Taanis Esther - Rabbi Isser Springer shlita

00:02 Speaker 1 You’re listening to the “Lema’an Yishme’u” podcast from Machon Halacha Chabad.

00:09 Speaker 2 Today, with Hashem’s help, we’ll learn about Taanis Esther. Taanis Esther is a very challenging fast. Not that fasting on Taanis Esther is challenging—we can manage that, especially knowing that Purim is just around the corner and there will be plenty of poppy-seed hamantaschen. But the source of this fast and its laws have many distinctive aspects, which we’ll study, with Hashem’s help, in this class. Let’s begin with the source of the obligation to fast on Taanis Esther. How do we know that we have to fast? For the other fasts—17 Tammuz and Tishah B’Av—we know the verse in Zechariah that mentions “the fast of the fourth,” meaning Tammuz, the fourth month from Nissan; “the fast of the fifth,” meaning Av; “the fast of the seventh”; and “the fast of the tenth.” There’s a verse about them in Zechariah, but Taanis Esther isn’t mentioned there. So the commentators discuss the source of the obligation to fast on Taanis Esther, and three views are given. One view is that its source is in the words of the prophets, in the Prophets and Writings. The second is that it dates from the time of Chazal, and the third places the institution of Taanis Esther even later, in the time of the Geonim, after the Talmud was completed. Let’s look at all three views. The first is known as the view of the Raavad. This is the well-known Raavad whom we know from his critical glosses on the Rambam. The early authorities quote the Raavad as saying that Taanis Esther is written in Megillas Esther. Where is the fast mentioned in Megillas Esther? He points to chapter 9, verse 31: “To establish these days of Purim at their appointed times, as Mordechai the Jew and Esther the queen had established for them, and as they had established for themselves and their descendants.” That’s the first part of the verse. Here are the crucial words: “the matters of the fasts and their cries.” The Raavad says that the acceptance of Purim also includes the acceptance of the fast days. “The matters of the fasts”—what fasts does that mean? The Raavad says it means

02:23 Speaker 2 Taanis Esther. Just as we’re obligated to observe Purim, we’re obligated to observe Taanis Esther. Some hold that the Rambam agrees. The Bach says the Rambam agrees, though there is room to examine the Rambam’s wording. We won’t go into those fine points now. According to this view, Taanis Esther is even more stringent than 17 Tammuz. After all, the Gemara says of 17 Tammuz, “If they wish, they fast; if they wish, they do not fast.” In our time, the status of the obligation to observe the other fasts isn’t entirely clear. But Taanis Esther, which doesn’t depend on the severity of the exile, remains in force today with a stronger obligation. Even people we would exempt from the other fasts would be obligated to observe this one. That is the Raavad’s view according to the Bach’s explanation, and according to the Bach, it is also the Rambam’s view. But not everyone accepts it. Let’s start with the interpretation of the verse. The Raavad’s interpretation of “the matters of the fasts and their cries” as meaning that we must fast the day before Purim—that we must observe Taanis Esther—isn’t universally accepted. The early authorities, including Shibolei Haleket, relate a story involving Rashi. We know Rashi from his commentaries: he wrote commentaries on the Torah, the Prophets, the Writings and the Gemara. But, of course, people also asked Rashi questions, and other books record various questions put to him and things that happened in his beis midrash. One story goes like this: Purim fell on a Sunday. When Purim falls on a Sunday, as we know, Taanis Esther is moved forward to Thursday, since the day before Purim is Shabbos. Later, with Hashem’s help, we’ll learn why it’s moved to Thursday, but we’ll get to that shortly. In any case, the custom is to move it to Thursday. A woman came to Rashi who needed to ride to see the authorities. She had

