The Origins and Nature of Keri'at ha-Torah | 2

Last week, we began our discussion of the origins and nature of keri'at ha-Torah. We noted that the Talmud (Megilla 32a) attributes the institution of Torah reading on the Festivals to Moshe, and the Yerushalmi (Megilla 4:1) adds Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh, Chol Ha-moed, and Shabbat. The Talmud also teaches (Bava Kama 82a) that the Mincha reading on Shabbat was instituted "for those who sit idly on street corners," and the Monday and Thursday readings so that three days should not pass without hearing words of Torah. The Rambam summarizes the development of this practice:

Moshe, our teacher, ordained that the Jews should read the Torah publicly on the Sabbath and on Monday and Thursday mornings so the [people] would never have three days pass without hearing the Torah. Ezra ordained that [the Torah] should be read during the Mincha service on Shabbat, because of the shopkeepers. He also decreed that on Mondays and Thursdays, three people should read [from the Torah] and that they should read no fewer than ten verses [total]. (Hilkhot Tefilla 12:1)

The Rambam attributes the Torah reading of Monday, Thursday, and Shabbat mornings to Moshe, and the Shabbat afternoon reading to Ezra.

We questioned whether to categorize keri'at ha-Torah as a chovat yachid, an obligation incumbent upon every individual, which in this case may only be fulfilled in the presence of a minyan, or as a chovat tzibbur, a communal obligation. We mentioned several ramifications of this question, including whether the Torah may only be read in the presence of ten men who have yet to hear keri'at ha-Torah, and the extent to which one must listen attentively to the reading.

This week, we will attempt to further and deepen our understanding of the nature of keri'at ha-Torah.

When an Individual or Tzibbur Misses Keri'at Ha-Torah

The Rishonim and Acharonim discuss, at length, whether an individual or a community who missed a Torah reading must "make-up" the missed reading. This issue, as we shall see, may also relate to the broader question raised above regarding the nature of the mitzva of keri'at ha-Torah.

This question was first raised by the early Ashkenazic Rishonim. The Ohr Zaru'a (Hilkhot Shabbat 45; see Darkhei Moshe Ha-Katzar OC 135:2) relates that in a particular place called Klunia, one of the congregants once delayed the Shabbat prayers for so long that the congregation was unable to read from the Torah (Parashat Emor). The following week, a R. Eliezer b. R. Shimon ruled that they should begin by reading the previous week’s parasha, and then read the current week’s parasha (Parashat Behar) as well. He explained that the enactment from the time of Moshe Rabbeinu was to read and complete the entire Torah each year, “in order to inform the congregation of the mitzvot and the statutes.” Furthermore, he asserted that one should not think that just because the proper time to read the parasha has passed, one should miss the parasha, as “ein keva be-farshiot” (the parashot were not established to be read on certain weeks, but were merely divided among the weeks of the year).

The Ohr Zaru’a maintains that there is an obligation to read and hear the entire Torah, and that the parashot need not necessarily be read on their assigned weeks. The Sefer Ha-Aguda (Megilla 3:30) and the Mahari Weil (Chiddushei Dinim Ve-Halakhot 66) cite this ruling as well. Interestingly, the Maharil (Shut Maharil Ha-Chadashot 142) disagrees and records that it is not customary to make up a missed parasha, due to the fear of confusing those who "entered and left" the synagogue.

The Rema (OC 135:2) rules that those who do not read the weekly parasha should read it the next week, with the following parasha, in accordance with the Ohr Zaru'a. However, while the Ohr Zaru'a explains that the obligation of keri'at ha-Torah – to hear the entire Torah read – is what mandates making up the missing parasha, the Vilna Gaon (Bi'ur Ha-Gra 135) equates this ruling to the laws of tashlumin, i.e., making up a missed obligation.^[1] These different approaches may yield significant practical differences. For example, does one who intentionally (be-meizid) misses keri'at ha-Torah also make up the parasha the next week, because he must hear the entire Torah, or do we apply the general rule of tashlumin, that a missed mitzva can only be made up if it was missed unintentionally? Similarly, if multiple parashot were missed, can they all be made up for the sake of completing the entire Torah, or only one, just as tashlumin is only performed for one missed tefilla?^[2]

The commentaries further disagree regarding the scope of this ruling. May a tzibbur make up a double-parasha? Or a parasha from a different sefer?

