Siman 689, Se'if 1 · Introduction: the rule of mitzvos asei she'hazman grama

Shulchan Aruch, siman 689: that everyone is obligated in the reading of the Megillah; it contains six se'ifim.
Se'if 1: "All are obligated in its reading: men, women, converts and freed slaves, and we train the children to read it."
(Shulchan Aruch)

Introduction: the rule of mitzvos asei she'hazman grama

• The rule: Any positive mitzvah that is bound to a particular time (mitzvas asei she'hazman grama), meaning a mitzvah whose obligation depends on a specific time, women are exempt from.
• Example, blowing shofar: The obligation to blow is on Rosh Hashanah alone. Someone who blows a day earlier or a day later has not fulfilled any mitzvah by doing so. This is a time-bound positive mitzvah, and in principle women are exempt. The fact that Ashkenazi women come to hear the shofar is a custom they accepted upon themselves, and they likewise took on the practice of making the berachah.
• Example, the four species: The obligation applies only on Sukkos; the rest of the year there is no obligation, so this too is a time-bound positive mitzvah. Even so, Ashkenazi women take the lulav and make a berachah on it, because they accepted the mitzvah upon themselves, and not because they are somehow dependent on their husbands.
• The view of Rav Ovadia Yosef: Nobody disputes that a woman may take the lulav; the argument is only about the berachah, and in his opinion they should not make it.
• Negative mitzvos: In every prohibition women are obligated. For example on Pesach, the prohibition of eating chametz applies to a woman exactly as to anyone else.

Exceptions derived from the verses

Although the rule is that women are exempt from time-bound positive mitzvos, there are mitzvos in which they are obligated on the strength of a derashah.

1. Eating matzah: In principle, eating matzah on the Seder night is a time-bound positive mitzvah, since the obligation applies only on the Seder night, and even then only to the kezayis of matzas mitzvah over which we make a special berachah, not to the rest of what one eats. But the Torah placed two matters next to each other: "You shall not eat chametz with it; for seven days you shall eat matzos with it." From this juxtaposition Chazal derived that whoever is included in the prohibition of eating chametz is included in the mitzvah of eating matzah. Since a woman is warned about chametz, she is obligated to eat matzah on the Seder night just like a man.
2. Kiddush on Friday night: Kiddush is a Torah obligation, learned from "Remember the Shabbos day to sanctify it," and it is a time-bound positive mitzvah. However, the first set of the Ten Commandments says "Remember" while the second says "Guard," and Chazal derived that whoever is included in guarding is included in remembering. Since a woman is included in guarding, meaning the prohibition of doing melachah, she is obligated in remembering as well, that is, in Kiddush.

• The practical difference: A woman makes Kiddush when her husband is not home, and also when he is home. Moreover, since her obligation is identical to his, she can fulfill the obligation on behalf of the entire household.

The source of women's obligation in Megillah reading

Women are obligated in the four cups, in the Chanukah light, and in the reading of the Megillah, for they too were part of that miracle.
(Gemara)

Two explanations of "they too were part of that miracle": the dispute between Rashi and Tosafos

• First explanation, they brought about the miracle: The women were the cause of the salvation. On Purim, Esther. On Chanukah, according to the aggadah, Yehudis, who cut off the head of the enemy general. At the Exodus, as the Midrash says, "In the merit of righteous women our forefathers were redeemed from Egypt": once Pharaoh decreed that every newborn boy be thrown into the Nile, the men refrained from having children, so the women went out to the field and won over their husbands, and in that way they preserved the continuation of the nation.
• Second explanation, they were included in the danger and were saved: The women were included in the decree, and when the Holy One performed the miracle they too were rescued from it, and therefore they are included in the obligation to publicize the miracle.

