Reading the Megillah as a Form of Recitation of Hallel

The Gemara, Megillah 14a, discusses why we don't recite Hallel on Purim. One of the answers presented is R. Nachman's opinion that the reading of Megillat Esther is considered a form of Hallel. In this week's issue, we will discuss R. Nachman's opinion and how this relates to the mitzvah of reading the Megillah.

Is R. Nachman's Position Accepted?

The Gemara, after quoting R. Nachman, quotes Rava as saying that there is no obligation to recite Hallel on Purim. Rava certainly disagrees with R. Nachman's premise that reading the Megillah is a form of Hallel. Rambam, Hilchot Megillah U'Chanukah 3:6, states explicitly that the reading of Megillat Esther serves as the Hallel of Purim. Rabbeinu Asher, Megillah 1:8, codifies the opinion of Rava that there is no obligation to recite Hallel on Purim.

Meiri, Megillah 14a, s.v. Davar, sides with the opinion of R. Nachman and presents an important difference between the two opinions. According to R. Nachman, there is an inherent obligation to recite Hallel on Purim that can be fulfilled through reading the Megillah. As such, if one has no ability to fulfill the mitzvah of reading the Megillah, he should recite Hallel on Purim. According to Rava, however, there is no inherent obligation to recite Hallel on Purim. Therefore, if one is unable to fulfill the mitzvah of reading the Megillah, there is still no requirement to recite Hallel.

R. Chaim Y.D. Azulai, Birkei Yosef, Orach Chaim 793:4, notes that the codifiers of Jewish law do not include any requirement to recite Hallel even if one has no ability of fulfilling the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. One must conclude that Rava's opinion is the normative opinion and there is never a requirement to recite Hallel on Purim.

R. Avraham S.B. Sofer, K'tav Sofer, Orach Chaim no. 140, notes that it is difficult to conclude definitively that R. Nachman's opinion is rejected given that Rambam codifies the opinion of R. Nachman. He suggests that the reason why we don't find any of the codifiers requiring recitation of Hallel when a Megillah is not available is that R. Nachman's opinion is that the institution to read the Megillah replaces the initial obligation to recite Hallel. Once this institution took effect, even if one is in a rare situation where he cannot fulfill the mitzvah of reading the Megillah, he does not gain by reciting Hallel because the obligation to recite Hallel no longer exists. [R. Sofer's explanation implies that the original obligation to recite Hallel is rabbinic in nature. His father, R. Moshe Sofer, Chatam Sofer, Orach Chaim no. 161, notes the opinion of some Rishonim that the obligation to recite Hallel on festivals is biblical in nature. He adds that if one assumes that the obligation is biblical in nature and that the reading of the Megillah fulfills that obligation on Purim, one must be stringent on matters of doubt relating to the recitation of the Megillah. Therefore, in a city where there is a doubt whether to celebrate Purim on the fourteenth of Adar or the fifteenth, one must read the Megillah on both days.]

The Nature of the Daytime Reading

R. Ya'akov B. Zolty, Mishnat Ya'avetz, Orach Chaim no. 77, notes that R. Nachman's opinion sheds light on the nature of the daytime reading of the Megillah. Tosafot, Megillah 4a, s.v. Chayav, quote the opinion of Rabbeinu Yitzchak that the daytime reading is considered the primary reading. Therefore, although one recites the beracha of Shehechiyanu before the nighttime reading, one repeats the beracha at the daytime reading. Rambam, Hilchot Megillah U'Chanukah 1:3, rules that one should not recite Shehechiyanu during the daytime reading.

R. Zolty explains that Rambam's opinion is that the daytime reading is not the primary fulfillment of the mitzvah of reading the Megillah. The Mishna, Megillah 20b, states that one can only recite Hallel during the day. Therefore, it is possible that the primary impetus to institute a daytime reading was to fulfill the requirement to recite Hallel. As such, there are two aspects of the daytime reading, neither of which warrants recitation of Shehechiyanu. The Hallel aspect does not warrant a Shehechiyanu since one does not ordinarily recite Shehechiyanu on the recitation of Hallel. The inherent obligation to repeat the reading of the Megillah during the daytime does not warrant a Shehechiyanu since the Shehechiyanu is already recited at the nighttime reading. A second recitation of Shehechiyanu is only logical according to Rabbeinu Yitzchak's opinion that the primary reading is during the daytime.

Reading the Megillah While Seated

R. Moshe Sofer, Chatam Sofer, Orach Chaim no. 51, notes that there are three principles that ostensibly cannot coexist. First, the Mishna's principle (Megillah 21a) that the Megillah can be read standing or sitting. Second, the principle of Shibolei HaLeket, no. 173, that Hallel must be recited in the standing position. This principle is codified by Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 422:7. Third, R. Nachman's principle that reading the Megillah fulfills the requirement to recite Hallel on Purim. If one assumes that Hallel must be recited standing and that reading of the Megillah fulfills the requirement to recite Hallel, how does the Mishna allow one to read the Megillah while seated?

R. Zolty, op. cit., without directly referencing Chatam Sofer's question, notes that the leniency to read the Megillah while seated may be contingent on whether one accepts R. Nachman's opinion. Tur, Orach Chaim no. 590, rules that although one can fulfill the mitzvah if he reads the Megillah in the sitting position, ideally, one should only read the Megillah in the standing position. Ran, Megillah 11b, s.v. HaKorei, rules that even in an ideal situation one may read the Megillah in the sitting position.

R. Zolty explains that Tur's reluctance to allow reading the Megillah in the sitting position is a function of R. Nachman's opinion that reading the Megillah fulfills the requirement to recite Hallel on Purim. Since Hallel is recited in the standing position, the Megillah should ideally be read in the standing position. R. Zolty further explains that since the reason to read the Megillah standing is due to the obligation to recite Hallel, Tur would agree that at the nighttime reading - which does not serve to fulfill the obligation to recite Hallel- there is no insistence on one standing for the reading of the Megillah.

R. Yosef D. Soloveitchik's Analysis

R. Yosef D. Soloveitchik (cited in Harerei Kedem 1:192) provides two more insights into how R. Nachman's position impacts the reading of the Megillah. First, Orchot Chaim, Hilchot Megillah no. 24, rules that if there is no minyan (a group of ten male adults) available, each person should read the Megillah on his own. If there is someone who is unable to read on his own, someone may read for him and he will fulfill the mitzvah by listening. Magen Avraham 689:10, explains that although the principle of shomei'a k'oneh (the listener is like the responder) should allow one to listen to the reading of the Megillah from someone else, the reading of the Megillah is similar to tefillah (prayer). Regarding tefillah, each person must pray on his own unless it is within the context of a minyan or he does not know how to pray on his own.

R. Soloveitchik notes that Magen Avraham's comparison of reading the Megillah to tefillah seems to be based on the principle that reading the Megillah fulfills the obligation to recite Hallel on Purim. Since one aspect of reading the Megillah is Hallel, when there is no minyan, it is preferable for each individual to read on his own.

Second, R. Soloveitchik notes that the Hallel aspect of the reading of the Megillah explains why certain verses of the Megillah are read by the entire congregation. Regarding Hallel, the Gemara, Sukkah 38b, states that certain portions of Hallel should be recited responsively (i.e. one person reads a verse and the rest of the congregation responds). The responsive reading of some of the verses in the Megillah serves to fulfill that requirement.