(Beraisa): A Kerach and anything near it (even if it cannot see the Kerach, e.g. it is in a valley), or anything seen with it, it is like it (and reads on the 15th.)

(R. Aibo bar Nagri citing R. Chiyah bar Ba): An example is Chamasah (it is near Tiverya).

He said so only to teach an example [of what is called near. He did not need to teach that Chamasah itself is near, for] Chamasah itself was surrounded with a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun;

Source: We learn from "v'Arei Mivtzar ha'Tzidim Tzer v'Chamas Rakas v'Chinares" - ha'Tzidim is [now called] Kefar Chitiya. Tzer is close to it. Chamas is Chamasah. Rakas is Tiverya. Kinares is Ginosar.

Question (R. Levi): It says "veha'Aravah Ad Yam Kinros" (regarding the border of the land taken from Sichon, in Ever ha'Yarden. Kinares is in the portion of Naftali, in Eretz Yisrael proper. If Kinares is Ginosar,) we must say that there are two cities Ginosar (and we never heard that there are)!

Answer: We can say that they were two districts [of one big city], like Beis Yerach and Tzinavrei. [They were called Kinros because] they grow there [reeds, for] Kinarim (harps).

Question: If a Kerach was destroyed and became of Nochrim [what is the law for cities near it]?

Answer: See - in it, they do not read [at all, for they are Nochrim]. Outside they read on the 15th?! (Rather, surely the suburbs read on the 14th.)

Opinion #1: Chizkiyah read [in Tiverya] on the 14th and 15th;

He was concerned for R. Shimon bar Yochai's teaching "v'Ish Ki Yimkor Bayis Moshav Ir Chomah" - this excludes Tiverya, that the sea is its wall [on one side. Also for Megilah, it is not considered a walled city. Or, perhaps the Halachah follows Chachamim, and it is a walled city.]

Opinion #2: R. Yochanan read in the Beis ha'Keneses of Kifra [only on the 15th]. He said that [Kifra] is the primary part of the old Tiverya. He was not concerned for R. Shimon bar Yochai's opinion. [Chachamim] were lenient about reading it [to give the law of a Kerach, even when it is not considered a walled city for redemption of houses. Why is it a leniency to read on the 15th? Alei Tamar - the enactment of Kerachim shows honor to Eretz Yisrael. There were walled cities from the days of Yehoshua, so they were lenient to consider it a Kerach.)

There, a Mishnah teaches "whatever is within the wall is considered a Bayis Ir Chomah, except for fields. R. Meir says, even fields."

And [regarding Megilah], it was taught whatever is near a Kerach or is seen with it, it is like [the Kerach].

R. Yochanan: From Gavis until Antiferas there were 600,000 cities, and the smallest was Beis Shemesh. It says about it "va'Yach b'Anshei Veis Shemesh Ki Ra'u ba'Aron Hash-m... (50,070 men)", and this was from one direction [from which the Aron came];

And now, if you would fill [the line from Gavis until Antiferas] with [600,000] sticks, it would not hold them (ha'Gaon Rav C. Kanievsky, Shlita).

Note: If each stick is one centimeter wide, they are less than 6 kilometers apart! From Gavis until Antiferas is considered the extent of Yehudah; presumably, it was no wider, so the area was at most 36 square kilometers. Also nowadays (after Eretz Yisrael shrank), we assume that a grave is four Amos by one Amah (Bava Basra 102a), about two square meters. There is room for only 18 million graves. Where did they bury over 120 billion people?! Even if he discusses the length of sticks, and they were a meter long, there is no room to bury two generations. Gitin 27a connotes that Stam, we are not concerned for another city of the same name. If there were so many cities, we should be concerned! How is a Get or any document Kosher according to R. Meir, who requires that everything is proven through the signatures? One year, there were 1.2 million Korbanos Pesach; it was called the fat Pesach (Pesachim 64b). If there were 120 billion people, even if there was only one Pesach for 1000 people, this is 120 million Pesachim! It seems that we must say like the Maharal says a similar Agadah in the Bavli (Gitin 57a), that it was proper to have so many cities there.

(R. Chaninah): Eretz Yisrael shrank.

Question: All the cities that Yehoshua listed are not even 300!

Note: R. Yochanan did not say that they were walled cities from the days of Yehoshua! The proof he brought about the size of Beis Shemesh was in the days of Shmuel, over 400 years later!

Answer #1 (Reish Lakish): [Yehoshua] listed [only] those surrounded by a wall.

Answer #2 (R. Yosi ben Chanina): He listed [only] those close to the border.

Support: "Va'Yhi Gevulam me'Chelef [me'Elon...]; [v']Ketes va'Nehalal v'Shimron v'Yid'alah u'Veis Lechem - me'Chelef is [now called] Chelef. Me'Elon is Ailon. B'Tza'ananim is Angiya of Kadesh. Va'Adami is Damin. Ha'Nekev is Tzaidatah. V'Yavne'al is Kefar Yamah. Ad Lakum is Lukim. V'Ketes is Ketinis. Va'Nehalal is Mahalul. V'Shimron is Simoniyah. V'Yid'alah is Choriyah. Beis Lechem is Beis Lechem Tzeriyah (this specifies which one; there were two cities called Beis Lechem. It was known that all these cities were near the border.)

