Siman 284

That which we call maftir and haftarah is because during the time of the decree they would exempt themselves with it from the reading of the Torah, as is written in siman 282 (Levush). And furthermore, because during the entire time of the Torah reading it is forbidden to speak, and afterward it is permitted to speak, and it is from the expression "they open with the lip" (ibid.). And it appears more likely that it is an expression of beginning, and it is common in the Midrash: "he made for it an opening," and like "one may not conclude after the Pesach with afikoman" at the end of Pesachim, and the intention is that he begins with the words of a prophet. And they established this name in the Aramaic language to explain it to the masses, and therefore in the time of the Shas they would translate the haftarah. And that which they instituted all the haftarot in the Prophets and not in the Writings is explained in the Mishnah at the beginning of "Kol Kitvei" that we do not read from the Writings on Shabbat because of the neglect of the beit midrash, see there. (And the Levush labored over this reason, see there). And the maftir recites seven blessings: two over the Torah, and one before the haftarah and four after it, corresponding to the seven called to the Torah. And at "truth and justice," even though there is an interruption—one does not answer Amen, for this is in the middle of a blessing. And the interruption is because in their days, when the maftir reached "You are faithful etc.," the congregation said this and afterward the maftir said it, as is explained in Masekhet Soferim chapter 13 (halacha 10). This is his wording: "For all His words are truth and justice," and immediately the people stand and say: "You are faithful etc.," and afterward the maftir repeats and says: "Faithful," see there. (And see Tosafot Pesachim 104b, starting with "Chutz"). And it is simple that when there is no Torah reading—there is no maftir here.

We say in Gittin (60a): that by the law it was forbidden to read from a book of haftarot. That is to say, they would write all the haftarot on parchment in one volume—and it is forbidden to read when there is not a complete Prophet, just as with a sefer Torah one may not read when the sefer Torah is not complete, but they permitted it because of "it is a time to act for Hashem, etc." That is to say, since it is not possible for every single congregation to write the complete Prophets, they therefore permitted the writing of the haftarot alone. And the Levush wrote: "I have wondered all my days that I have not seen it practiced to write the haftarot in the form of a book as they write the Megillah, for it seemed to me that they do not fulfill the obligation at all with the reading of the haftarot in the congregation when they read from printed Chumashim, since they are not written according to all the laws of a sefer Torah, and it requires further study." Thus far his words. And it is clear that his intention is not that they should write the Prophets in their entirety, for regarding this the Gemara permitted it because it is not possible, but rather his intention is why they do not write the haftarot on parchment and with ink and with sinews as they write a sefer Torah, just as they did in the time of the Gemara, for this is possible for every congregation, as it is a small matter. And with the printed ones, they certainly do not fulfill the obligation, even if we were to say that there is sanctity in printing as there is in writing—nevertheless, there is no parchment and no ink, but merely dye. Furthermore, all the haftarot are not joined together, and behold, we must do as the sages of the Shas did, and in my humble opinion his words are clear.

And those who came after him challenged him: There is one who answered that in a time of pressing need, it is permitted even by heart (Or Zarua in the name of Etz Chaim), and there is one who answered that not every community has the ability to write the complete Prophets, and if they write only the haftarot—there is no benefit, since it is not a complete book (ibid. in the name of Maaseh Yom Tov). And I wonder, for does the Levush require a complete book? He requires only the writing of the haftarot according to the law on parchment and with ink, and have we become wiser than the sages of the Gemara? And I do not know what he means by saying there is no benefit in this, for in this the sages of the Shas permitted reading from a book of haftarot. And the words of the Levush are clear in their reasoning, for why should we not do as they commanded us in the Gemara in Gittin there.

