The Gemara states that from the eighth day of Nisan until the end of the holiday of Pesach, these days were considered holidays on which one cannot eulogize. This was because during this period, the Sages debated the Baitusim regarding the holiday of Shavuot. The Baitusim contended that Shavuot should fall on a Sunday, based on their interpretation of the verse "Maharat HaShabbat." However, the Sages proved that "Maharat HaShabbat" refers not to a Sunday, but to the second day of Pesach, from which one counts 49 days, with the 50th day being Shavuot. This debate took place between the eighth of Nisan and the end of Pesach, and the Sages were victorious. Consequently, the rabbis declared these days a holiday on which eulogizing is forbidden.
The Gemara questions why the ruling specifies "until the end of the holiday." It asks, "Why say 'until the end of the holiday'? Just say 'until the holiday,' because the holiday of Pesach itself is forbidden for eulogizing anyway." The Gemara responds by drawing a parallel to a previous discussion. Just as the days from Rosh Chodesh Nisan until the eighth were declared a holiday because the rabbis succeeded in their debate against the Sadducees, who wanted to bring the Korban Tamid from private money, the inclusion of the holiday of Pesach in the prohibition against eulogizing is also significant. In the earlier case, the Gemara asked why Rosh Chodesh Nisan was included, since it is already a special day. The answer was that by designating it as a day of Megillat Taanit, it also prohibited the day before it, the 29th of Adar. Similarly, here, the days of Pesach are included in the prohibition from Megillat Taanit because this prohibition, being rabbinic in origin, extends to the day after as well. This means that if a day is prohibited by Torah law, only that day itself is prohibited, but the day before and after are permissible. However, if the prohibition is rabbinic, then the day after is also prohibited, and according to Rabbi Yose, the day before is also prohibited, as we will now see.
Therefore, the Gemara explains that the Sages had to prohibit eulogizing from the eighth of Nisan, including the holiday of Pesach, because since these days are prohibited by Megillat Taanit (a rabbinic prohibition), the day after Pesach will also be prohibited. The Gemara clarifies that this follows the opinion of Rabbi Yose, who states that the days before and after the days of Megillat Taanit are also prohibited.
The Gemara then raises a question based on this principle: If so, then the 29th day of Adar should also be prohibited. We previously said that the 29th of Adar is prohibited because it is the day before Rosh Chodesh Nisan, which is a day of Megillat Taanit. But why give that reason? Let's just say that the 29th of Adar is prohibited because it is the day after the 28th of Adar. The 28th of Adar is also one of the days of Megillat Taanit. On the 28th of Adar, good news came to the Jewish people: they would not have to stop learning Torah. There had been a decree against them forbidding Torah study and circumcision. Yehuda ben Shamua and his friends approached a noblewoman who had connections with the Roman hierarchy. They protested to the government, crying out, "Are we not brothers? Are we not from the same father and mother? Why are we different from any other nation that you decree upon us?" They were asserting their shared lineage with Avraham Avinu and Yitzchak Avinu, asking why they were singled out for harsh decrees. When the Romans heard this, they nullified the decrees. On that day, the rabbis made a holiday, the 28th of Adar. Therefore, according to Rabbi Yose, not only is the 28th of Adar prohibited, but the day after, the 29th, also becomes prohibited. So, why did we need to say that the 29th is prohibited because it's the day before Rosh Chodesh Nisan (which is also a Megillat Taanit day)? We could simply say it's prohibited because of the 28th. If the 28th is a holiday, then the 29th will also be a holiday, and we wouldn't need to count Rosh Chodesh Nisan to prohibit the day before it, because the day before is already prohibited as the day after the 28th.
The Gemara responds that we do need the prohibition of Rosh Chodesh Nisan for a case where the month of Adar is a "full" month (Mi'ubar), meaning it has 30 days. In such a case, the 28th of Adar is a holiday, and the 29th is prohibited as the day after it. However, if Adar has 30 days, then the 30th of Adar would not be prohibited by the 28th. Therefore, we need Rosh Chodesh Nisan to be a day of Megillat Taanit, because its rabbinic prohibition would then extend to the day before it, the 30th of Adar, making that day also prohibited. So, the prohibition of Rosh Chodesh Nisan is beneficial for this specific scenario.
