(Mishnah): One who read the Megilah out of order was not Yotzei;

If he read it by heart, in [Arame'ic] translation (it was written in Hebrew) or [It was written and he read it] in any other language [that he does not understand], he was not Yotzei.

However, we read it for Lo'azim (people who speak La'az, i.e. another language) in La'az, and a Lo'ez who heard Ashuris (Hebrew) was Yotzei.

(Gemara): [One who read it out of order was not Yotzei,] for it says "ki'Chsavam." One who read it by heart was not Yotzei, for it says "ki'Chsavam." One who read it in translation was not Yotzei, for it says "ki'Chsavam."

(Mishnah): One who read it in any other language, he was not Yotzei.

This is because it says "ki'Chsavam vechi'Lshonam." (One must understand the language.)

(R. Yonah citing Nachman bar Rav Ada, and R. Yosah citing Nachman Sava): [Regarding Keri'as Shma] it says "v'Hayu" - [the words] will be like they are [written, i.e. in order];

(Beraisa): Also Hallel and Keri'as ha'Megilah must be so (in order).

Question: Granted, Keri'as ha'Megilah [must be in order], for it says "ki'Chsavam". However, [what is the source for] Hallel?

Answer: It says "mi'Mizrach Shemesh Ad Mevo'o Mehulal Shem Hash-m." (Just like the sun rises and sets in order, so must be the praise of Hash-m.)

Question: What do you learn from "mi'Mizrach Shemesh Ad Mevo'o"? (Pnei Moshe - is it enough to say the verses of each Perek in order, or must even the Perakim be said in order?)

Answer (R. Avin): Also [Hallel] is said in order [of the Perakim] - b'Tzeis Yisrael mi'Mitzrayim" was in the past, "Lo Lanu" is for these generations [in exile]. "Ahavti Ki Yishma Hash-m" is in the days of Mashi'ach. "Isru Chag ba'Avosim" is in the days of Gog and Magog. "Keli Atah v'Odecha" is in the future (David himself will say so at Techiyas ha'Mesim).

(R. Yosah citing R. Acha citing R. Lazar): (The Mishnah says that we read it for Lo'azim in La'az.) This is when [the Megilah] is written in La'az.

Question: What is the case? If it was written in Ashuris, and [the reader] translated it to La'az, the Mishnah taught that in any language [he was not Yotzei]!

Suggestion: It was written in La'az, and [the reader] translated it to Ashuris. (ha'Gaon Rav C. Kanievsky, Shlita - we read it for Lo'azim in La'az is when he read in La'az. After this the Mishnah taught that a Lo'ez who heard Ashuris was Yotzei. The Gemara teaches a bigger Chidush, that when it is written in La'az, even in the latter case a Beraisa disqualifies.)

Rejection (Beraisa): What is the difference between Seforim and Megilas Esther? Seforim may be written in any language, but Megilas Esther is only in Ashuris.

Answer (R. Shmuel bar Sisrati): The case is, it was written in Greek (according to R. Shimon ben Gamliel, who is Machshir this. Alternatively, the initial letters of La'az were written.)

(Shmuel): If [the reader] erred and omitted one verse, and the translator translated it, he was Yotzei.

Question: We say [in our Mishnah] that in any language he was not Yotzei. How can you say so?!

Answer: Shmuel holds like he taught elsewhere, for Shmuel said that if it was written properly, a Lo'ez is Yotzei in La'az.

(R. Avahu): If one understands Ashuris and understands La'az, he is Yotzei only in Ashuris. [If he understands only] La'az, he is Yotzei in La'az.

Question: If one understands Ashuris and understands La'az, can he be Motzi others in La'az (according to R. Avahu, who says that he himself is not Yotzei in La'az)?

Answer: We learn from the following. Anyone who is not liable in something, the Rabim cannot fulfill their obligation through him.