(R. Acha citing R. Yudah ben Levi citing Rebbi): Lud and Gei ha'Charashim were surrounded by a wall from the days of Yehoshua bin Nun.

Question: Why didn't they say and [also] Ono?

If it is because it is written [explicitly, so they did not need to say it, this is difficult, for] Lud is written, and it was said!

Answer: Rather, [they did not need to say it] because [a Mishnah] taught "and Gamlah, Gedor, Hadir, Ono, Yerushalayim and everything like them."

Question: It says "Alpa'el's sons were Ever, Mesha'am and Shmar; he built Ono and Lud and its villages" (long after the days of Yehoshua)!

Answer (R. Lazar bei R. Yosah): It was built in the days of Yehoshua, destroyed in the war against Binyamin, and Alpa'el rebuilt it. (It was difficult regarding Ono and Lud! It seems that Korban ha"Edah's text says that he rebuilt them. Alternatively, R. Lazar holds that Ono and Lud are the same, like R. Chananyah below.)

Support: It says "also all these cities found, they burned."

(R. Chananyah): Ono and Lud are Gei ha'Charashim. (This is unlike Rebbi.)

(R. Chelbo or (Defus Vinitziyah; however, in Nazir 3:1 the Yerushalmi cites R. Chelbo bar Chuna) R. Chuna citing R. Chiyah Rabah): Anyone who reads on the 14th is Yotzei, for it is the time of the reading. [Bi'Zmaneihem] comes to teach only that the Mitzvos apply in Adar Sheni.

Implied question: R. Yosi and R. Acha were sitting [and asked that the Mishnah says that Kerachim read on the 15th!]

Answer (R. Yosi): Is it not reasonable [that one who read on the 14th is Yotzei] only b'Di'eved, but l'Chatchilah [he must read on the 15th]?!

Support: It was taught that in a place where the custom is to read it two days, they read it two days. (Ridvaz - this refers to a Vadai Kerach. Since one is Yotzei on the 14th only b'Di'eved, it is not Bal Tosif to read again on the 15th.)

Affirmation (R. Acha): Also I hold so!

(R. Mana): Is this proper? [Even if l'Chatchilah a Ben Kerach may read on the 14th,] if one read it on the 14th, and [wants to] read it again on the 15th, perhaps we do not let him?! If you say so, you uproot the time of the Kerachim! (Since the 15th is the time, Bal Tosif does not apply.)

(Nachman brei d'R. Shmuel bar Nachman): "Simchah v'Sason" teaches that [these days] are forbidden in eulogies; "u'Mishteh" teaches that one may not fast; "v'Yom Tov" teaches that one may not do Melachah.

R. Chelbo: I often sat in front of R. Shmuel bar Nachman, and I never heard this!

Nachman brei d'R. Shmuel bar Nachman: Did you hear everything [from my father] that I heard?! (It is not surprising if I heard it and you did not hear it.)

Observation: This [Drashah] is unlike Rebbi, for on two days a year Rebbi publicized that he acts [like his opinion] - he bathed on the 17th of Tamuz, and he planted trees on Purim.

Support (for Rebbi, and question against Nachman - R. Chavivah citing Rabanan there (in Bavel)): Wherever it is written "Yom Tov", it is not written that they accepted. Wherever it is written that they accepted, it is not written Yom Tov!

Answer (Nachman): Here it is written "Yom Tov", and it is written that they accepted! (It says that they accepted "Es Asher Hechelu La'asos"; this includes Yom Tov.)

(R. Simon citing R. Shmuel bar Nachman): "Mishpachah u'Mishpachah" refers to villages. "Medinah u'Medinah are Kerachim. "Ir va'Ir" are [open] cities.

(Shmuel): Why do [villages] read early on the day of assembly? It is in order that [on Purim they will not need to read the Megilah, so] they will be able to supply water and food to their brethren in the Kerachim.

Inference (R. Palifa): He disagrees with [Nachman's Drashah] that Melachah is Asur!

Rebuttal (R. Yonah): You cannot learn from this at all. Melachah is Asur on Chol ha'Mo'ed, and they supply food to their brethren in the Kerachim!

You may [infer that Melachah is permitted] only from this that Rebbi publicized about himself on two days - he bathed on the 17th of Tamuz, and he planted trees on Purim.

Question (R. Yosta): Ezra enacted that people read the Torah on Monday, Thursday and Shabbos Minchah. Did Mordechai and Esther enact based on what Ezra would enact later?! (Before Ezra, there was no day of assembly!)

Answer: The author of our Mishnah brought a support from the verse "Mishpachah u'Mishpachah Medinah u'Medinah v'Ir va'Ir" (that Rabanan may enact different times for villages. Indeed, it was enacted only later, after Ezra.)