Halakhah Study Group 022

1:
The first paragraph of section 140 is concerned with the correct procedure to be followed when the person called to read from the Torah cannot continue. This ruling comes directly from the Talmud of Eretz-Israel [Berakhot 40a], therefore we must bear in mind that it is referring to a situation in which the person reciting the blessings is the person actually reading from the Torah.

2
I translated the Hebrew "ve-nishtatek" as 'encounters difficulties'; a literal translation would be 'became silent'. In other words, we are dealing with a situation in which the person honoured with an aliyyah is not able to continue the reading. This could be for a variety of reasons, the two most obvious being that he or she is either unwell or has difficulties managing the text.

3:
When such a situation arises somebody else must replace the honoree who cannot continue. Now the question arises whether the replacement reader can be considered 'covered' by the blessing that the first honoree recited before commencing the lection. The ruling given in paragraph 1 makes the situation quite clear. The blessings that an honoree recites are his personal blessings. They are not for the purpose of helping the congregation fulfill a duty: these are blessings that the honoree himself (or herself) must recite before and after reading from the Torah. It follows that the replacement reader must recite his own blessings and cannot consider the blessing recited by the first honoree as covering him as well. (To clarify: the blessings are not blessings to be recited when the Torah is read publicly; they are blessings that I, the individual, must recite when I am honoured with a reading from the Torah.)

4:
Therefore the procedure to be followed is that the replacement recites the blessing to be recited before the reading from the Torah and then starts reading from the same place as the previous honoree began reading. When the replacement reaches the end of his reading he must recite the blessing that comes after the reading.

5:
When we studied 139:6 we noted that barekhu etc which precedes the blessing before the reading is actually a kind of invitation [see HSG 019]. When the reader is a replacement he does not begin with barekhu but proceeds immediately to the berakhah.

6:
Let me add here parenthetically, that if the first honoree manages to read at least three verses and comes to a stop at a place where it is permitted to stop (even if not as these stops are marked in our modern Ĥumashim) then he may be considered to have completed his reading and should recite the blessing that comes after the reading.

7:
Rabbi Yosef Karo (the compiler of the Shulĥan Arukh) notes that Rambam rules differently. With the greatest of respect I must point out that this is not necessarily the case. What Rambam says [Hilkhot Tefillah 12:6] is as follows:

It is not that Rambam states that the substitute does not recite the first berakhah, he just does not mention it, mentioning only the last berakhah. I presume that Karo knows that Rambam is very careful with the wording of his rules and that therefore the omission is meaningful.

8:
Rabbi Moshe Isserles adds a note to the effect that nowadays, when each honoree does read his own aliyyah, the Ĥazzan or other functionary who reads from the Torah must observe the same procedure. The person actually reading is considered to be the honoree's agent, assisting him in fulfilling his honour. The relationship between the actual reader and the honoree is expressed in the talmudic dictum that 'a person's agent is as themselves' [Gemara Ĥagigah 10b and many other places].

In HSG 021 we described the text of the blessing to be recited after a reading from the Torah, and we noted that that at some stage in our liturgical history a slight change was made in the wording. Ellen Schwartz writes:

I am curious if you can comment on the chronology of this second blessing's alteration (going from ha-olam to just olam) with the prayer Kedusha D'Sidra which has the exact same wording as the blessing under discussion. In other words, is Kedusha D'Sidra "quoting" the revised Torah blessing, or is it that the blessing was revised to match Kedusha D'Sidra. I have always been particularly fond of those few phrases in Kedusha D'Sidra (starting Baruch Hu …) having learned them as a young child as one of my first "theology lessons" after Shema and Modeh Ani.. Any info you could provide would be welcome.

I respond:

I cannot be very helpful here since both of the possible options that Ellen mentions are possible, and, indeed, probable! Kedusha de-Sidra was introduced into the liturgy quite early on. Originally the Torah reading was followed by a midrash. As time became more precious the midrash was gradually replaced with quotations from biblical sources. Since the midrash almost invariably ended with a prayer for Israel's restoration it should not surprise us that the Kedusha de-Sidra begins with verses concerning Israel's ultimate redemption. Since Kedusha de-Sidra is intimately linked to Torah reading it follows that we cannot state which version came first in either case! I am sorry to dissapoint you.

Perhaps I may be permitted a parenthetic comment that hopefully will not be considered 'insolent'. I am sure that Ellen herself does not say Modeh Ani. when she wakes up every morning: she must say "Modah Ani"… Vive la différance!