Gemara Megillah, daf (page) tet. The masechet (tractate) is dedicated by our good friend, Mr. Nissim Norman Jamal, in honor of the Rabbi’s parents: sheya'arichu yamim veshanim bivri'ut eitanah, amen ken yehi ratzon. We begin today’s daf on chet amud bet (page 8b), starting from the Mishnah, five or six lines from the bottom.
Matnitin (the Mishnah says): Ein bein sefarim litfillin (phylacteries) umezuzot (doorpost scrolls) (There is no difference between scriptural scrolls, tefillin, and mezuzot). Sefarim refers to Tanach (Bible). In those days, everything was written on parchment, so there was really no difference between sefarim and tefillin and mezuzot, except ela shehasefarim nichtavim bechol lashon: you could write sefarim—you could write Tanach—in any language. Utefillin umezuzot einam nichtavot ela ashurit (Assyrian script): tefillin and mezuzot must be written in the original. Ashurit is like the ktav (script) that we have today, the Hebrew.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel omer, af bisefarim: even sefarim, lo hitiru sheyikatevu ela Yevanit (Greek). They only were matir (permits) it to write sefarim in Greek. At this point, we are thinking that this means whatever sefarim the Tanna Kamma referred to—Tanach—and that they may be written only in Greek. So we have a machloket (dispute) between the Tanna Kamma and Rashbag. The Tanna Kamma says sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon, and Rashbag says no, only Yevanit. The Gemara will explain the reason.
The Gemara says that this seems to be the only difference between sefarim and tefillin and mezuzot. Ha litofram begidin uletame et hayadayim, zeh vazeh shavin (That they are sewn with sinews and render the hands impure, both are equal), right? Legabei (regarding) everything else, it sounds like there is no difference between sefarim and tefillin and mezuzot: when you make the tefirot (stitching), you have to use gidin (sinews), these special types of stitches. Also, everything is metame yadayim (renders the hands impure). Even though you could write sefarim bechol lashon, they are metame yadayim, meaning they have tum'at yadayim (impurity of the hands), as we learned.
Rashi comes along and says: “Tofram begidin, kol sifreihen asuyim biglayon” (all their scrolls are made on parchment), “vehalachah le-Moshe mi-Sinai” (law given to Moses at Sinai), “hu bitfillin umezuzot sheyehu tefurin begidin, uvesfer Torah nechleku beMasechet Makkot (tractate Makkot), besefer Torah shetefaro befishtan” (a Torah scroll stitched with flax), “hashta ashme'inan matnitin kema'an depasal.”
If you are making these sefarim, you need to use the regular tefirot when making the parchments, to stitch them into part. With tefillin, we also have the gidin that they make the boxes. The point is that this is a din (law).
So the Gemara says, usefarim nichtavim bechol lashon. Now we get to the sugya (Talmudic discussion). Basically, it is a very simple sugya. We have a Mishnah and a Baraita (early rabbinic teaching), and they are at odds with each other. We have to answer the contradiction. The Mishnah said sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon, which simply means Tanach: you can write the Tanach in any language you want. We have a Baraita that mashma (implies) that the only language you can write sefarim is ktav Ashurit, and otherwise it is not considered a Sefer Torah that is metame yadayim and everything else. That is the stirah (contradiction).
Urminhu (they raised an objection): now it is going to say it like this: Mikra shekatvo targum (Aramaic translation). Let’s say you have a pasuk (verse) in the Torah. Instead of writing it in Hebrew, you wrote it in Aramaic. Or the opposite: targum, a targum part of the Torah that you wrote in mikra, so you switched the languages. Vechtav Ivri (Hebrew script), or you wrote it in ktav Ivri, which is a different type of writing, eino metame et hayadayim (does not render the hands impure). That type of Sefer Torah is not metame yadayim until ad sheyichtevenu (until you write it) bichtav Ashurit. It sounds like you have to write it bichtav Ashurit and lashon Ashurit, meaning everything is in Hebrew, al hasefer (on the sefer), you know, on the sefer, on klaf (parchment), and with ink.
What are you talking about? We just said in the Mishnah that sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon, and now you are telling me it has to be written bichtav Ashurit, belashon Ashurit, we are assuming. So what do we have? We have a stirah. Read the Rashis over here.
Mikra shekatvo targum: give me a case where we have mikra—you have a pasuk—and you wrote it betargum. Rashi says, “Sefer shekatuv bilshon hakodesh hara'ui lichtov bo mikra ketavo lashon arami.” That means you wrote it in lashon hakodesh, but a part that should have been written in Hebrew you ended up writing in Aramaic, and that is a problem. “Vetargum shehayah ra'ui lichtov bo targum.” I think there is only one case where you could have a targum part: Yegar Sahaduta (Witness heap) by Lavan, as we learned. Kegon Yegar Sahaduta ketavo mikra Gal'ed. You wrote it in Hebrew: you wrote Yegar Sahaduta, translating it into Hebrew as Gal'ed. Vechen targum shel Daniyel ve'Ezra. By the way, we are talking about Tanach here, about everything. Many, many, many chapters of Daniyel and Ezra are written in targum, so you wrote those targums in Hebrew.
