And the remainder of Jews who were in the provinces of the king gathered [for war] and stood up for their lives and rested from their enemies…on the fourteenth of [Adar], and made it a day of feasting and rejoicing: And the Jews who were in Shushan gathered [for war] on the thirteenth and fourteenth of [Adar] and rested on the fifteenth, and made it a day of feasting and rejoicing. For this reason, the unwalled Jews who live in the unwalled cities make the fourteenth day of the month of Adar rejoicing and feasting and a Yom Tov and mishlo'ach manot from a man to his fellow. Mordechai wrote these things and sent letters to all the Jewish people that were in all the provinces of King Achashverosh – near and far, to establish for them to make the fourteenth day of the month of Adar and the fifteenth day, each and every year, as the days that the Jewish people had respite from their enemies, and the month that was reversed for them from misery to joy and from mourning to festival; to make them days of feasting and joy and sending portions from man to his fellow, and gifts to the destitute.

Did not Rav Yosef teach: “joy and feasting and holiday,” “joy” – teaches that it is forbidden to eulogize [on those days], “feasting” – teaches that fasting is forbidden, and “holiday” – teaches that performing labor is forbidden!... Rabba the son of Rava said:…Eulogy and fasting – they accepted upon themselves, [a prohibition on] labor they did not accept upon themselves. For it was first written “joy and feasting and holiday,” and at the end it was written “to make them days of feasting and joy,” but “holiday” is not written…And if you want, say: it is certainly the custom [not to perform labor]…

Performing labor is permitted on Purim. In a place where the custom is not to perform labor, one should not perform it. (And nowadays, the custom in every place is not to perform it)… Rema: It is permissible to perform any mitzva labor, such as writing halachic rulings, and it is also permissible to perform even full-fledged labors as needed for Purim

Rav Yosef taught: “And sending portions from a man to his fellow” – two portions to one man; “and presents to poor people” – two gifts to two people.

And he said to them, 'go eat rich foods and drink sweet drinks and send portions to he who has nothing prepared, for today is sacred to our Lord and do not be sad, because rejoicing in God is your strength:

[The purpose of mishlo’ach manot is] to increase peace and friendship, the opposite of the habit of the enemy [Haman] who said [the Jewish people are] “scattered and separated,” meaning that instead of being one nation, they are scattered and separated in disagreements. Therefore, they established mishlo’ach manot.

It also seems to me that with this (mIshlo’ach manot) it is not sufficient to send a ka-zayit [of food] or revi’it [of drink], for it needs to be a proper portion, as this is the meaning of “manot,” such as a piece of meat that is fitting to be served, it should be something important. And those that send small pieces have not fulfilled their obligation.

And you shall rejoice on your festival, you and your son and your bondsman and your maidservant and the Levite and the convert and the orphan and the widow who are in your gates:

We do not investigate whether he is poor and it is fitting to give him, for this giving does not stem from the laws of charity alone, but rather from the laws of rejoicing…

It is better for a person to give more gifts to the destitute than to have more of his feast and sending more portions to his fellows. For there is no great and glorious rejoicing except to bring rejoicing to the heart of the poor and the orphans and the widows and the converts.

While the story of Esther begins with opulence — the gilded Persian palace, the tapestries, the golden vessels and flowing wine — the story ends on an entirely different note, a reminder to give matanot l’evyonim, gifts to the poor — that is, charity. The story of Esther and Mordechai is one that serves as a reminder to who we truly are: Not the drunken revelers of ancient Persia, but a people charged with altruism, with caring for those with less.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Women are obligated in megilla reading since they, indeed/too, were part of that miracle.

Mahari Brin wrote…that a woman is obligated in mishlo'ach manot and matanot la-evyonim like she is obligated in megilla reading…

A woman is obligated in matanot la-evyonim and mishlo’ach manot like a man.

This law is unclear, for "ish" [man] is written, and not woman. Whence does he [Rema] learn this?

To me it seems that this is a true and straight law. Should it be that everywhere that "ish" is written it is to exclude the woman?...Furthermore, here it is written that the "Jews enacted and accepted [the laws] upon themselves and upon their progeny" and a woman is included without a doubt as everywhere that "zera" [progeny] is written, for it connotes males and females…

…For certainly women were also part of that miracle, for this is the reason they [women] are obligated in reading the megilla. Furthermore, regarding mishlo'ach manot it is written “the Jews accepted it upon themselves” and women are also included. The difficulty that is raised, – that it is written "mishlo'ach manot from a man to his fellow," which implies a man and not a woman – is not difficult at all. For it is taught in the first chapter of Kiddushin (30b) that our rabbis taught "A man [ish] should have awe (tira’u) for his mother and his father" (Vayikra 19:3). I learn here only a man, whence is a woman obligated? When it says "they will have awe (tira’u)," that refers to both of them [a man and a woman]. If so, what does the word "ish" come to teach us? A man has the capacity to do it and a woman does not have the capacity to do it…If so, that is also the logic here. Even though a woman also is obligated in mishlo'ach manot, it is still written "ish" because he has the capacity to do it, which is not so for the woman. Thus, it makes sense that regarding matanot la-evyonim it is written unspecified and "ish" is not written, because we accept tzedaka from women…

I have not seen that people are careful about this, and perhaps this specifically refers to a widow. But if a woman has a husband, her husband sends to a number of people on her behalf. And in any event, one should be stringent [and women should perform these mitzvot].