R. Moshe Mintz (15th century, Germany), a student of R. Yaakov Weil, relates that a certain congregation once did not complete the double-parasha of Vayakhel-Pekudei. R. Mintz notes that the Ohr Zaru'a said a tzibbur should make up one missed parasha; in his understanding, however, if they missed a double-parasha, they should not read all three parashot, since "ein le-davar sof" (there would be no end). He further asserts that even if a congregation would read the previous week's parasha, it should not read parashot from two different sefarim (Vayakhel-Pekudei from Sefer Shemot and Parashat Vayikra from Sefer Vayikra) together.^[3] The Magen Avraham (135:4) concurs. Others disagree and rule that a congregation should even make up a double parasha.[4] The Acharonim also discuss whether a community should make up a missed parasha from a previous sefer.^[5]        

Should a congregation which missed a number of parashot read them all? One might say no, in accordance with the reasoning of R. Mintz that "ein l'davar sof," as well as the Gra’s understanding of the Ohr Zaru'a as referring to a form of tashlumin. However, the Eliya Rabba (135) and the Arukh Ha-Shulchan (135:6) rule that a community should in fact make up even more than one or two missed parashot. The Mishna Berura (135:6) cites this debate.

How is this practice meant to be implemented? The Acharonim disagree about whether the missed parasha may be read in the afternoon, at the Shabbat Mincha service. R. Chaim Azulai, in his Chaim Sha'al,^[6] writes that keri'at ha-Torah on Shabbat is meant to be read in the morning, as the Rambam describes,^[7] and may not be read in the afternoon. R. Soloveitchik agreed, explaining that although the keri'at ha-Torah of Monday and Thursday may be performed all day, it is possible that the keri'at ha-Torah on Shabbat can only be fulfilled during the morning, as a different reading was instituted for the afternoon.^[8]

R. Yechezkel Landau, in his Dagul Mervava (OC 135:2) disagrees and rules that if there is time before Mincha to read the entire missed parasha, the congregation may do so. R. Ephraim Zalman Margulies (Galicia, 1762-1828), in his Sha’arei Ephraim (7:9), and the Mishna Berura (135:5) concur.^[9] R. David Tzvi Hoffman, in his Melamed Le-Ho'il (14), records that in Berlin, R. Azriel Hildesheimer established a special keri'at ha-Torah before Mincha on Shabbat (followed by the Haftara and Mussaf) for the youth who were in Gymnasium (high school) in the morning.

The Sha’arei Ephraim (ibid.) writes that the first three aliyot are read from the previous parasha, the fourth finishes the previous parasha and begins the new parasha, and the last three conclude the new parasha. Others insist that the entire missed parasha is read during the first aliya, along with the beginning of the current parasha.[10] This appears to be the custom.        

Incidentally, the Ateret Zekeinim[11] (135:1) writes that if a community missed keri'at ha-Torah on Monday, they may read it on Tuesday, as a community is not meant to go three days without hearing the Torah; however, other Acharonim disagree. This may be due to technical reasons, such as tircha d'tzibbura (significant inconvenience to the community),^[12] or because fundamentally, the keri'at ha-Torah of Monday and Thursday is different from the keri'at ha-Torah of Shabbat: the Monday and Thursday readings are so that three days should not pass without Torah, while the Shabbat reading relates to a broader obligation to complete the Torah. 

This issue is commonly raised regarding those who travel between Israel and the diaspora when the weekly parashot are not aligned, or if a congregation cannot read the Torah due to inclement weather or other reasons. Unfortunately, this question was also raised once communities were permitted to resume public prayer during Covid, and tragically, this year as well, as many congregations were forced to disperse and seek shelter as Israeli communities and cities were attacked during the atrocities of Simchat Torah.  

Despite the rich halakhic discussion summarized above, the sources do not specify who is obligated to make up missed parashot and under what circumstances. Should or may an individual make up a missed parasha? Or only a tzibbur? If the latter, does this refer to an entire congregation that missed a reading, or individuals who come together to hear the missed parasha? This discussion may shed light on whether keri'at ha-Torah is an individual or communal obligation. 