04:22 Speaker 2 to go to the authorities on some mission, to make a request, and she needed to travel on horseback. She asked whether she could fast on Friday instead, because she had the exertion of the journey that day and it would be hard for her to fast while riding to the authorities. What did Rashi answer? This fast is not ordained by the Torah or by the Sages; it is merely a custom. But wait, Rashi asks there: doesn’t the verse say “the matters of the fasts and their cries,” indicating that they established and accepted these fasts too? Doesn’t that mean the fasts are already mentioned in the Prophets and Writings? Rashi says no. That is not what the verse in Megillas Esther means. We must explain it differently: they accepted these days of Purim for themselves, their descendants and future generations because of the fasts and their cries. According to Rashi, “the matters of the fasts and their cries” does not refer to something we accepted upon ourselves for all generations. That is not the Megillah’s intention. Rather, it means that because of the fasts and their cries, they instituted the observance of Purim for future generations. That is Rashi’s interpretation. So Rashi holds that this fast has no source in Megillas Esther. What Megillas Esther says is that because they fasted and cried out at the time, we celebrate: we emerged from distress into relief and from darkness into great light. That is Rashi’s view. Then, in his answer concerning this particular woman, Rashi says there is the injunction “Do not form separate factions”—there shouldn’t be differences in practice from one person to another. But that isn’t really our subject. What matters to us in this story is Rashi’s statement that Megillas Esther does not say to fast on Taanis Esther. “The matters of the fasts and their cries” does not refer to our fast. Another interpretation comes from one of the great commentators, Ibn Ezra. Ibn Ezra, who lived somewhat after Rashi—a generation and a half or two generations

06:32 Speaker 2 later—also argues that the verse in Megillas Esther does not mean what the Raavad says it does: that it provides a source for Taanis Esther. But he doesn’t agree with Rashi either. Ibn Ezra says: earlier we mentioned the verse in Zechariah. It speaks of “the fast of the fourth and the fast of the fifth, and the fast of the seventh and the fast of the tenth.” The context there is that the Jewish people had accepted these fasts upon themselves. Although this was later written in Zechariah, the verse does not say that the prophet came and commanded, “Everyone, you must fast on the fast of the fourth, the fast of the fifth, the fast of the seventh and the fast of the tenth.” No, that isn’t what Zechariah says. It discusses the fasts you accepted upon yourselves: must you continue fasting even after the Second Beis Hamikdash has been built? And that, Ibn Ezra says, is how it relates to our subject. That is what our verse means: “Mordechai the Jew and Esther the queen had established for them, and as they had established for themselves and their descendants, the matters of the fasts and their cries.” It refers to the fast of 17 Tammuz, the fast of Tishah B’Av, the Fast of Gedaliah and the fast of 10 Teves. It doesn’t mean a fast connected with Purim at all. Rather, it draws a comparison: we accepted Purim upon ourselves just as we accepted 17 Tammuz upon ourselves. So there are three interpretations of our verse. The first is the view we discussed: the Raavad says “the matters of the fasts and their cries” means we accepted upon ourselves to observe a fast in future generations. Rashi says we accepted upon ourselves to observe Purim because of the fasts and their cries. Ibn Ezra says we accepted upon ourselves to observe Purim just as we accepted the fasts and their cries. According to Ibn Ezra, the words “the matters of the fasts and their cries” have nothing to do with Purim at all; they take us to a completely different subject. But the point we came away with regarding the Raavad is that his is the stringent view, the view that holds

08:42 Speaker 2 That Ta’anis Esther has a source in Scripture, in Megillas Esther. Let’s move to the second opinion. Its source is the She’iltos. The She’iltos is an ancient halachic work, one of the earliest, written after the completion of the Talmud. It was written by Rav Achai Gaon in the period of the Geonim, the period before the Rishonim, which ended about a thousand years ago. Rav Achai lived during that period and wrote the She’iltos, an important halachic work arranged by topics: the first she’ilta, the second she’ilta, the third she’ilta, a she’ilta for Purim. So what does the She’iltos say about when this practice began? He says it has a source in the Gemara. It is mentioned in the words of our Sages. Not necessarily as a custom—the fast itself is mentioned in the words of our Sages. Not in the Megillah, admittedly, but in the words of our Sages, yes. Where? When the Gemara in Tractate Megillah discusses the days on which the Megillah may be read early, it says that the 13th of Adar is “a time of assembly for all.” It is a time when people gather. The commentators disagree about what “a time of assembly” means. Rav Achai said: Why is it a time of assembly? Because the villagers come into the city. Why do they come? For the fast. They need to hear the Torah reading for the fast, to hear Vayechal, to say Selichos. They did not say Selichos yet, but today we do. In any case, they come into the city because of the fast. So, says the She’iltos, we already see Ta’anis Esther mentioned by our Sages: “a time of assembly for all.” Rav Achai himself says it was observed even when the Beis Hamikdash stood. In his view, it is not written in the Prophets, but it was observed even then. That is the second opinion. What is the first written source