The second explanation applied to the three miracles

• Purim: The decree was "to destroy, to kill and to annihilate" all the Jews, "young and old, children and women." The women were included in the decree and were saved.
• Chanukah: The decree of religious persecution, forcing Israel to abandon the mitzvos, applied to women as well, since a woman is obligated to keep Shabbos. And according to tradition there was also a decree that every bride be taken first by the governor, so with the victory in the war they too were saved.
• Pesach: The verse says, "And the Egyptians made the children of Israel serve with crushing labor," and Chazal explain that they switched the tasks around, giving the men's work to the women and the women's work to the men, so that each one did work he was not accustomed to. It emerges that the women too were included in the servitude and were saved from it.

The wording of the Mishnah Berurah on women's obligation (s.k. 1)

"Even though the reading is a time-bound positive mitzvah, nevertheless they are obligated, since they too were part of that miracle, for the decree was originally against them as well, as it is written in the verse: to destroy, to kill and to annihilate all the Jews, young and old, children and women, on one day."
(Mishnah Berurah)

• The Mishnah Berurah's position: The Mishnah Berurah takes the explanation that the women were included in the decree and were saved, and he does not cite the explanation that they brought about the miracle.

A precise look at the rule: a mitzvah of rabbinic origin

• The difficulty: The rule exempting women was stated regarding time-bound positive mitzvos from the Torah, whereas reading the Megillah is rabbinic, as are the Chanukah light and the four cups. On the face of it the rule has no bearing here at all.
• The resolution: There is a further principle: "Whatever the Rabbis enacted, they enacted along the lines of Torah law." When Chazal make an enactment they model it on the Torah's patterns, so there would have been room to exempt women from a rabbinic time-bound mitzvah just as the Torah exempts them. That is the novelty here: they were nevertheless obligated, because they too were part of that miracle.

How women fulfill the obligation

"Therefore a man must read it in his home before the women, the unmarried girls and the maidservants. In some places the practice is that they go to shul to hear the reading, but this requires further consideration."
(Mishnah Berurah)

• Why the man reads: The women did not go to shul and stayed at home, so the man who knows how to read has to read again in front of them.
• The level of their obligation: One would think that if they too were part of the miracle their obligation would be entirely equal to the man's, but it emerges from the poskim that the obligation is not equal, and some hold that their obligation is only to hear and not to read. This will be discussed later in the siman.
• A gathering of women: When the entire audience is women, a woman may read, since they are all in the same status, and the one reading also hears the reading herself, so there is no deficiency in this.
• The difficulty with going to shul: It is hard to fulfill the obligation properly in the women's section, since in many shuls the ezras nashim is separated by a wall or situated where it is hard to hear, and even in the shul itself there is commotion and it is difficult to hear every word. For that reason some preferred that they hear it at home.
• The question of watching young children: When there are small children at home, someone has to stay with them. The question is whether it is better for a child of ten or eleven to stay, since he is obligated only on the level of chinuch, and the mother should go, or whether the mother should stay, since her obligation is not at the highest level, and the child should go with his father. There are differing opinions among the poskim and no simple resolution.

Slaves

• An eved ivri (Jewish servant): A Jew who was sold, such as a thief who has no means to pay and is sold for his theft. He is a Jew in every respect and obligated in all the mitzvos like anyone else, including hearing the Megillah.
• An eved kena'ani (Canaanite slave): A non-Jew who comes to work for a Jew, who is circumcised and immersed in a mikveh. Even so he is not a Jew in every respect; his status regarding mitzvos is like that of a woman, apart from certain matters in which he is obligated and a woman is not, such as the prohibition of rounding off the corners of the head.
• The difficulty in the Shulchan Aruch's wording: If his status is like a woman's, and a woman is obligated in the Megillah reading, then a slave should presumably be obligated too. Why did the Shulchan Aruch specify "freed slaves"?

