Siman 137

It has already been explained at the beginning of siman 135 that it is from the enactment of Ezra not to read fewer than ten verses on Monday, Thursday, and Shabbat at Mincha for three men, for reasons explained there. And the verse "Vayedaber" also counts toward the tally. Even though it contains no specific matter, nevertheless it is Torah, and if one letter is missing from it – the entire Torah is invalid. And even though on Purim we read "Vayavo Amalek," and it contains only nine verses – it is different there because the subject matter is concluded, and the sages did not want to begin earlier from a different subject. Aside from this, there is a reason in the Yerushalmi, because he performed a truncated act, meaning: Haman and Amalek wanted to truncate the power of Israel, therefore its parasha is truncated. (The Tosafot wrote the first reason in Megillah 21b, and our teacher, the Beit Yosef, and the Taz brought the second reason from the Yerushalmi. And the Taz exerted himself in this in subsection 1, see there. And I wonder: for I did not find this answer in the Yerushalmi. On the contrary, in the Yerushalmi, chapter "HaKorei," Halacha 2, it is explained like the Tosafot, for it asks: But what of the parasha of Amalek? And it answers: It is different, for it is the order of the day, see there. And it requires further study.)

And since there are ten verses for three men, it follows that for one of them, four verses will reach. And the sages said that there is no concern regarding who shall read four, and they may do as they wish. And the reason is because each one has a distinction: for the first is indeed first, and the third because we ascend in holiness, and the middle one because in the Menorah the middle one was more significant. Therefore, the sages did not want to establish that specifically the first should read four, as they established regarding the primary aliyah to the Torah that a Kohen reads first. And it is possible to say the reason they did not want this is that specifically when another reads them, one must accord honor to the first, but regarding the reading of the Torah, the olim themselves would read—as it was in the time of the Gemara—the sages were not concerned to establish a rule in this, since there are reasons for each. And even now that the reader reads—we do not have the power to change, for the reason that each one has a distinction as I have written. (And perhaps this is the reason of the Maharshal brought by the Magen Avraham, subsection 1, that now that the chazzan reads, he should not read four for the middle one, so as not to shame the last or the first. Thus far his words. And the Pri Megadim and the Machatzit HaShekel struggled with his intent, and their words are puzzling, see there. And in my humble opinion, it is a printing error, and it should say: "so as not to shame the first." That is to say: just as in the essence of the reading, the first is more honored. And the Bach asked: from where do we have this? And according to what I have written, it sits well with good reason. And the Perishah and the Eliyah Rabbah brought another version in the Maharshal and also there is no reason, see there. And in my humble opinion, it appears as I have written. And be precise and you will find it easy.)

And know that Rashi, of blessed memory, wrote in Megillah there, and this is his wording: And if they have space in the parsha, and each of them read four verses – they are all praiseworthy. Thus far his words. And I do not understand this: Is there not space in all the sidrot, for every sidra is very long? Furthermore: why indeed did the sages not ordain it so? Rather, it is certainly because of tircha de-tzibbura, and if so, how shall each one read four verses? And it appears to me that Rashi's intention was to wonder at our custom, for behold, in parshat "Bereishit" where the Levi reads only three verses, and the Kohen reads four, and the Yisrael five – it is well, for there are petuchot and it is impossible otherwise. And that one should read two parshiyot, they were concerned for tircha de-tzibbura. But in "Noach" where the Kohen reads eight verses, and the Levi and the Yisrael each read three, why do we do so? And similarly in "Lech Lecha" the Kohen reads three and the Levi six verses, and there is no break of a petucha or setuma, why do we do so? And similarly one should be precise in several parshiyot. And regarding this Rashi says that in a place where there is space – it is good that each one should read four verses. But what shall we do since the custom is not so? And we have further to question our custom in parshat "Vayeilech" where we read only nine verses, as the Yisrael concludes "and to all the elders of Israel" and there are not ten verses there. And recently it was indeed printed in siddurim that the third [aliyah] is until "to possess it," but the custom is not so. And perhaps because the sidra is small, and until "to possess it" would be four parshiyot and almost half the sidra, and it is not proper to do so since on Shabbat they will read it once more. Therefore we judge it like the parsha of "Vayavo Amalek" which is considered the conclusion of the matter. And it requires further study. (And conversely, there is in some places a wondering custom in "Naso" that they continue the Yisrael further from "the son of Aaron the Kohen," and there are many verses there and there is no need for this. And similarly in "Beha'alotcha" there are those who continue after "and the Levites shall be Mine" and there is no need for this, see there.)