And there is one who answered that since the entire essence of that which the sages, of blessed memory, permitted is because of "it is a time to act," because not every community has the ability to write a complete Prophets, if so, now that the craft of printing has been revealed and books are inexpensive—it is forbidden to write the haftarot, for printing is a superior form of writing. And if it is because they write on paper—behold, the Shiltei Giborim wrote in the chapter "Kol Kitvei" that other books besides the Torah are written with all types of colors, and if so, it follows that they are also written on paper and do not require a scroll (Magen Avraham), and he wrote further that the Tosafot wrote so there. And all these matters are astonishing, for the Tosafot conclude explicitly there that this is regarding the matter of saving them from a fire, and so it is in the Shiltei Giborim, but to read from them in the community—it is forbidden, see there. And so he himself wrote later in siman 334 (subsection 18), that we do not read even in this time when they are written without ink, see there. (And so the Gr"z challenged him in the Kuntres Acharon, see there). And that which he wrote, that we recite the blessing over Shir HaShirim and Eichah over those printed on paper—your guarantor needs a guarantor, and furthermore, among us we do not recite a blessing over them at all.

He further wrote that in the Responsa of the Rashba (siman 487) he wrote that it is specifically forbidden regarding a Sefer Torah and not regarding the haftarot, see there. And I wonder, for the Rashba did not mention this, and this is the wording of the Rashba there: "One may only read in public from a Sefer Torah made properly... and to read the haftarah in a place where they did not read from a Sefer Torah—no, for it was only instituted after the reading of the Sefer Torah." Thus far his words. Behold, he did not mention at all the permission to write haftarot when they are not written properly according to the law of the Gemara, and regarding this there was no question at all. The question was that they were accustomed to recite the blessing when they read the haftarah in a Prophet even though they did not read from a Sefer Torah, and there are those who read from the Torah written on pamphlets, and he responded to both as a prohibition, and more than this is not found in the entire response of the Rashba. He further brought from the Kol Bo in the name of the Rashba, and this is his wording: "And regarding the haftarah about which you asked—I say that we are not particular about it, and we recite the blessing over the reading without a scroll." Thus far his words. And in my humble opinion, this is its explanation: even when there is no complete scroll, as it is stated in Gittin ibid., but the haftarot are written according to the law. And I have a further difficulty, for even according to his words, that now books are common in print and inexpensive and it is forbidden to read from a haftarah scroll, for if so, we should have to read the haftarah from a Tanakh or a complete Prophet, yet we read from the haftarot that are in the Chumashim. And if so, it is simple that it is forbidden according to his words, for he says that even with a haftarah scroll written on parchment it is forbidden, because it is possible to use a complete book from the printings, and all the more so it is forbidden with printed haftarot.

And there are those who rejected his words for another reason, and this is his wording: "For the haftarah was not instituted at all to be read from a kosher scroll, but rather that it is forbidden to read it by heart. And even though in their days it was forbidden to write individual portions by themselves as long as it was not a complete book—whether in the Torah, or in the Prophets and Writings—nevertheless they permitted writing haftarot because of 'it is a time to act.' And even now that the craft of printing has been revealed and books are inexpensive, nevertheless it is permitted to print or write the haftarot alone, because even if they print a complete book of a Prophet on paper, it would only be permitted to read from it because of 'it is a time to act for Hashem,' since it is not on hide and was not written in a scroll, etc." Thus far his words. (The HaGra"z in section 4). And these words are not understood at all, for from where does he have it to say that it was not instituted to read the haftarah in a kosher scroll in the community. Furthermore, if so, for what did they say in the first chapter of Bava Batra (13b) that one must leave four lines between every Prophet and Prophet, and in the Twelve [Minor Prophets] three lines, and that one must write every Prophet by himself; for since in the community it was not instituted to read from a kosher scroll, all the more so for ordinary study, and why did they not say so regarding the Writings. Rather, it is certainly because it must be read in the community in kashrut like a Sefer Torah, and the "book of haftarot" in Gittin was written according to the law on parchment and with ink and in a scroll, but it was not a complete book because it was not possible. And besides this, it is impossible to say so, for behold we say in Gittin there that we do not read from Chumashim in the community because of the honor of the community, and all the more so they would not institute reading the haftarah from a Prophet that is not kosher because of the honor of the community. And certainly even now through printing one should not read, but rather with writing like a Sefer Torah, yet not complete Prophets but a book of haftarot, for in this the sages permitted, and the Levush spoke well. And in Lithuania there are many places where they write complete Prophets, and there are those who write only the haftarot, and such is our obligation and such is beautiful for us, except that one must warn them not to make two columns like in a Sefer Torah but one column, for so we say there in Bava Batra (15a), see there (and so wrote the Eliyah Rabbah).