"Freed: but those who are not freed are exempt, for they are of lesser standing than women."
(Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 2)

• The reason for the distinction: Women's obligation stems from their having been included in the decree, whereas a Canaanite slave is still not a Jew, and was not included in the decree "to destroy, to kill and to annihilate all the Jews." Since he was not included in the decree, he is not included in the obligation.
• The view of "yesh omrim": Some say that even slaves who have not been freed are obligated, since the non-Jews were not versed in the halachic details, and they regarded anyone circumcised as a Jew, so he was in fact included in the danger.
• Rejecting the proof from circumcision: Circumcision is not a definitive sign of Jewishness, since Arabs are also circumcised, so there is no proof that the non-Jews viewed the slave as a Jew. The dispute hinges on this.
• A freed slave: From the moment a Canaanite slave is freed he becomes a full Jew and does not revert to his gentile status, and therefore he is obligated in the reading of the Megillah. For this reason we even find someone who freed his slave in order to complete a minyan.

Chinuch of children

"This means one who has reached the age of chinuch... and since women are also obligated, it is obvious that this applies to young girls as well."
(Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 3)

• Defining "reached the age of chinuch": A child who understands the miracle and the events of the Megillah, and to whom the matter can be explained. He need not have reached the age of twelve; some reach this understanding already at eight, or even younger. Once he has reached that understanding, we bring him to shul to hear the reading.
• Young girls: Since women are obligated in the reading, it is obvious that girls who have reached the age of chinuch are included in this chinuch as well, just like the boys.

Se'if 2: shomea ke'oneh

"Whether one reads it himself or hears it from the reader, he has fulfilled his obligation, provided that he hears it from someone who is himself obligated in its reading."
(Shulchan Aruch)

• The principle: For anything a person is obligated to say, it is not necessary that each individual say it himself; it is enough that one says it and the others listen, and the listener is considered as though he said it (shomea ke'oneh). So it is with Kiddush on Friday night, where one person makes Kiddush and fulfills the obligation for the household.
• First condition, the reader must be obligated: The one fulfilling the obligation for others must himself be obligated in that matter.
• Second condition, intent of the listener and of the one saying it: The listener must intend to fulfill his obligation, and the one saying it must intend to fulfill the obligation for him; it is not enough that he happens to be saying the words out loud.
• Third condition, hearing every word: If he spoke in the middle or let his mind wander and missed words, then he has not said the full text and has not fulfilled his obligation.

In passing · "Savri maranan" in Kiddush

• The question: In Friday night Kiddush we first say "Vayechulu hashamayim veha'aretz vechol tzeva'am," then "Savri maranan," and then the berachah of "borei pri hagafen." We need to clarify what that phrase in the middle is doing there.
• The verses at the beginning: Saying "Vayechulu" is not indispensable to the Kiddush, and the same is true of the custom of saying "Veshamru bnei Yisrael es haShabbos" in the morning. Their purpose is to instill the feeling that the berachah is being made in honor of Shabbos.
• First explanation, a call for attention: "Savri maranan" is a kind of attention marker: take note, gentlemen. The people at the table are about to drink the wine without making a berachah themselves, fulfilling their obligation through shomea ke'oneh, so one has to make sure that they are indeed listening.
• The response: "Savri" is an Aramaic word, and according to this explanation they answer him in Aramaic, "L'chayei," which in Aramaic means "fine," that is, we are listening. According to a different explanation of the word "savri" they answer "L'chaim," and today the response "L'chaim" has become widespread.
• A further explanation, from the Avudraham (Rabbi David Avudraham): The Gemara expounds the verse in Mishlei, "Give strong drink to the one who is perishing, and wine to the bitter of soul." The plain meaning is that one who labors and suffers should be given wine to ease his pain, and Chazal expounded that they would give wine to one condemned to death in order to dull his senses. Therefore, when a person holds the wine on Friday night he says "Savri maranan": what do you think, is this wine perhaps being given to me because I am bitter of soul or because I am condemned? And they answer him "L'chaim," that this is not the case, but rather he is drinking for joy and in honor of Shabbos.
• The Ashkenazi custom: Ashkenazim do not say "Savri maranan," since in the siddurim it is printed in small letters, and they have a general rule that whatever is printed in small letters is skipped. According to the reasons given there is good sense in saying it, even though it was Rabbi David Avudraham, one of the Sephardi authorities, who said it.