10:55 Speaker 2 for Ta’anis Esther? In the words of our Sages. And some say it began to be observed in the days of our Sages. Rabbeinu Tam, the Rosh, and the Tur accept Rav Achai’s view of the source. In siman 686, which deals with this, the Tur asks: Where is Ta’anis Esther written about? “A time of assembly for all,” in the Gemara in Tractate Megillah. But Rashi, for example, says that is not what those words in the Gemara mean. Rather, “a time of assembly for all” refers to their days. In the days of Mordechai and Esther, that was the day on which they assembled and stood up for their lives. They assembled that day to take vengeance on their enemies. That is what “a time of assembly for all” means. So the commentators disagree: Rashi on one side, and the She’iltos and Rabbeinu Tam on the other. The She’iltos and Rabbeinu Tam say that when the Gemara says “a time of assembly for all,” it is describing something that took place in the days of our Sages. The 13th is a time of assembly, when people gather for Ta’anis Esther. Rashi, however, says the Gemara is not speaking about an assembly in the days of our Sages. It is telling us about an assembly long ago. The 13th was “a time of assembly for all”: on the 13th they went to war, and the assembly was for that war, in the days of Mordechai and Esther. So we have seen the first source according to the Raavad: a source in the Prophets. According to the She’iltos, the source is in the words of our Sages. The She’iltos himself places the practice earlier: although its source is in the words of our Sages, it was observed even before then, when the Beis Hamikdash stood. Others understand simply that it was observed only from the days of our Sages, that Ta’anis Esther began after the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash. And the third opinion... The third opinion places Ta’anis Esther even later. The Hagahos Maimoniyos cites Rabbeinu Shavat. Shavat is an acronym for Shmuel bar Natronai. Don’t ask why they say Shavat rather than Shavan, but that is how it is. Shmuel bar Natronai. Rabbi Shmuel bar Natronai was the son-in-law of the Raavan and the brother-in-law of Rabbi Yoel Halevi, among the great

13:03 Speaker 2 Rishonim, and he writes that it is a custom from the days of the Geonim. The Ritva writes that it is a custom. And if it is a custom, note what the Ritva writes: a person must therefore accept the fast upon himself, just as a person must accept a private fast upon himself. As we mention in Hataras Nedarim on Erev Rosh Hashanah, so too with Ta’anis Esther, a person must accept the fast upon himself. An interesting point before we sum up this section: there is a fascinating book called Magen Avos. Several books have that name. One is a work of Chabad Chassidus. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman of Kapust, a cousin of the Rebbe Rashab, wrote a work of Chassidus called Magen Avos, in several volumes. But today we will discuss a different Magen Avos. It is a book written by Rabbeinu the Meiri, who wrote Beis Habechirah on the Talmud. He was one of the sages of Provence, a region of France. Sages from Spain came to Provence. The Ramban’s students came there, bringing their customs from Spain, and the Meiri vigorously defended the customs of Provence. One disagreement concerns our topic, and we will discuss it at greater length later: when the fast is moved to if it would otherwise fall on Shabbos. When Purim is on Sunday, the fast should be on Shabbos, but one cannot fast on Shabbos, so it is moved earlier. They disagreed about which day it should be moved to. We will return to that question, with Hashem’s help. For our purposes now, the Meiri writes that this has “a trace of ancestral tradition originating with the Men of the Great Assembly.” A trace—what does “a trace of ancestral tradition originating with the Men of the Great Assembly” mean? He quotes the verse, “the matters of the fasts and their outcry.” What does he mean by a trace of a tradition from the Men of the Great Assembly? What is this “trace”? It means a small part. Apparently, he means that the Men of the Great Assembly did not command us to do this, but we can understand