We conclude with a reading from the Prophets related to the subject of the parashah, as is printed in the Chumashim, and we do not read fewer than twenty-one verses corresponding to the seven who were called to the Torah, three verses for each one, unless the subject matter is completed earlier, such as "Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices" and the like. For in truth, this is not an absolute requirement, as the Tur wrote that in a place where there is a translator—ten verses are sufficient, for so it is stated in Masekhet Soferim (chapter 13), and on a Yom Tov when five people are called to the Torah—fifteen verses are sufficient. According to this, on Tisha B'Av and a public fast—nine verses are sufficient, except that there the subject matter extends longer. And we have already written that the maftir and the haftarah were only instituted in a tzibbur and after they have read from the Torah, but otherwise—it is forbidden to read it with a blessing before it and after it, but without blessings—it is permitted. And it is proper to read the haftarah after Shnayim Mikra Ve-echad Targum, and such is the custom.

If Rosh Chodesh falls on Shabbat—one does not mention Rosh Chodesh in the blessing of the haftarah in "Al HaTorah VeAl HaAvodah," because on Rosh Chodesh there is no prophet. And some say that even though one does not mention it in the signing of the blessing of "Who sanctifies the Shabbat" regarding Rosh Chodesh—nevertheless, one mentions it within the blessing, that he should say "and for this Shabbat day and for this Rosh Chodesh day," and such are the words of the Rambam in the twelfth chapter of Tefillah, where he wrote: "And so if Rosh Chodesh falls on Shabbat, the one who reads the haftarah from the prophet mentions Rosh Chodesh in this blessing, just as he mentions it in the prayer." Thus far his words. And so it appears is the opinion of Rashi in Shabbat (24a) and so is the opinion of Rabbeinu Yonah in the Rosh there. And nevertheless, the custom is not so, because our teachers the Tosafists wrote there that it is not necessary to mention it at all, and it depends on the sugya of the Shas. (For that which it says: "And the halacha is not etc.," the Tosafists wrote that it does not refer to Rav Giddel, see there.)

We have already written that before the haftarah there is one blessing: "Who chose good prophets." And there are those who wish to say that they are two blessings, for in the middle one says "Blessed are You, Hashem, Who chooses the Torah, etc." However, it is truly one blessing, for at the beginning one blesses "Who chose good prophets" and not false prophets, and because there are many matters in the prophets that appear like mere storytelling—for this one says "and desired their words which were spoken in truth," meaning that this is not mere storytelling but words of truth that the Holy One, Blessed be He, desired. And they wished to accord honor to the Torah, which is of a higher level than the prophets, and to Moshe the teacher of all the prophets, and it would have appeared as if mentioning them after the prophets, which is not their honor—for this one says "Blessed are You, Hashem, Who chooses the Torah and Moshe His servant, etc." to place them adjacent to "Blessed [are You] Hashem," and afterwards "and the prophets of truth and righteousness," for the prophets are smaller in level than Moshe our teacher, and the words of the prophets are smaller in level than the Torah (Kesef Mishneh chapter 12 of Tefillah, halacha 15). And that which he said previously "Who chose" in the past tense, and afterwards "Who chooses"—this is like in the blessing of the Torah, where previously one says "Who gave," and afterwards "Giver of the Torah," to indicate that every single day the Holy One, Blessed be He, gives His Torah and chooses it, in the manner that they said: "that every single day they should be in your eyes as new." And furthermore, that innovations of Torah are revealed every single day to those who engage and toil in it for its own sake, and like their statement, of blessed memory: "Just as this breast, etc."