Vechtav Ivri, o shelo shinah et halashon aval shinah et haktav. Oh, you did not change the language; you changed the font. It is called ktav Ivri. It is also not really considered a Sefer Torah legabei tum'at yadayim. Sheketavo bichtav shel Ever Hanahar (Beyond the River). Whatever that is, it is ktav livona'ah (Libona'ah script), they call it. Fine.
Next: ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit. Ktav Ashurit hu ktav shelanu. You know, our ktav, the one we know. This is the state of fact. So what do you see here, rabbotai (my teachers)? We have a contradiction. The contradiction is very clear: our Mishnah said sefarim, meaning Tanach, nichtavim bechol lashon. And what? Nichtavim bechol lashon, and it is kasher and metame yadayim as well, because right away the Gemara started off: ha letame yadayim, zeh vazeh shavin.
What was the law about letame yadayim? Just as a reminder, we learned already that the rabbis made a gezeirah (rabbinic decree): sefarim that have kedushah (holiness) would be metame yadayim. Why? Exactly: they used to put their terumah (priestly offering) by the Sefer Torah to watch it, to guard it. So what was happening? The mice were coming to eat the terumah, and meanwhile they were nibbling away at the books. Then the rabbis came along and said, “No, sefarim are metame.” So what is going to happen? No one will put the terumah next to the sefer. Good.
But the point here is that we have a contradiction. So let the Gemara give a few answers. The Gemara gives the first answer: Amar Rava, la kashya (no question). Kan begufan shelanu (here, in our font), kan begufan shelahen (here, in their font). So gufan would be the font, meaning the ketivah, the writing. Look at Rashi: “Kan begufan shelanu, matnitin diktani bechol lashon, shelo shinah et haktav ela sheshinah et halashon.” We would call that transliteration today. You used our ktav, but wrote “in the beginning.” You used a different lashon, but wrote it in our font—transliteration, basically.
Not—but you wrote it using an alef, you know: “in the beginning,” alef, yud, nun, daled, like that. So that case, sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon, which is metame yadayim, is talking about begufan shelanu. Uveraita begufan shelahen. Ah, the Baraita: not only did you use another language, but you used their letters. That is what it implies, because it says ktav Ivri and different types of writing. You used not only a different language but their letters, so it is not going to be good. But if you used our ktav, that is already a legitimate sefer.
So that is one chilluk (distinction). The Mishnah that talked about sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon is begufan shelanu, using our letters. I do not care about the language, as long as you use our letters. And the Baraita that came along and said, “No, ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit,” and all that, is talking about using their letters. Until you write it in Ashurit, it is not going to be good.
So the Gemara says, “Wait, what are you talking about? We have a problem here.” Amar leh Abaye, “Bemai okimta lehahi, begufan shelahen?” So you want to tell me that the Baraita is talking about where you use their writing, their letters? “Mai irya mikra sheketavo targum, vetargum sheketavo mikra, afillu mikra sheketavo mikra, vetargum sheketavo targum nami?” Exactly! What are you telling me—that a mikra that you wrote in targum, or a targum that you wrote in mikra? Hold it: if you are using their letters, even targum that you wrote in targum, you wrote the right targum, you wrote Yegar Sahaduta, but using their letters, it is still no good. Even if you wrote Yegar Sahaduta, since you wrote it with their letters, it is no good. So why did you have to jump to saying you wrote Yegar Sahaduta as Gal'ed? And if you wrote Yegar Sahaduta as Yegar Sahaduta, you still have a problem. Why? Deha katani, ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit. It clearly says, “Until you write it Ashurit, al hasefer uvadiyo.”
So that answer is not going to work, rabbotai, to say that the Baraita is talking about begufan shelahen, using their letters. If you are using their letters, even if you wrote it correctly with their letters, it is not going to be a legitimate sefer. So the Gemara says, “You’re right, scratch that answer.” We are going to put a scratch on that.
Ela la kashya. Ha rabbanan, ha Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Our Mishnah that said sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon is the Rabbanan—the rabbis. Tanna Kamma is the Rabbanan, who say what? Sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon: Tanach. We have a Baraita that says, “No, ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit,” and all that. That is Rashbag. Didn’t Rashbag say in the Mishnah that sefarim are not nichtav bechol lashon? The only language in which you can write sefarim is Greek. So the Baraita that says sefarim nichtavim Ashurit is Rashbag. Good?
The Gemara says, “Well, that’s not good. I Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, ha ika Yevanit.” It should have said sefarim ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit o Yevanit if it were Rashbag. So you see we are struggling here. Why? It said Ashurit, true, but there is another language Rashbag also allows: Yevanit. It is not only Ashurit; it should say ad sheyichtevenu Ashurit vegam Yevanit, because he said sefarim nichtavim beYevanit. Ashurit for sure.
Ela, so we do not have an answer, by the way. Ela la kashya. Kan besefarim, kan bitefillin umezuzot. Very easy: our Mishnah is talking about Tanach, sefarim. Sefarim nichtavim bechol lashon. The Baraita is talking about specific items: tefillin and mezuzot, which can only be written bichtav Ashurit.