Question:
If a person is unable to hear megillah with a minyan on Purim meshulash should they still recite a brocho on keriyas hamegillah?
Introduction:
The Gemoro in Megilla (5a) quotes a machlokes between Rav and Rav Assi. Rav maintains that when megillah is leined “bizmano” (on the correct day) it can be leined by an individual [and does not require the presence of a minyan]. But when megillah is leined “shelo bizmano” there is an obligation to lein the megillah in the presence of a minyan. Rav Assi maintains that irrespective of whether the megillah is leined bizmano or shelo bizmano there is an obligation to lein the megilla in the presence of a minyan.
The Gemoro (ibid) then writes that Rav once was choshesh for the view of Rav Assi. Rashi explains that Rav formed a minyan in order to hear megillah [when it was bizmano].
The Tur in Siman 690 quotes various opinions in the Rishonim: According to the Rif and Rabbeinu Tam when megillah is leined bizmanoh there is no requirement to lein it in the presence of a minyan and an individual can lein it l’chatchilo. The opinion of the Behag is that even bizmanoh the megillah must be leined in the presence of a minyan. And finally, the opinion of Rav Amrom and the Rosh is that l’chatchilo the megillah bizmanoh must be leined with a minyan, but if it is not possible to gather a minyan the megillah can be leined by an individual without a minyan.
The Beis Yosef (ibid) expounds on the various opinions of the Rishonim. Within his exposition he quotes the Ran who maintains that when Purim coincides with Shabbos and megillah reading is preceded to Friday is considered shelo bizmanoh.
The Beis Yosef also quotes the Mordechai who writes that if a minyan is required an individual may not recite brochos if he leins megillah without a minyan, and were he to recite brochos this would be considered a brocho l’vatolo.
Discussion: The Shulchan Aruch (Siman 690 Se’if 18) rules in line with the view of Rav Amrom and the Rosh and writes that the megillah should be leined in the presence of ten people (i.e. even when the megillah is leined bizmano) and if this is not possible then the megillah can be leined without a minyan.
In Yerushalayim this year [5781], where Purim coincides with Shabbos and leining the megillah is preceded to Erev Shabbos, the Mishna Berura (s.k. 61) maintains that preceding the megillah because of Shabbos is also considered shelo bizmano and thus the requirement of a minyan is more severe (c.f. Gemoro Megillah ibid), to the extent that without a minyan the brochos prior to the megillah should not be recited.
The Mishna Berura explains in Sha’ar Hatziyun (s.k. 61) that the reason that brochos should not be recited is because according to some authorities the machlokes between Rav and Rav Assi pertains to b’dieved and not just to l’chatchilo, therefore even if one has no alternative it may not be acceptable according to these authorities to lein the megillah without a minyan. However, one should still lein the megillah even without a minyan because according to other opinions the presence of a minyan is l’chatchilo and not b’dieved and one can certainly fulfil the mitzvo without a minyan. Therefore, the compromise of the Mishna Berura is that in such a situation the megillah should still be read, but without brochos prior to the megillah.
However, various other Acharonim (Rav Yosef Chaim Zonenfeld, Chazon Ish, Rav Yechiel Michel Tuketzinski) argue with this ruling of the Mishna Berura and maintain that regarding Purim meshulash if the megillah is leined without a minyan, a brocho can still be recited. The minhag in Yerushalayim appears to be in line with these Acharonim and a brocho is recited even when the megillah is leined without a minyan. |