And after the haftarah there are four blessings, for we have already written that "Ne'eman" is in the middle of a blessing. And there is a question regarding this: why does it open with "Baruch," for is it not adjacent to its fellow, the blessing before the haftarah? And the haftarah should not be considered an interruption, just as "Yishtabach" does not open with "Baruch" because it is adjacent to "Baruch She'amar," even though the Pesukei D'zimra interrupt in the middle, as I wrote in siman 54, see there. And the answer is that they wished to liken it to the blessing of the Torah, which begins with "Baruch" after the reading, for the reason explained above in siman 139, because in the time of the Mishnah not all those who ascended the bimah recited the blessings, but only the first and the last, and there was a great interruption; therefore, regarding the Prophets they also ordained thus (Levush in the gloss). Furthermore, it appears that because there were those who would translate the Prophets to make them understood to the common people, and there was a great interruption—therefore they ordained to open with "Baruch," and the remaining three blessings do not open with "Baruch," according to the law of a blessing adjacent to its fellow. And the first blessing after the haftarah opens and concludes with "Baruch," because it contains several matters, and it is a long blessing. (And perhaps the first one before it is also considered a long one: "who chose" and "desired their words," and afterwards the Torah and Moses are mentioned, and there is no need for what I wrote in section 9, and delve into this.)

Regarding that which we say: "and not one of Your words shall return back empty," and seemingly this word "back" is redundant and has no meaning. And it appears to me that this is its explanation: for it is a simple matter that all the words of the Torah and all the words of the prophets will be fulfilled, God willing, and one who doubts this has no portion in the God of Israel. Rather, seemingly regarding matters that have already passed—we have no benefit from their words, and Heaven forbid it should be like a mere story. But the truth is that even the past still sparkles at every moment and at every time, like the Exodus from Egypt, for in every generation a person is obligated to see himself as if he went out from Egypt, and it turns out that at every moment it is the Exodus from Egypt; and so too all the words of the prophets that have already passed—they have not passed and will not pass, and they sparkle always and act at every moment, and this is from the unique property of our holy Torah. And for this we say "and not one of Your words shall return back empty," meaning even those that now stand "back" because they have already passed—they too shall not return empty, and they are a complete Torah. And in the blessing of "Have mercy" we say: "and for the one whose soul is lowly, save quickly in our days," and the Sephardim say: "save and gladden," because they conclude with "Who gladdens Zion"—it is necessary that there be something similar to the conclusion adjacent to the conclusion. And the Ashkenazim were not concerned for this, because the salvation is all one with the gladness. And in the blessing of "Gladden us" we conclude with "Shield of David," for so the sages, of blessed memory, commanded in Pesachim (117b): "In the prayer—Who causes the horn of salvation to sprout; in the haftarah—Shield of David," see there, for so the Holy One, blessed be He, promised David: "And I have made for you a name like the name of the great ones" (I Chronicles 17:8), for just as we conclude with "Shield of Abraham"—so we conclude with "Shield of David," but in the prayer it is impossible to conclude with "Shield of David," for we must conclude with a language of mercy. And furthermore, since they concluded with "Shield of Abraham," it is impossible to mention "Shield of David" there (Rashbam in the name of Rashi ibid.).

Every person must focus on the blessings of those called to the Torah and the blessings of the Maftir, and answer Amen after them, and they shall count for him to complete the count of one hundred blessings that is lacking from their count on Shabbat, as I wrote above in siman 46, see there. According to this, it is an obligation upon those who ascend to bless in a loud voice, and one who says it in a whisper is rebuked. And a minor may read the Haftarah, and we teach him to say it in a loud voice. And if they called for Maftir one who does not know how to say the Haftarah—another may say it, just as with the Sefer Torah where this one blesses and the reader reads, but ab initio it is forbidden to do so. And the reason for the matter is that it is well and good regarding the Torah, where it is necessary to read with the cantillation marks and he is not expert in the cantillation marks—the reader reads and he says it after him in a whisper. But the Haftarah, which we read from Chumashim, if he is such an ignoramus that he cannot read from a Chumash—it is not proper to call him for Maftir. Therefore, in our regions, where there are complete Nevi'im in many synagogues—the reader reads just as with the Torah, and such is the simple custom. (So it appears to me in the explanation of our teacher, the Rema, section 4, and there is no need for the words of the Magen Avraham, subsection 3, see there. And also what he brought from the Beit Yosef, siman 282—the Beit Yosef there also did not agree to this, see there and examine closely.)