15:10 Speaker 2 from this verse that it is fitting to do so. In any case, that is what the Meiri says. So let’s sum up this section, the first part of our lesson on Ta’anis Esther. In brief, we learned three opinions about its source. The view of the Raavad and others is that the Megillah says, “the matters of the fasts and their outcry.” We saw who disagrees about the meaning of that verse. The She’iltos and Rabbeinu Tam say there is a source in the words of our Sages: “It is a time of assembly for all.” The assembly is something that takes place in their time: people gather for the fast. We saw those who disagree. The third opinion, which Rashi apparently also holds, says it is a later custom, from the days of the Geonim. Now that we know who said to fast and what the source of the obligation is, let’s turn to the question of why we fast. What is Ta’anis Esther about? On the 17th of Tammuz, we know, the city wall was breached. On Tisha B’Av, to our great sorrow, the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed. With Tzom Gedaliah and the 10th of Teves, we know what happened and why we fast. But why do we fast on Erev Purim? What happened? The Rishonim and Acharonim offer a number of opinions. How many explanations are there for why we observe this fast? It is a big and intriguing question. There is a book called Orchos Chaim by Rabbeinu Aharon Hakohen of Lunel, one of the Rishonim. He writes that it is—there are other books called Orchos Chaim, by other Rishonim and by Acharonim. We are speaking now of the Orchos Chaim by Rabbi Aharon Hakohen. Orchos Chaim writes: “It corresponds to the fast Esther requested.” Esther said, “Fast for me, and do not eat or drink.” As I prepare to go in to Achashverosh, fast for me and do not eat or drink for three days, night and day. When was that fast? It was in Nissan. The Gemara quotes, “Mordechai went forth and did everything Esther had instructed him.” According to one opinion, the Gemara explains: What does “Mordechai went forth” mean? That he seemingly transgressed the words of the Torah and had the first day of Pesach observed as a fast.

17:10 Speaker 2 That fast took place in Nissan. The fast of “fast for me” was in Nissan. There are different opinions about when in Nissan—12, 13, I don’t remember exactly, 12, 13, 14, 15, or 14, 15, 16—but in any case, that fast was in Nissan. Orchos Chaim writes that we observe the Fast of Esther before Purim today in commemoration of that fast. The commentators ask: There are two differences between the original fast and the one we actually observe. The original fast was in Nissan and lasted three days. Ours is in Adar and lasts one day. So how does our fast commemorate it? They explain that there are reasons for these changes. They did not want to establish a fast in Nissan, because Nissan is the time of the dedication of the House and the offerings of the nesi’im. Maseches Sofrim adds that Nissan is the time when the Beis Hamikdash is destined to be rebuilt, so it certainly isn’t a suitable month for fasting. That is why the fast was moved to Adar, and in Adar itself it is one day rather than three. Why one day? It is hard for people to fast for three days; we can barely get through one day, let alone three. So, in commemoration of the three-day fast in Nissan, we fast for one day in Adar. As an aside, there were people who fasted three days in the month of Adar, according to the ancient custom in Eretz Yisroel recorded in Maseches Sofrim. Not three consecutive days, but three days after Purim, not before. That was the ancient custom. Corresponding to Esther’s three-day fast, the three-day fast Esther requested, they also fasted for three days according to the ancient custom in Eretz Yisroel. But that custom fell out of practice. In any case, the first opinion says: What is the Fast of Esther? It commemorates “fast for me.” We spent time on the comparison, but that is the point. The Fast of Esther commemorates “fast for me, and neither eat nor drink,” which took place in Nissan. That is one opinion. A second opinion is cited in the name of Rabbeinu

19:21 Speaker 2 Tam. We already mentioned Rabbeinu Tam, and today we’ll mention him again. Rabbeinu Tam, as is known, was named Rabbi Yaakov, and the name “Tam” refers to “Yaakov, a guileless man.” Rabbeinu Yaakov, the guileless man who dwelt in tents, was Rashi’s grandson—a famous grandson. Rashi had other grandsons who were great Torah scholars, but Rabbeinu Tam became especially well known. Rabbeinu Tam says: Why do we observe the Fast of Esther? Because what happened in the days of Mordechai and Esther on 13 Adar? On 13 Adar the Jews fought, and we know that during a war people fast so that they will be victorious. It says that Moshe fasted during the war against Amalek. When it says that Moshe, Aharon, and Chur went up to the top of the hill, it says that they fasted at that time. So too, they fasted on 13 Adar, and in memory of that wartime fast, we fast to this day. These are the two main opinions. Later, with Hashem’s help, we’ll look at more details and more opinions, but these are the two main ones. Why is the fast called the Fast of Esther? According to the first opinion, that it commemorates Esther’s request, “Fast for me, and neither eat nor drink for three days,” it makes sense. Esther asked them to fast; the fast was for her and on her behalf, so we fast in later generations to commemorate it. But according to the second opinion, the fast was because of the war. If so, why do we associate this fast with Esther? It was a fast of the entire Jewish people. Just as Moshe and Yankel and everyone else fasted, Esther fasted as one of them. What was special about Esther? Several answers have been given to that question: What connects this particular fast to Esther? We’ll skip over some of the answers. You can see the answer in the Mishnah Berurah, siman 686, though there is room to discuss what he says. Let’s turn to the Rebbe’s answer. Before that, let’s look at another question the Rebbe asks in a sicha from 5740. There is