There are reports of rabbis who, after missing numerous parashot, arranged to have them read on the first possible Shabbat. For example, R. Moshe Schick (Teshuvot Maharam Schick, OC 335) relates that his teacher. R. Natan Adler, once missed numerous parashot and made them up in a private minyan. Similarly, the Vilna Gaon (Tosefet Ma’aseh Rav 34) made up four parashot after being released from prison, and the Chazon Ish made up two parashot he missed during an illness (Pe'er Ha-Dor v.3 pg. 33). R. Aharon Lichtenstein, upon returning from America, would make a special minyan for keri'at ha-Torah in order to make up a missed parasha. This practice may reflect the approach that keri'at ha-Torah is a chovat yachid, or at least that the obligation is to hear the entire Torah.

On the other hand, R. Margulies writes:

If a congregation misses a [Torah] reading, they should make it up on the next Shabbat. But if they didn't miss it, but instead there weren't ten [men] on Shabbat, they do not need to make up [the missed parasha] the following Shabbat. (Sha’arei Ephraim 7:39)

R. Margulies apparently maintains that keri'at ha-Torah is a chovat tzibbur, and more specifically, an obligation incurred by a specific tzibbur that meets on Shabbat; therefore, only when such a tzibbur misses a parasha, they should make up the parasha the following week. The Chida (Chaim She'al 1:71) appears to concur. Despite the compelling rationale of this approach, previous teshuvot which address the issue do not make this distinction, but rather allow a quorum of individuals, of which each individual missed the previous week's Torah reading, to make up the missed parasha the following week.^[13]

Interestingly, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Alef, Ki Tisa 6) writes that if there is a minyan that read the parasha in the city, those who were unable to hear keri'at ha-Torah are exempt from making up the parasha – possibly implying that keri'at ha-Torah is a communal obligation.

Moving a Sefer Torah for an Individual

May a Torah be brought to an individual so that he may hear keri'at ha-Torah?

The Mishna (Yoma 7:1) teaches that in the Beit Ha-Mikdash, on Yom Kippur, a sefer Torah was passed from person to person to be brought to the Kohen Gadol. The Yerushalmi comments:

Generally, one goes to the Torah. But here you are saying, one brings the Torah to them? Only since they are important personalities, the Torah is honored by them. (Yerushalmi, Yoma 7:1)

Based upon this Yerushalmi, the Mordekhai (Rosh Hashana 710) rules that a sefer Torah is not brought to Jewish prisoners, even on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. The Shulchan Arukh (OC 135:14) rules accordingly. At the same time, the Rema writes that if the sefer Torah is brought to the prisoner a day or two before (so it does not appear that it was brought for the sake of the person needing it, but was simply relocated), or if the person is an adam chashuv (an important person), it is permitted.^[14] 

The Bi'ur Halakha (135:14) questions the rationale of this ruling. While the Yerushalmi's concern is understandable, why would it be prohibited to bring a Torah to prisoners, who are unable to come to the sefer Torah? He concludes that the Mordekhai only objected to bringing a Sefer Torah to an individual, as "an individual is not obligated in the mitzva of keri'at ha-Torah if he is unable to attend a synagogue." However, he writes, it would certainly be permitted to bring a sefer Torah to ten men who have not heard keri'at ha-Torah; "since they are obligated in keri'at ha-Torah, and they are unable to go to the [Torah], even the Mordekhai would agree that the sefer Torah may be brought to them." 

As the Bi'ur Halakha explains, this issue may also relate to the broader question of whether keri'at ha-Torah is a chovat yachid or chovat tzibbur.