All women are obligated in mishlo'ach manot and matanot la-evyonim, and even if she has a husband she is not exempt through her husband’s, for this is a mitzva that is incumbent upon her [individually]. (See Magen Avraham, and our women are scrupulous and send portions.)

Women are also included in this mitzva (of matanot la-evyonim), as women have the same obligation as men in all mitzvot of Purim. And it seems to me that a man and his wife both fulfil their obligation with the same two gifts, as they are like one entity (ishto k’gufo – lit. his wife is like his own body). But the son and the daughter that he provides for (lit. eat at his table) – are obligated to give themselves.

It is proper to send matanot la-evyonim through one’s young sons and daughters to educate them in mitzvot. I remember when I was young my father, a”h, would send me, and not a servant, to the poor, to teach me the mitzva. And everything was done with joy and a happy heart and modesty, so as not to embarrass the poor person. 

From my uncle Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach I heard that the intention of Magen Avraham is for the husband to say to his wife that this mishlo'ach manot is from both of them, and according to this one should take care that there be two portions for each of them [four total, two each for husband and wife]

Mishlo'ach manot increase affinity between the sender and recipient. Rema, again drawing on Mahari Brin, writes that it is inappropriate for one to send mishlo’ach manot to someone of the opposite gender.

…A woman should send to a woman and a man to a man, but not the opposite, that the man not come to send to a widow and bring about a situation of possible Kiddushin, but regarding matanot la-evyonim there is no concern.

…Even when a man sends manot on his wife's behalf to another man there is no concern here of [excess] affection, since this is [actually] from family to family…

In my humble opinion it is appropriate to increase the number and quantity of mishlo'ach manot for those people whom one has hurt or quarreled with in the past year, in order to increase love between them and restore peace. And through this, Purim can become like [Yom] Kippurim (the Day of Atonement) – atoning for sins between man and his fellow, and Israel will be one unit and not, Heaven forbid, [as Haman says in the megilla] a “nation scattered and dispersed.”

When one eats and drinks, one must feed the convert, the orphan, and the widow along with the rest of the unfortunate poor, but one who locks the doors of his courtyard and eats and drinks, he and his children and his wife, and does not feed and give drink to the poor and embittered, this is not the rejoicing of a mitzva but rejoicing of his belly…

What is the requirement of this feast? To eat meat and make a nice feast according to one’s means. And one should drink wine until he is drunk and falls asleep due to his drunkenness.

A person is obligated to become intoxicated on Purim until he does not know the difference [between] cursed is Haman and blessed is Mordechai. Rabba and Rabbi Zeira had the Purim meal together, they got drunk. Rabba arose and slaughtered Rabbi Zeira. The next day he prayed and revived him. The next year he said to him, ‘Come and let us have the Purim meal together.’ He said to him, ‘Miracles do not happen all the time.’

A person is obligated to become intoxicated on Purim until he cannot distinguish [between] “cursed is Haman” and “blessed is Mordechai.” Rema: There are those who say that one does not need to become so intoxicated, but one should drink more than usual and sleep, and when one is asleep one cannot distinguish [between] “cursed is Haman” and “blessed is Mordechai.” Whether one [drinks] a lot or a little, he should do so for the sake of Heaven.

If you would say: How did the sages obligate what the Torah and Prophets describe in multiple places as a great stumbling block? And it seems that because all the miracles that were done for Israel in the time of Achashverosh were through a drinking-feast (mishteh) – in the beginning Vashti was overthrown through a drinking-feast and Esther was introduced, and with the entire matter of Haman and his downfall was through drinking-feasts, therefore the sages obligated that one get drunk so that the great miracle is remembered through drinking wine. And in any event, this is meant to be a mitzva, and not an absolute requirement.

Nevertheless, if one knows that he will come to disregard one of the mitzvot, like washing hands or berachot or birkat ha-mazon, or that he will not pray mincha or ma’ariv, or that he will behave with frivolity, it is best not to get drunk, and all his deeds should be for the sake of heaven.

Rava said: A se'udat Purim that one has eaten at night, he did not discharge his obligation. What is the reason? "Days of feasting and rejoicing" is written.

For there is an obligation to eat meat on Purim as on Yom Tov, and it is proven from the words of the halachic authorities that women are obligated in all the mitzvot of Purim like men…and this is the law for se'udat Purim, for se'udat Purim and mishlo'ach manot are a single entity….On Shabbat and Yom Tov, the custom is for women to eat meat on the day they will go to immerse, it is clear that this is also the law for Purim…

Wines are not allotted to a woman [as part of the husband’s requirement to provide food for his wife]… A woman who is accustomed to drinking is different… Abbaye said: This is what he meant: One who is accustomed to drinking, in her husband’s presence we give her two cups, when she is not in her husband’s presence – one cup. One who is not accustomed to drinking, in her husband’s presence – only one cup, when she is not in her husband’s presence we do not give her anything …

It seems clear that, even though women are obligated in all the mitzvot of the day, they are not obligated to get drunk on Purim ad de-lo yada (until one cannot distinguish), for it is not the way of women to get drunk. On the contrary, it is a severe prohibition, for they are not accustomed [to get drunk] even at a feast, and they may come to severe transgressions. And if it weren’t for the halachic authorities [that say otherwise] I would say that this is a good reason why we [men] are not scrupulous to keep this rabbinic mitzva to get drunk on Purim.

There is also a mitzva for women to increase drinking wine which causes rejoicing, but they [women] should be careful about getting drunk, for drunkenness is more disgraceful for women than for men.