21:28 Speaker 2 another question about the Fast of Esther. How can Rabbeinu Tam say that we fast to commemorate the fast of the Jews at the time of the war? The Jews were not allowed to fast. It says that people who are fighting must not fast, so that they do not lose their strength. If so, how were the Jews allowed to fast when they were at war? How could they fast? Fasting was forbidden. In the additions to Likkutei Sichos, volume 6, there is a letter in which the Rebbe asks what connection the fast has to Esther. But a note appears at the end of the letter: its dispatch was delayed, and in the meantime, the Rebbe says, there is an answer. Why is the fast named after Esther? This is closely related to the question we brought from the Rebbe’s farbrengen in 5740. At that farbrengen, the Rebbe asked: How could they fast? You are not allowed to fast when you are fighting. The Rebbe says that this answers why the fast is named after Esther. It is named after Esther because she was the only one who fasted. The entire Jewish people—men, women, and children—had to gather and stand up for their lives, “to kill and destroy all the forces of the peoples and provinces that attacked them, children and women.” Since everyone was involved in the war, none of them was allowed to fast. Who did not fight in that war? Who remained behind, somewhere safe and protected? Only Esther remained in the palace; she did not fight. If Esther was the only one who remained in the palace, that means she was the only one who fasted. And if Esther was the only one who fasted, we understand why the fast is named after her. That is the explanation the Rebbe gives. Let’s look at one more detail from Sefer HaEshkol. Sefer HaEshkol was written by the Raavad’s father-in-law. At the beginning, we mentioned the well-known Raavad, who wrote the glosses on the Rambam. His father-in-law—we won’t go into detail about him now—wrote Sefer HaEshkol. In Sefer HaEshkol, which was printed in recent generations, he gives the same reason: we fast

23:35 Speaker 2 to commemorate the war that took place on 13 Adar. But he words it a little differently. The Eshkol writes that we fast today on 13 Adar to commemorate the distress the Jews experienced on 13 Adar. He does not write that it commemorates a fast the Jews observed on 13 Adar; he says it commemorates their distress. If it commemorates their distress, we understand how it relates to everyone. Regarding the fast, we asked: Not everyone fasted. But as for the distress, we understand that everyone experienced it. That is the opinion of the author of the Eshkol. So, before moving on to two more interesting reasons for the Fast of Esther, let’s sum up this point. The two well-known reasons for the Fast of Esther given by the Rishonim are, first, that it commemorates Esther’s request, “Fast for me,” in Nissan. We explained why we nevertheless fast for one day in Adar. Second, it commemorates the fast the Jews observed during the war. We asked how they could have fasted, and the Rebbe’s explanation is that they actually did not fast, which is why the fast is named after Esther. According to the Eshkol, they did not fast. True, but our fast commemorates their distress, not a fast. According to the Eshkol, though, it remains unclear why the fast is named after Esther. Let’s now move on to two lesser-known reasons for observing the Fast of Esther at all. One reason is given by the Eshkol. The same Eshkol we mentioned earlier adds another reason that seems right to him: to spur people to hear the Megillah reading. He says that we know we do not eat before performing a mitzvah, because when we start eating, we know where it begins, but sometimes we do not know where it will end. We might drown in the oil from the schnitzel. Therefore, says the Eshkol, to spur people to hear the Megillah reading—so that they do not come to it straight from a meal, with no telling what might happen—we do not eat from the morning onward. To spur people to hear the Megillah reading: that is one reason. And another reason, based on the inner dimension of Torah, appears in the book Maggid