The Nature of Keri'at Ha-Torah

What is the nature and purpose of the public reading of the Torah on Mondays, Thursdays, Shabbat morning, and Shabbat afternoon? On the one hand, one might suggest that these enactments of keri'at ha-Torah provide regular exposure to, and study of, the Torah. Indeed, as we noted above, the rabbis teach:

As it is taught "... and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no water" (Shemot 15:22). Those who interpret verses metaphorically said that “water” here is referring to nothing other than Torah, as it is stated: "Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water" (Yeshayahu 55:1). The verse means that since the Jews traveled for three days without hearing any Torah, they became weary, and therefore the prophets among them arose and instituted for them that they should read from the Torah each Shabbat, and pause on Sunday, and read again on Monday, and pause on Tuesday and Wednesday, and read again on Thursday, and pause on Shabbat eve, so they would not tarry three days without hearing the Torah. (Bava Kama 82a)

This passage implies that keri'at ha-Torah is a public learning of the Torah, as we are not meant to go three days without studying Torah.

However, as noted above, there are other Biblical models of public Torah readings which may reflect different themes and purposes. For example, the Torah (Devarim 31:10-13) describes how once every seven years, the Jewish people are meant to assemble in Jerusalem to hear the Torah. The Rambam, describing the event, writes:

Converts who do not understand are obligated to concentrate their attention and direct their hearing, listening with reverence and awe, rejoicing while trembling as on the day the Torah was given at Sinai. Even great Sages who know the entire Torah are obligated to listen with exceedingly great concentration. One who is unable to hear should focus his attention on this reading, for Scripture established it solely to strengthen the true faith. He should see himself as if he was just now commanded regarding the Torah and heard it from the Almighty. For the king is an agent to make known the word of God. (Hilkhot Chagiga 3:6)

Based on this portrayal, Hakhel is meant to be experienced as a recreation of ma'amad Har Sinai, i.e., the giving of the Torah.

R. Soloveitchik suggested that similar to Hakhel, keri'at ha-Torah should be viewed as a re-enactment of Matan Torah. As we shall see, he applied this perspective to numerous Talmudic passages. 

Standing While Reading and Listening to the Torah

The Talmud derives an obligation to stand while reading the Torah from the giving of the Torah at Sinai:

It was taught: This is not the case with regard to reading the Torah, as one must stand when reading the Torah. From where are these matters derived? R. Abbahu said: It is as the verse states: "But as for you, stand here with Me (and I will speak to you all the commandments and the statutes)" (Devarim 5:28). And R. Abbahu said: Were the verse not written in this manner, it would be impossible to utter it; as it were, even the Holy One, Blessed be He, was standing (at the giving of the Torah). (Megilla 21)

In fact, the same principle seems to be extended to teaching and even studying Torah:

And Rabbi Abbahu also said: From where is it derived that the teacher should not sit on a couch and teach his disciple while he is sitting on the ground? It is as it is stated: "But as for you, stand here with Me."

The Sages taught: From the days of Moses until the time of Rabban Gamliel, they would study Torah only while standing. When Rabban Gamliel died, weakness descended to the world, and they would study Torah while sitting. And this is as we learned (Sota 49a): When Rabban Gamliel died, honor for the Torah ceased."^[15] (Ibid.)

The Rabbis insist that one's posture while reading, teaching, and even studying Torah relates to an intent to re-experience matan Torah. 

Should the congregation stand during the reading of the Torah as well, or only the reader? The Mordekhai (Shabbat 422) relates that his teacher, R. Meir of Rothenburg (Maharam), would stand during keri'at ha-Torah.^[16] Although the Shulchan Arukh says one may sit during keri'at ha-Torah, the Rema (146:4) cites the Maharam’s practice.^[17] The Bach (141) explains that "[the Maharam] did not do so due to a halakhic requirement, but rather, because every person should put his mind to, as he hears the reading of the Torah from the reader, accepting the Torah, at that very moment, on Har Sinai." Here too, it appears that the custom of standing during the reading of the Torah is based upon the understanding of keri'at ha-Torah developed above.

The Translator and the Translation (Targum)

The Talmud (Megilla 21b) relates that during Torah reading, "one person reads and one may translate the reading into Aramaic for the congregation."  Rashi (ibid., s.v. u-v'navi) explains that the purpose of the translation is "to read the Torah for the women and uneducated who do not know Hebrew." In other words, the function of the targum is educational.