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 5: "If the one reading the haftarah became mute in the middle of the haftarah—the one who comes to complete it should not start from the place where the first one stopped, but rather must go back and start from the place where the first one started, just as with a Sefer Torah." Thus far his words. That is to say, as he wrote above in siman 140: "One who reads from the Torah and became mute—the one who stands in his place shall start from the place where the first one started, and shall recite the blessing before and after, and according to the Rambam he shall not recite the blessing before." Thus far his words. And even in a place where the shliach tzibbur reads, this is the law. And here too, he must also recite the blessing that precedes the haftarah, and according to the Rambam it is not necessary, and this is from the Yerushalmi, chapter 5 of Berakhot (halacha 3), and there we explained it with the help of Heaven; see there. (And this is not comparable to a shliach tzibbur who became mute which the Taz mentioned in subsection 2, or to shofar which the Magen Avraham mentioned in subsection 4, for there everyone has already fulfilled their obligation. This is not the case with the haftarah, for the one who ascends is obligated to recite the blessing before it and after it, and similarly with a Sefer Torah in siman 140.)

The maftir does not begin the blessing before the haftarah until the golel finishes rolling the Sefer Torah (Sotah 39b). The reason is so that the golel may also hear the blessings and the haftarah, and furthermore, because there is a slight to the Sefer Torah if it is not yet rolled and one is occupied with the needs of the haftarah. (See Beit Yosef) And when he recites the blessings after the haftarah—they should not remove the book of the Prophet until after the blessings, so that it is visible what he is blessing over. Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in his great work, did not find this matter correct, see there; however, it can be said that for anything over which one recites a blessing—the object must be before him. (See Taz, letter 3) And two people should not recite the haftarah at one time, for two voices are not heard. This is only when the reader reads from the Prophet, or the maftir himself reads from the Chumash and everyone listens. But in most places in this country—everyone recites the haftarah from the Chumashim in their hands, and the opinion of the Arizal tends toward this (see Magen Avraham, subsection 5), and in such cases this law does not apply (and this is the intent of the Magen Avraham there). And know that on a Shabbat when two portions are read—the haftarah is from the second parashah, and also for "Acharei" and "Kedoshim" we read the haftarah "Are you not like the children of the Ethiopians" of Kedoshim, and not like the one who says to read "Will you judge" as the haftarah (see Levush and they disagreed with him).

After the haftarah, it is customary to say "Yekum Purkan," and "Mi Sheberakh," and a blessing for the king. And we mention the souls of the deceased, because on Shabbat even the dead have rest, and we vow tzedakah on their behalf. There is support for this from the Sifrei: "Atone for Your people Israel" — these are the living; "whom You have redeemed" — these are the dead; this teaches that even the dead require atonement. And we say "Av HaRakhamim" and "Ashrei" and "Yehalelu," and the congregation says "Mizmor LeDavid Havu etc.," because it contains seven voices, from which they derived the seven blessings for Shabbat. And on a Shabbat where we would not say tachanun if it were a weekday, and similarly on a Shabbat when we bless the new month — we do not say "Av HaRakhamim" and we do not mention the souls of the deceased. Nevertheless, if one must mention them — he mentions them, for even on Yom Tov we mention the souls of the deceased. And during the days of the Sefirah — we say "Av HaRakhamim" even when we bless the month, and similarly when we bless the month of Av, because these days are days of decrees. And if Rosh Chodesh Iyar or Rosh Chodesh Av falls on Shabbat — we do not say "Av HaRakhamim," and similarly when there is a wedding or a milah we do not say "Av HaRakhamim," and every place follows its custom. (See Magen Avraham subsection 6 that if there is no Chumash in the beit knesset and there is no eruv — ten people go to a house that has a Chumash and read the haftarah there, even though the reading of the Torah was in the beit knesset, and that they may read by heart if it is impossible otherwise, but this is not clear, see there. And the other things he wrote — the custom is not so among us.)