25:32 Speaker 2 Meisharim. The book Maggid Meisharim is a very unusual book. It was written by Rabbi Yosef Karo, whom we know from his Shulchan Aruch, Beis Yosef, Kesef Mishneh, the responsa Avkas Rochel, and Klalei HaGemara. All those books are entirely in the revealed dimension of Torah. He also wrote Maggid Meisharim. What is Maggid Meisharim? An angel would reveal himself to the Beis Yosef and tell him, “I am the Mishnah speaking through your mouth. Because you study Mishnah, an angel has been sent to reveal various matters to you.” The Beis Yosef also records things for which the angel rebuked him: “You didn’t act properly in this matter; you didn’t act properly in that matter.” I don’t want to repeat them—whoever wants to can read in the book itself what the angel says he did wrong. There are also various things the angel tells him about great Torah scholars. And there is the well-known promise the angel makes him, which the Rebbe mentions many times: that he would die al kiddush Hashem. If I’m not mistaken, that promise appears in the book dozens of times. For our purposes, the book also gives another reason for the Fast of Esther. What is the reason? It says that since on Purim we become intoxicated and drink, and intoxication can have undesirable consequences, we fast in advance. We ask forgiveness in advance and make preparations so that there will be no anger, so that Satan will not bring accusations, and so that the drinking on Purim will have no undesirable consequences. So, to sum up this section, we’ve seen four reasons for the Fast of Esther: to commemorate Esther’s request, “Fast for me”; to commemorate the fasting and distress during the war; to spur us to the Megillah reading; or to protect against the undesirable consequences of Purim drinking. In a case

27:32 Speaker 2 where Purim falls on Sunday, we would normally fast on the day before Purim. But that’s Shabbos, and we can’t fast on Shabbos. So, as everyone knows, we fast on Thursday. But if, for example, Tisha B’Av falls on Shabbos, or the Seventeenth of Tammuz—or the Fast of Gedaliah—falls on Shabbos, we postpone the fast until Sunday. Our third topic concerning the Fast of Esther is: What’s the difference? Why, with the Seventeenth of Tammuz and Tisha B’Av, do we say, “We can’t fast on Shabbos, all right, so Sunday,” whereas with Purim, we can’t fast on Shabbos, so we move the fast earlier? What’s the difference? The reason we postpone the Seventeenth of Tammuz, Tisha B’Av, and the Fast of Gedaliah from Shabbos to Sunday comes from the Gemara in Megillah, 5a: “We do not bring calamity forward.” Since a fast is connected with calamity, we don’t want to bring it forward; we prefer to postpone calamity. So why do we move the Fast of Esther earlier? A fast, which would seem to be a calamity, shouldn’t be brought forward. The Rishonim give a number of reasons why we don’t postpone this fast but instead move it earlier, and there seem to be two general approaches. One approach says this fast is not a calamity, and that is expressed in several ways. The Ritva writes, “This fast is a fast of repentance, not a fast of calamity.” The Kol Bo writes something similar. The Kol Bo is a halachic work from the period of the Rishonim whose author is unknown. There are several books from that period whose authors we don’t know. The Kol Bo says it is a fast of spiritual strengthening. The Meiri, in Magen Avos—we mentioned in the first section the Meiri’s book Magen Avos, in which he debates the students of the Ramban and defends the customs of his forebears, the customs of

29:39 Speaker 2 the sages of Provence. One of the debates there concerns the claim of the sages of Spain that the fast should be on Thursday, as we do and as halachah rules. But the Meiri argued in the name of his teachers, the sages of Provence, who moved the fast not to Thursday but to Friday. There’s a debate about it. They argued that one may not fast on Erev Shabbos and enter Shabbos while still fasting. The Meiri argued that this rule against entering Shabbos while fasting applies to an ordinary fast. A fast that involves a mitzvah, that has a particular purpose or an added measure of devotion, is permitted. That’s a debate, but within it we find something very important for our purposes. The Meiri cites the students of the Ramban as saying that this fast is a fast of joy—no less. Earlier we discussed the Ritva and the Kol Bo, who describe it as a fast of repentance and strengthening: not a calamity, not a commemoration of something distressing, but still repentance and strengthening. The Meiri cites the students of the Ramban describing it as joy. Elsewhere, the Kol Bo also writes, “They accepted it joyfully in commemoration of the miracle.” The She’iltos, the book by Rav Achai Gaon that we mentioned earlier, also says, “Because it is a miracle.” So they all agree—the Ritva, the Kol Bo, the Ramban, the She’iltos, and so on—that this is not a fast of calamity. It can be moved earlier. As we said, “We do not bring calamity forward.” A fast commemorating the destruction, a fast commemorating a siege, a fast commemorating the breaching of the city wall—those are fasts we postpone. The Fast of Esther, a fast of joy, strengthening, and repentance, can be moved earlier to Thursday. But the Maggid Mishneh, one of the great Rishonim and one of the great commentators on the Rambam, sees the Rambam’s ruling that the fast is moved earlier to Thursday and writes: “Why do we move it earlier rather than postpone it?” He says it’s a practical matter: it can’t be postponed. Why not? Because Sunday is