The Gemara offers another interpretation of the phrase "Kol shele'acharav b'Taanit asur b'Hesped, kol shele'acharav b'Taanit asur, b'Hesped mutar, v'zehu ilu mutal bein shnei Yamim Tovim, asa'u k'Yom Tov atzmo v'afilu b'Hesped name'asur." This means: Any day that is after a day of Megillat Taanit is prohibited only for fasting, but not for eulogizing. However, if this day is "sandwiched" between two holidays, it is treated as a holiday itself, and eulogizing is also prohibited on it. The explanation is as follows: A day after a Megillat Taanit day is generally only prohibited for fasting, not eulogizing. For example, the 28th of Adar is prohibited for both fasting and eulogizing. But the 29th, as the day after, would normally only be prohibited for fasting. However, since the 29th is "sandwiched" between two holidays – the 28th of Adar (the holiday commemorating the nullification of the decrees) and the first of Nisan (the holiday commemorating the victory over the Sadducees regarding the Korban Tamid) – it is treated as a full holiday itself, and eulogizing is also prohibited on it. This is why the first of Nisan needs to be prohibited, because it creates the second "sandwiching" holiday, making the 29th of Adar prohibited for eulogizing as well.
The Gemara reiterates the initial statement: "From the eighth of Nisan until the end of Pesach, that already the holiday of Shavuot was established..." The Gemara then asks, "Why say 'from the eighth of Nisan'? Start from the ninth. Didn't we say above that the eighth day was already prohibited by Megillat Taanit because it was the last day of the debate regarding the Korban Tamid, where the rabbis were victorious? So the eighth day is already prohibited. Why include the eighth day with the Shavuot debate holiday? Just say 'from the ninth to the end of Pesach.'"
The Gemara responds: "Ein Rabbanan Mivtlin Yom Tov b'Yom Tov." This means that the rabbis have the ability to override days of Megillat Taanit and revert them to regular fast days if necessary. For example, they could decide to nullify the first seven days of Nisan as holidays and declare them fast days due to a new decree. However, they would not have the ability to nullify the eighth of Nisan. This is because the eighth day is a "double holiday": it is not only the last day of the Korban Tamid holiday, but also the first day of the Shavuot debate holiday. Even if they wanted to nullify the entire unit of Korban Tamid holidays (from the first to the eighth of Nisan), they could not nullify the eighth day because it is part of another unit – the Shavuot debate holidays. Therefore, the eighth of Nisan must be prohibited in both units, so that even if one unit is nullified, the eighth day remains prohibited.
Based on this logic, the Gemara explains that the Sages had to prohibit the 29th of Adar because it is the day before Rosh Chodesh Nisan. This is in case they nullify the 28th of Adar (which is a holiday). Even if the 28th is nullified and reverts to a regular day, the 29th would still be prohibited because it is the day before Rosh Chodesh Nisan, the day the Korban Tamid debate began. Thus, the ruling regarding the 29th of Adar being prohibited as the day before Rosh Chodesh Nisan ensures its prohibition even if the 28th of Adar is nullified.
It was stated: Rabbi Hiyya Bar Rav said in the name of Rav: "The halakha follows Rabbi Yose." This means that both the day before and the day after a Megillat Taanit day are prohibited. Shmuel, however, said: "The halakha follows Rabbi Meir," who holds that only the day before is prohibited, but the day after is permissible. This was also the position of our Mishnah. So, according to Rabbi Meir, only the day before is prohibited, but the day after is permissible. Did Shmuel really say this? We have a teaching from Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel in Megillat Taanit which states that on certain days, one cannot fast, and on certain days, one cannot eulogize. This implies that on these specific days, these prohibitions apply, but on other days, they do not. However, it then states that the first and second days are forbidden. This implies that only those specific days mentioned in Megillat Taanit are forbidden, but the days before and after are permissible. This was stated by Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. So, how can you say that Shmuel holds like Rabbi Meir, who says the day after is permissible, when Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel's statement implies that both before and after are permissible, making him even more lenient?