If one skipped one verse on Monday, Thursday, or Shabbat at Mincha, and similarly on the festivals, if they read ten verses without the skipped verse—he does not return, since this reading exists on Shabbat. And if not—he returns. And it is possible that nine is sufficient, since there are three verses for each of the olim. But in Masekhet Soferim chapter eleven it implies that we specifically require ten, since such was the enactment (see Magen Avraham subsection 4). And on Yom Tov we require fifteen verses, since there are five called to the Torah. But on Shabbat morning, in any case he returns and reads, even if he finished seven called to the Torah without this verse; and even after he returned the Torah and said Kaddish, and even after they prayed Musaf, because this verse remained without reading and without a blessing. Therefore, they open the Sefer Torah, and one blesses before it and reads this verse with two more verses and blesses after it. And so it is in Masekhet Soferim there. And it appears that the two verses he adds to this verse should be after this verse. However, if this verse that he skipped is before an open or closed parsha, he must perforce start two verses before it.

And so too, if one of those called up read only two verses and recited the blessing after it—it is as if he did not read, and his blessings were in vain, and he must read those two verses once more with one additional verse. And on Shabbat another may ascend and read, but on Monday and Thursday and Mincha on Shabbat, this same person should ascend, so that it does not appear as if one is adding to the three called up. And on Shabbat, even if seven people were already called up, it does not avail, because these two verses are as if they were not read and were not blessed over. And if they remembered immediately after he recited the final blessing, and another had not yet read—he does not require a blessing before it, rather this final one was in vain, and they read one more verse for him and he recites the blessing after it (Taz, subsection 4). And only if they remembered after another ascended, then he requires two blessings as I have written. (See Magen Avraham, subsection 8, that on Shabbat and Yom Tov he should not read a second time but rather another, see there. And it does not imply so, and also the Eliyah Rabbah, subsection 7, disagrees with him, see there. However, regarding that which the Eliyah Rabbah also disagrees with the Taz, and holds that even if they remembered immediately he requires a blessing before it as well, see there—it appears in my humble opinion that the primary view is like the Taz. And examine carefully and you will find it simple.)

And if they only read nine verses, even though ab initio one must read ten, nevertheless, after the fact, since they read three verses for each person, they do not need to return and read. And this "after the fact" is no worse than the portion of "Vayavo Amalek," where ab initio they read nine. And it is not similar to skipping, regarding which we wrote that one must return and read, for skipping is a defect. Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 4: But if they read fewer than nine—they must return and read. Thus far his words. And there is one who explained the reason is because it does not amount to three verses for each person. And according to this, if they read three verses, for example, if two of the called ones read one verse—they have fulfilled the obligation (Magen Avraham, subsection 9). And I wonder: for if so, how does this relate to fewer than nine verses? And one cannot say that in such a case everyone must return and read, for from where would one say so? Since according to this opinion the hindrance is only from fewer than three, if so, only the one who did not read three verses must return and read. Therefore, it appears to my humble opinion that the intention is that a reading of fewer than nine verses is not called a "reading" at all, since it was not performed according to the enactment. Therefore, if they have not yet removed the Torah, and have not said Kaddish—the third should complete until three verses even though he recited the blessing after it. And if they already removed it or said Kaddish—everyone must return and read. (And also the Eliyah Rabbah, subsection 8, disagrees with him. And I wonder at the Magen Avraham that he did not see the words of the Levush who wrote explicitly so, see there. And what the Magen Avraham wrote from the Ma'amadot—one does not learn from a reading that is not permanent, only during the time of the Temple. Examine and you will find it simple.)