31:46 Speaker 2 Purim, and we certainly can’t fast on Purim; it’s a festive day. He says there is no choice but to move it to before Shabbos. From his words, it seems that if the Sunday after Shabbos were an ordinary weekday rather than Purim, we would postpone the Fast of Esther. “We do not bring calamity forward”—we only postpone it. But what can we do? There are constraints. Because of those constraints, we move this fast earlier instead of postponing it. So we appear to have a fundamental disagreement here. According to many Rishonim, this fast cannot be defined as a calamity. But the Maggid Mishneh says it can be. In his responsa, the Chasam Sofer asks: How can this fast be defined as a calamity? After all, it commemorates a miracle. What calamity is there? He answers: True, but in practice, fasting is a calamity. Not eating and so on—that makes it a day of calamity. Yes, it commemorates a miracle, but the experience itself is one of calamity. The Ramban, whom we mentioned, cites the Yerushalmi’s account of a custom to fast three days in the month of Adar in commemoration of the fast Esther requested: “Fast for me.” The Ramban says they observed this custom after Purim. Why after Purim and not before? Again, because “we do not bring calamity forward”; we postpone it instead. So we see that, in the view of most Rishonim, this is a fast of joy. But some Rishonim apply the principle “we do not bring calamity forward” even to the Fast of Esther. The Maggid Mishneh discusses our custom of moving it earlier and says that this is due to a practical constraint. The Ramban discusses the earlier custom and says that, in fact, they postponed the

33:39 Speaker 2 The fast of the ancient custom. So, to conclude the third part: according to the majority view, Taanis Esther is a fast of joy. According to the minority view, it has an element of distress. But we saw that the Chasam Sofer qualifies this and says that, in essence, it is joyful; it is only technically a hardship because we do not eat. Now, the Selichos for this day. Selichos were generally written in a somewhat difficult poetic style, and we do not always understand every word we read. But if we pay attention to the Selichos for Taanis Esther, we will see that two-thirds of them do not speak about distress and do not express sorrow. The general pattern is that on 10 Teves, Taanis Esther, 17 Tammuz, and the days before Rosh Hashanah—in the Selichos we say, apart from Erev Rosh Hashanah—there are three poems that change from day to day. There is a fixed framework for Selichos. We begin with “Forgive us as we open our mouths,” “In You we have hoped,” and so on, and then there are three poems that change. There are the fixed passages, “Remember Your mercies,” “For with You is the source of life,” “Hear our voice,” and so on, and there are three poems that change. I recommend getting up now and bringing a siddur. You can pause the computer or phone for a moment, bring a siddur, and look inside at the three poems specific to Taanis Esther. The first poem is essentially a summary of Megillas Esther. It is not a sad poem. It begins, “When a man rose against us”—that refers to Haman. Our Sages expound the verse in Tehillim 124, “Had Hashem not been with us when a man rose against us…” They asked: Why does it say “a man”? A man and not a king—this refers to Haman. So the poem begins, “When a man rose against us, dread seized us and we trembled.” When this man, the wicked Haman, rose against us, we began to tremble. It goes on to describe the troubles, as in Megillas Esther. The poem follows

35:40 Speaker 2 the order of the alef-beis. At the end, we discover an acrostic. After passages arranged in alef-beis order, the initial letters tell us that the poem was written by Rabbi Menachem ben Machir. Rabbi Menachem ben Machir is not new to us. We encountered him not long ago on Simchas Torah. Anyone who pays attention to the introductory poem we say for the Chassan Bereishis on Simchas Torah will see that its initial letters spell Menachem ben Rabbi Machir. And anyone who goes a little further back, to the kinos of Tisha B’Av, will also find a kinah there, “I Will Awaken Mourning,” that appears to have been written by Rabbi Menachem ben Rabbi Machir. In any case, in our poem, Rabbi Menachem ben Rabbi Machir, who was a contemporary of Rashi, gives us a summary of Megillas Esther. He speaks about the troubles at the beginning, then about the prayer and the outcry, and at the end, Haman was hanged. “He restored me to my position, and hanged him”—Haman. “And Esther wrote of the mighty events, to be read with praise at the festivals.” At that time, relief and deliverance would arise for the Jews. So this poem is not entirely what we might expect of a fast day and Selichos. Its beginning is sad and its ending is joyful, like Megillas Esther. The same is true of the second poem. The second poem is a little older, about two generations before Rabbi Menachem ben Machir. It was written by Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yitzchak. Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yitzchak lived in the generation of Rabbeinu Gershom, Me’or Hagolah, at the beginning of the Rishonim period in Ashkenaz. There is a story about how his son Elchanan became an apostate, how they managed to find him, and how he was lost and disappeared. We will not go into the story, its different versions, or its details. But for our purposes, Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yitzchak wrote

