who was angry with his slave and put him in prison and ordered that he should not be fed or given to drink. And one person went ahead and fed him and gave him to drink. If the king heard about this, would he not be angry with that person? And you, after all, are called slaves, as it is stated: “For the children of Israel are slaves to Me” (Leviticus 25:55). If God decreed that a certain person should be impoverished, one who gives him charity defies the will of God. Rabbi Akiva said to Turnus Rufus: I will illustrate the opposite to you with a different parable. To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a king of flesh and blood who was angry with his son and put him in prison and ordered that he should not be fed or given to drink. And one person went ahead and fed him and gave him to drink. If the king heard about this once his anger abated, would he not react by sending that person a gift? And we are called sons, as it is written: “You are sons of the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1).
This explains why we give Tzedoko
בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה נָשָׂא יַעֲקֹב אֶת עֵינָיו וְרָאָה אֶת עֵשָׂו שֶׁהוּא בָּא מֵרָחוֹק, וְתָלָה עֵינָיו לַמָּרוֹם, בָּכָה וּבִקֵּשׁ רַחֲמִים מִלִּפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, וְשָׁמַע תְּפִלָּתוֹ וְהִבְטִיחוֹ שֶׁהוּא מוֹשִׁיעוֹ מִכָּל צָרוֹתָיו בִּזְכוּתוֹ שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים כ, ב): יַעַנְךָ ה' בְּיוֹם צָרָה יְשַׂגֶּבְךָ שֵׁם אֱלֹהֵי יַעֲקֹב.
Q1)Why was Yaakov afraid of Esov, he filpped of the stone on the well like a bottle cap, whilst 3 burly shepards couldn't move it?
Q2)what is the meaning of "coming from afar"?
Chazon Ovadiah: He was afraid of Eisov הבא מרחוק, i.e. המן.
The בעל הטורים says this explicitly:
הצילני נא מיד - ר"ת המן רמז להמן שיצא להכות אם על בנים כדכתיב טף ונשים
The only way to get saved from Eisov "coming from afar" is by אחרים, which is why Yaakov was worried now!!
The בני יששכר asks: why do we make a גורל on Yom kippur for the most important decision of which goat is L'Hashem and which L'Azozel?
A)To be מתעורר Hashem's רחמים which seems illogical, that בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ אַתֶּם קְרוּיִם בָּנִים. A fathers love for his child is illogical.
This explains why Hashem made Homon make a גורל, to bring about that רחמים which we needed to be saved!