נהגו לקרות כהן אחר כהן בהפסק ישראל ביניהם ואומר החזן כשקורא לשני "אף-על-פי שהוא כהן"; וכיוצא בזה נוהגים בלוי אחר לוי: הג"ה ולכן מותר לעלות גם כן למפטיר בכי האי גוונא; ואם קורא מפטיר סתם אין לחוש לפגמו דהרי לא מזכיר שמו. ויש אומרים דאין לקרות כהן או לוי למנין שבעה אבל לאחר שנשלם המנין יכולים לקרות כהן או לוי [אגור בשם מהרי"ו ומרדכי פ' הניזקין וב"י בשם ר' ירוחם] וכן נוהגין במדינות אלו; ומיהו במקום צורך ודחק יש לסמוך אסברא ראשונה:
.
It is customary to call a Kohen after a Kohen with an Israelite between them, and the Ĥazzan says "although he is a Kohen". It is similarly customary a Levite after a Levite. Note: It is therefore permitted for him to be called as Maftir in a similar fashion; and if he [the Hazzan] just calls "Maftir" there is no reason to be concerned about disqualification since he did not mention his name. There are [poskim, decisors] who say that a Kohen or a Levite should not be called among the seven, but after that number has been reached they may call a Kohen or a Levite [Egor quoting Mahariv and the Mordechai on Gittin 5:1 and the Bet Yosef quoting Rabbenu Yeruĥam]. And this is the custom in these lands, but nevertheless where there is great need and distress one can rely on the former view.
1:
On several occasions we have already seen that two Kohanim [of priestly stock] should not be called to the Torah one after the other. This was to prevent the drawing of mistaken conclusions concerning the first of these two Kohanim, lest onlookers should imagine that while he stood there for the reading from the Torah some fault had been discovered concerning his priestly pedigree and he had to be replaced by the second Kohen. (The same precaution is to be taken concerning Levites and for the same reason.)
2:
Now, Rabbi Yosef Karo, the author of the Shulĥan Arukh, states that this restrictive practice does not apply to the calling of two Kohanim (or two Levites) when they are not called consecutively. It is permitted, he says in the paragraph which is now the object of our study, to call two Kohanim to the Torah provided the two are separated by an Israelite. The reason is obvious: in such a manner no one could think that the first of the Kohanim had been disqualified. However, he adds, in order to remove any possibility of misunderstanding, when the Ĥazzan calls the second Kohen he should make it clear that he is being called "although he is a Kohen".
3:
Rabbi Karo seems to be basing his permission on two earlier authorities of great standing: Rav Amram Ga'on (who died in 875 CE) and Rav Sa'adyah Ga'on (died in 942 CE). Both of these great and worthy authorities reflect the practices of their milieu: the Sefardi heritage. In his note, Rabbi Moshe Isserles points out that the Ashkenazi tradition was less permissive. He quotes great Ashkenazi authorities who maintained that a second Kohen could only be called after all the Israelites had had their turn. This would only apply on those days when more than three are called to read from the Torah (Shabbat, festivals, Rosh Ĥodesh). For example, on Shabbat, after the Kohen and the Levite five Israelites must be called to the Torah to complete the number of seven honorees. According to these Ashkenazi authorities a second Kohen should only be permitted to receive this honour after all five Israelites had exercised their rights.
4:
Rabbi Isserles seems to sense a certain weakness in this further restrictive view since he points out that it can be ignored in two instances: A Kohen may be called for 'Maftir' and this whole restriction may be discarded when the need to call more than one Kohen is great. 'Maftir' refers to an eighth and last reading from the Torah; this reading is usually (but not always) a repetition of the last few verses that have already been read. The person who is honoured as 'Maftir' subsequently reads the 'Haftarah' from the prophetic literature. However, he states that when a Kohen is called as 'Maftir' it should be done 'in a similar fashion'; in other words, he should be called by name with the addition 'although he is a Kohen'.
5:
The great need of which Isserles speaks can really only be a social one. When a family celebrating a joyous occasion (Bar-Mitzvah, for instance) has many members who are of priestly stock honouring many of them with an Aliyyah to the Torah can be problematic in those of our congregations which still accord the Kohanim their historical privileges. One unfortunate solution that is often practiced is to add – inordinately – to the number of honorees in order to include more Kohanim. In my view this solution is to be severely discouraged since it makes the Torah reading a long and tedious experience for the congregation and constitutes what the sages call "Tirĥa de-Tzibbura", an unjustifiable burden on the public's patience. Isserles admits that in such circumstances even Ashkenazim would do better to adopt the Sefardi practice. In practical terms this could permit four Kohanim to be called: first, fourth, sixth and Maftir.
6:
The authorities quoted by Iserles are:
- Mahariv: Rabbi Israel Bruna (1400-1480 CE), a German rabbi and communal leader; a recognized halakhic authority of Germany; his opinion in communal and rabbinic matters was widely sought.
- Mordechai: Rabbi Mordechai ben-Hillel (1240-1298 CE), one of the earlier Ashkenazi authorities whose halakhic writings are a kind of halakhic discussion on the Talmud.
- Yeruĥam: Rabbi Yeruĥam ben Meshullam (1290-1350 CE). Although he was born in Provence (southern France) he studied under the Rosh (Rabbi Asher ben-Yeĥi'el) and his collation of laws therefore reflects to a considerable extent Ashkenazi practice. (On the Rosh see HSG 001.)