37:31 Speaker 2 this poem, and again we see the same principle in it. It begins with the enemy rising to stir up strife and cause trouble. Then Hashem provided the cure before the blow and had the wicked Haman killed, and in the end everything was all right. So these two poems are not entirely sad. The third poem, however, is a poem of repentance. It is a poem for an ordinary fast day. “Though we are few in number, we seek Your face; do not close Your ears to the cry of the afflicted; heed their supplication.” And the poem continues with a prayer for forgiveness: “Grant us abundant pardon.” At the end of the third poem, in its final passage, we see that it was written by Rabbeinu Meshullam. Anyone who looks at that passage—“Grant us abundant pardon, hear our prayer, and overlook wrongdoing; may those who oppress us make peace with us”—will see that it skips the vav and spells Meshullam without it. The last line is, “Do not withhold Your mercy from us.” There are differing opinions about exactly when this Rabbeinu Meshullam lived. But in any case, in light of what we learned in the previous part, we can say that the Selichos we recite on Taanis Esther express the nature of the fast. According to the majority view, Taanis Esther commemorates the miracle and is a fast of joy, a fast that strengthens us. Since it is a fast that strengthens us rather than one of distress, the miracle of Megillas Esther is emphasized, and the sorrow less so. The third poem, by Rabbeinu Meshullam, on the other hand, is more like a poem for an ordinary fast day, a fast more focused on repentance, a fast with an element of distress. That is why we are called “the afflicted” in that poem, and so on. The last point in this section on Taanis Esther may also be the biggest surprise of the class. We save surprises for the end. The Rebbe said several times that the fast of Taanis Esther will not be abolished, because even when the other fasts are abolished, it is written that the days of Purim will not be abolished, and that includes

39:39 Speaker 2 Taanis Esther. The Rebbe derives this precisely from the Rambam. It was discussed in collections of scholarly notes and so on, and the explanation offered—the one that seems simplest—is that this follows the majority view. According to the majority view, as we saw, Taanis Esther is a special fast. It is not a fast of distress like the other fasts, but one that commemorates the miracle: a fast of joy, of strengthening ourselves, and of repentance. So if it is a fast of joy, it is very fitting that it should continue in the days of Moshiach. That is what the Rebbe says—for example, in the sichos of 5746, page 696: Taanis Esther will not be abolished even in the future. This fits with the Rishonim we mentioned and with some of the Selichos, which show that the fast is primarily about joy. So let us briefly summarize the five topics we covered in this class. The first was the source of Taanis Esther: either in the Megillah, “the matters of the fasts and their outcry”; or in the words of our Sages, as the Gemara says, “It is a day of gathering for everyone”; or in a custom dating from the period of the Geonim, a later period. That was the first topic: three opinions on the source of the obligation. The second topic was four reasons for Taanis Esther: two common and well known, and two less so. The common ones are that it commemorates either the fast Esther requested or the fast at the time of the battle on 13 Adar. The two less-known reasons are to spur us to read the Megillah, or to prevent accusations in Heaven and undesirable consequences arising from the drunkenness of Purim. The third topic we discussed was why we move the fast of Taanis Esther earlier rather than postponing it. We saw two general explanations: either because, unlike the other fasts, it is not a fast of distress; or because, although it is a fast of distress, we cannot postpone it, since Sunday is Purim, a festival. The fourth thing we learned about was the Selichos. We saw that the first two poems are not so sad; rather, they seem to commemorate the miracle. And the third poem, “Though We Are Few in Number,” appears to have

41:45 Speaker 2 an element of distress. And the fifth topic, timely as it is, was the days of Moshiach: the Rebbe points out that even in the days of Moshiach, we will continue to fast on Taanis Esther. May everyone have an easy and meaningful fast and a happy Purim. Much success.