The Gemara responds that originally, Shmuel thought that Rabbi Meir represented the most lenient opinion, holding that the day before is prohibited, but the day after is permissible. So, Shmuel adopted this lenient position. However, once he heard that there was an even more lenient opinion, that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who says that both the day before and the day after are permissible, Shmuel would have agreed with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. The Gemara then clarifies the statement of Rabbi Yochanan, who said that the halakha follows Rabbi Yose. Rabbi Hiyya explains that Rabbi Yochanan's ruling applies specifically to days that are prohibited for fasting. On such days, both the day before and the day after are prohibited. However, regarding days that are prohibited for eulogizing, Rabbi Yochanan does not follow Rabbi Yose. Instead, he holds like Rabbi Meir, who says that only the day before is prohibited, and the day after is permissible. Thus, Rabbi Hiyya explains that Rabbi Yochanan's statement that the halakha follows Rabbi Yose applies only to fast days, where the day before and after are prohibited. But for eulogizing days, which are generally more stringent, the Sages were only strict about the day before, not the day after, aligning with Rabbi Meir.
The Gemara continues, citing a Mishnah in Masechet Megillah, which states that while one may read the Megillah earlier than the 14th of Adar, one may not read it past the 15th of Adar. Even if certain cities or villages read the Megillah early, before the 14th (which is the primary holiday for unwalled cities, while the 15th is for walled cities from the time of Yehoshua), those early days are still permissible for eulogizing and fasting. The Gemara asks: What case is this referring to? If it refers to people from walled cities reading on the 14th, that cannot be. The 14th and 15th of Adar are Purim, and it is forbidden to eulogize on those days. The Megillat Taanit would not need to state this, as it is redundant. It must be teaching us that the 14th and 15th are prohibited for each other, meaning a person from an unwalled city is still prohibited from eulogizing on the 15th, and a person from a walled city is prohibited on the 14th. So, Rabbi Yochanan could not have been talking about a 15th-day person reading on the 14th, as that is clearly prohibited for eulogizing and fasting for both groups.
The Gemara suggests that the Mishnah must be referring to people who read the Megillah even earlier, on the 13th. For example, if the 14th falls on a Tuesday, people in villages would read the Megillah on the previous Monday, the 13th, because that was a day when the courts (Batei Din) would sit. The Sages were lenient with them, allowing them to read the Megillah on the 13th. So, perhaps Rabbi Yochanan was saying that if people from cities (who normally read on the 14th) read the Megillah on the 13th (Yom HaKnisah, the Monday), even though they read it early, those days are permissible for eulogizing and fasting. However, the 13th is a holiday called Yom Nikanor, on which eulogizing is forbidden. So this cannot be the case.
The Gemara then suggests it must be referring to the 12th of Adar. If the 14th falls on a Wednesday, these people would read two days before, on Monday the 12th. Rabbi Yochanan would then be saying that on the 12th, it is permissible for eulogizing and fasting. But this also cannot be, because the 12th is a holiday called Yom Turinus. Therefore, it must be that they are reading the Megillah on the 11th. For example, if the 14th fell on a Sunday, they would read on the previous Thursday, the 11th. And the Mishnah states that the 11th is permissible for eulogizing and fasting. But we just said that the 12th was the holiday of Yom Turinus. According to Rabbi Yose (as Rabbi Yochanan supposedly holds), the day before a holiday should also be prohibited. So, the 11th, being the day before the 12th (Yom Turinus), should be prohibited. Yet the Mishnah says it is permissible. This contradicts the idea that Rabbi Yochanan follows Rabbi Yose regarding fast days, where the day before is prohibited.
The Gemara resolves this by stating that the Mishnah is not talking about the 11th being permissible. It is talking about a case where the people of the 14th (cities) read the Megillah on the 12th. And the reason it is permissible on the 12th is that Yom Turinus, which normally falls on the 12th, was nullified. It was nullified because on that day, the Chassidim, Shemaya and Achaya Achiv, passed away. Therefore, the 12th, no longer being a holiday, is permissible for eulogizing and fasting. The Gemara brings a proof: Rav Nachman once decreed a fast on the 12th, which was Yom Turinus. People responded that Yom Turinus had already been nullified because Shemaya and his brother were killed on that day. This proves that Yom Turinus was indeed nullified.