The Kol Bo wrote: It happened that a certain chazzan read from the parashah of "Parah" and stopped at "for the stranger who sojourns among them," and rolled the sefer Torah and sat in his place. The Rabbi was strict about the matter and said: You have not read the parashah. It is as if we have not read it, for we have said it only as a mere allusion. They went back and opened it and began at the beginning of the parashah, and the reader recited the blessing before it and after it based on the reasoning of the Rabbi, and they finished the entire parashah until "shall be unclean until the evening." Thus far his words, and it was brought briefly in the Shulchan Aruch, section 5. And it seems to me that specifically because he stopped at "for the stranger who sojourns among them," for the primary laws of the purification of the parah had not yet been explained, as further on it is written: "He who touches a corpse... he shall purify himself." But if he concluded at "living water into a vessel," even though he did not finish the entire parashah – he does not need to return and read. For so it is explained from his wording, as he wrote "for we have said it only as a mere allusion," meaning: that the primary laws of the purification of the mei chatat had not yet been explained (and see Magen Avraham, subsection 11). And it is obvious that for the skipping of a verse one does not return (ibid.). And so too in any such case like the parashah of "Chodesh" or on the festivals. And so too here, if he only recited the final blessing, and they remembered immediately – he does not need a first blessing nor to start from the beginning of the parashah, but rather he completes the reading and recites the final blessing (Taz, subsection 5). And there is one who disagrees on this (see Eliyah Rabbah), and it is not compelling.

And it happened on the first Sabbath of Chol HaMoed Sukkot, that the one reading the Maftir was supposed to read "And on the second day [...] and on the third day," but he only read "And on the second day," and he had already rolled the Sefer Torah. And one of the great authorities ruled that he should read "And on the third day" without a blessing before it or after it (Responsa of Rabbi Meir of Lublin, siman 85). And there are those who disagree on this, for the reason that we are experts in the intercalation of the month, and the primary reading is "And on the third day" (Magen Avraham, subsection 6, and Eliyah Rabbah, subsection 10). And there are those who agreed with the first opinion (see Ba'er Heitev, subsection 4). And it appears that the rule of "a doubt regarding blessings is to be lenient" applies; even though the reasoning appears like the opinion of those who disagree, nevertheless, since this is not the Sabbath morning where they read the parashah – there is not so much concern in this.

It is a clear matter that each of those who ascend must read different verses from what the previous ones read, for if not so, why did our sages, of blessed memory, trouble themselves in Ta'anit regarding the Ma'amadot who read the portion of "Bereishit": how to divide a portion that does not have six verses – let one read it and afterwards the second. Rather, it is certainly of no avail. And granted that there is no prohibition in this, nevertheless, for the count of those called up, the one who repeats does not ascend (ibid. subsection 13). And that which on Chol HaMoed Sukkot regarding the bulls of the festival they repeat, is because it is not possible otherwise, as there is no place for all those called up to read, as is known. However, if he reads what the first read and adds to them another three verses which the first did not read, he certainly ascends for the count. And even if he added only two verses – he ascends, for behold on Rosh Chodesh we do so with the Levi who begins "And you shall say" which the Kohen read, and adds another two verses. But one verse is of no avail, for we require a majority of the three. And even this is only in a case of pressing need, and ab initio one should not begin at all from what the first read even if he will add much. And even this which we wrote, that if he does not ascend for the count of those called up there is no prohibition in the matter to read what the first read – not everyone agrees with this. And there are those who prohibit this entirely, and it will be explained with the help of Heaven in siman 282.