While the targum may play an educational role, numerous sources indicate that how the Torah is translated is modelled after the revelation at Sinai. For example, the Yerushalmi teaches:

R. Shmuel bar Rav Isaac went to a synagogue. A man stood up to translate while leaning on a pillar. He said to him: This is forbidden to you; just as it was given in trembling and fear, so we have to treat it in trembling and fear. (Yerushalmi, Megilla 4:1)

The Rambam (Hilkhot Tefilla 12:11) paraphrases this Yerushalmi: "The translator should not lean on a beam or a pillar. Rather, he should stand with awe and fear."

The following passage in the Yerushalmi implies that even the very practice of appointing a translator is meant to mimic the giving of the Torah at Sinai.

R. Chaggai said, R. Shmuel bar Rav Isaac went to a synagogue. He saw Chuna standing up translating without putting up another person in his stead. He said to him: This is forbidden to you; just as it was given by an agent, so we have to treat it by an agent.

The passage appears to compare the roles of the reader and the translator to the roles of God and Moshe at Sinai (Shemot 19:19).

Conclusion

R. Soloveitchik added another dimension to this approach. In his essay U-Vikashtem Mi-Sham, he writes:

[The purpose of keri'at ha-Torah] is to arrange an encounter with God, as experienced by our ancestors at Mount Sinai. Every act of reading from the Torah is a new giving of the Torah, a revival of the wondrous stand at the foot of the flaming mountain. The reading of the Torah is a "staging" of the giving of the Torah and a renewal of the awesome, sublime experience. The revelational experience is re-enacted whenever the Torah scroll is removed from the aron.^[18]

In other words, keri'at ha-Torah does not just re-enact Matan Torah; the community re-experiences the revelation at Sinai. R. Soloveitchik suggested that this may be why Barekhu precedes the blessing recited upon reading the Torah – because upon sensing the presence of God, man is obligated to bless and sanctify His name.^[19] 
 

^[1] As we shall see below, this contradicts the Tosefet Ma’aseh Rav 34, which reports that the Gra, upon being released from prison, asked the ba’al kri’ah to read the previous four parashot which he had missed.

^[2] See Ateret Zekenim 135:2, Peri Megadim (Eshel Avraham) 135:4, and Bi’ur Halakha 135.

^[3] Maharam Mintz 85.

[4] See Hagahot Sefer Ha-Minhagim (Tirna), Minhag shel Shabbat 41, and Arukh Ha-Shulchan 135:6.

^[5] Dagul Mervava 135. See also Mishna Berura 135:7.

^[6] Chaim Sha’al 1:71 and 2:16.

^[7] Hilkhot Tefilla 12:1.

^[8] R. Kenneth Brander (“In the Eye of the Storm: Shabbat Observance During a Hurricane or Severe Weather Event,” Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, LXIV (Fall 2012)) cites R. Herschel Schachter, who reported this in the name of R. Soloveitchik.

^[9] See also Tzitz Eliezer 13:27.

[10] See Kaf Ha-Chaim 135:5, Bereichot Mayim 135 and R. Ovadia Yosef in Yabi'a Omer OC 9:28; see Piskei Teshuvot 135:4.

[11] Menachem Mendel Auerbach, 17^th century Austria.

^[12] See Dagul Mervava 135.

^[13] See Leket Yosher 54:2, Mahari Weil 66, Shevut Yaakov 3:6.

^[14] This is the basis for bringing a sefer Torah for an esteemed guest, to a celebration of a chatan and kallah, to a beit ha’avel (a mourner’s house), for a Shabbat or Yom Tov, or even on Simchat Torah. See Piskei Teshuvot 135:27.

^[15] The Gemara further distinguishes between “easy” material and “difficult” material.

^[16] See also Tashbetz Katan 182.

^[17] R. Menahem Azariah da Fano, known as the Rema Mi-Pano (91), suggests that one should stand during keri’at ha-Torah to ensure that he will be standing during Barekhu, as the Yerushalmi teaches that one should stand during the recitation of devarim she-bikedusha.

^[18] U-Vikashtem Mi-Sham, pp. 227-228. In Shiurim L’Zekher Abba Mari (v.2 pp. 127-130), he describes keri’at ha-Torah as “kabbalat ol malkhut shamayim.”

^[19] See Shiurei Ha-Rav – Tefilla U-Keri’at Shema, pg. 248. We will present other understandings elsewhere of the Barekhu which precedes reading the Torah.