The Gemara asks: Even if Yom Turinus was nullified, the 12th should still be prohibited for fasting because it is the day before the 13th, which is Yom Nikanor. If the actual holiday of Yom Turinus was nullified, then certainly we would not treat the day before Yom Nikanor with such stringency as to prohibit fasting. If the holiday itself was nullified, we are not going to prohibit a fast merely because it is the day before another holiday. Therefore, the Gemara concludes that Yom Turinus was indeed nullified. The case in the Mishnah is where the people of the 14th (cities) read the Megillah on a Monday (the 12th) when Purim falls on a Wednesday. On that 12th day, it is permissible for eulogizing and fasting. But in reality, Rabbi Yochanan also holds like Rabbi Yose, that when it comes to days prohibited for fasting, both the day before and the day after are prohibited.
The Gemara then explains what happened on these two holidays: Yom Nikanor and Yom Turinus. Nikanor was a Greek duke during the time of the Hasmoneans, in the era of the Second Temple. Every day, he would gesture menacingly towards Yehuda and Jerusalem, declaring that the day would come when these cities would fall into his hands and he would trample them. The Hasmonean family and kingdom were victorious over him on the 13th of Adar. They cut off the thumbs of his hands and the big toes of his feet, because he had pointed at Jerusalem and threatened to trample it. They hung these body parts at the gates of Jerusalem, declaring, "The mouth that spoke in arrogance and the hands that waved over Jerusalem, we will take revenge upon them." This was the origin of Yom Nikanor.
Regarding Yom Turinus: When the wicked Turinus wanted to kill the two righteous men, Lulianus and Pappus, in the city of Lod, it was because a decree had been issued against all the Jewish people. The king's princess had been murdered, and the Jewish people were suspected, even though they were innocent. These two brothers stood up and accepted responsibility for the murder to save all of Israel from the decree. The king killed them. Turinus said to them, "If you are from the nation of Chananya, Mishael, and Azarya, let your God come and save you from my hands." They replied that Chananya, Mishael, and Azarya were perfect righteous individuals, worthy of a miracle, and Nevuchadnezzar was a proper king who might have had a legitimate claim against them for not bowing down. Therefore, it was fitting for a miracle to occur through him. But Turinus, you are a simple, ignorant person, and it is not fitting for a miracle to occur through you. "And we are guilty before God," they continued, "we are being punished for the sins that Am Yisrael has committed, and therefore we are guilty by divine judgment and are not worthy of a miracle. And if you do not kill us, God has many messengers to kill us. God has many bears and lions in the world that can come and kill us. God delivered us into your hands for this lie; He wants to avenge our blood from you, and therefore He wants to kill you." Even though they gave him this powerful response, he killed them immediately. Soon after, Roman generals arrived from Rome and killed Turinus. So, their words came true. The Sages made this day a holiday, and that was the day of Yom Turinus.
The Gemara concludes by discussing the laws of fasts. We said that we do not make a decree (Gezerah) to fast. However, if a series of fasts has already begun, we do not interrupt them. This was the teaching of Rabban Gamliel in the Mishnah. If a series of fasts has started, or if Purim falls within those days, we fast. Rabbi Meir, however, said that even though Rabban Gamliel said one fasts on those days, he meant that one does not complete the fast. The Gemara explains what constitutes "starting a series of fasts" that one does not interrupt. It means starting three fasts (e.g., Monday, Thursday, Monday). Once three fasts have been undertaken, one does not interrupt the series, even if Purim, Rosh Chodesh, or Chanukah falls into a subsequent fast. The Gemara then concludes that this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who said in the name of Rabban Gamliel, that one does not interrupt these fasts, meaning one fasts on Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah, or Purim if they fall within the series. However, Rabbi Meir also said that one does not complete the fast on Rosh Chodesh, Chanukah, or Purim. Since it is a holiday, one fasts because the fast was accepted, but one does not finish it. The Sages, however, say that one indeed fasts and completes the fast, specifically on Rosh Chodesh. However, even they agree that one would not fast on Chanukah or Purim. This is the opinion of the Tosafot. To review the final dispute: Regarding fasting on Rosh Chodesh, one rabbi said that the initial requirement was three fasts, but then it was extended to even one fast, after which one continues through Rosh Chodesh. Then there was a dispute: Do you complete the fast or not? Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Meir, who said in the name of Rabban Gamliel, that one does not complete it. But the Sages said that one does complete it. This was the opinion of Murshidullah in the name of Rav Yehuda, that one does not complete it. We have returned to the topic.