Torah.org Kriat Shema 2:11-12 The Judaism Site https://torah.org/learning/rambam-kriatshema-ks2-11/ KRIAT SHEMA 2:11-12 by Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom 11. If someone reads [K'riat Sh'ma] out of order (*l'mafreia'* - lit. "backwards"), *Lo Yatza* (he has not fulfilled his obligation). When does this apply? - to the order of verses; however, if he read one Parasha before another Parasha, even though he is not allowed [to do so], I say that *Yatza*, since they are not next to each other in the Torah. If he read a verse and went back and read it a second time, this is unseemly. If he read one word and repeated it - for instance, if he read "Sh'ma, Sh'ma", we hush him. 12. If he read [K'riat Sh'ma in a manner of] *Serugin*, Yatza. Even if he paused between each *Serug* enough time to finish the whole [reading], Yatza. [This is true] as long as he reads in order. If he read it *Mitnamnem* - i.e. someone who is neither fully awake nor fully asleep, Yatza. [This is true] as long as he is awake for the first verse. ********** K'RIAT SH'MA L'MAFREI'A' Yitzchak Etshalom I. THE SOURCES The Mishna in Berakhot (2:3) states: *HaKorei l'mafrei'a' Lo Yatza* - if someone reads K'riat Sh'ma *L'mafrei'a'* - they have not fulfilled the obligation. The meaning of l'mafrei'a' is "backwards" or "out of order". Rashi (Berakhot 13a s.v. mid'varim) explains that *L'mafrei'a'* means e.g. "uvish'arekha - beitekha - mezuzot" (instead of the way it is written: "mezuzot - beitekha - uveish'arekha"). The Mishna lists one other reading which, if done l'mafrei'a', is invalid: The Megillah (Megillat Esther - read on Purim from a scroll). (Megillah 2:1). The Tosefta (Berakhot 2:3) adds Hallel and Tefillah, as follows: "If someone reads K'riat Sh'ma l'mafrei'a', lo yatza; the same applies to Hallel, Tefillah and Megillah." The Gemara in Megillah (17a-b) cites prooftexts for each of these "non-l'mafrei'a'" readings: Page: 1 Torah.org Kriat Shema 2:11-12 The Judaism Site https://torah.org/learning/rambam-kriatshema-ks2-11/ Megillah: "These days [of Purim] are observed and remembered" - just as the observance cannot be out of order (the 14th of Adar must come before the 15th - Rashi), similarly, the remembrance (Megillah) must be in order; Hallel: (various texts from Hallel itself are offered which indicate that the praise for God must be in its order, just like the sun moves from east to west) Tefillah: (here, there is no prooftext; however) the Gemara cites two sources that indicate that the blessings of the Tefillah were "ordered", hinting that the order is not coincidental but necessary. K'riat Sh'ma: *V'hayu haD'varim ha'Eleh* - (and these words shall be...) that they should be [read] as they are - not l'mafrei'a'. II. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS We have seen four readings which are invalidated l'mafrei'a'; are all four invalidated for the same reason? The practical difference may be the range of invalidity - what level of l'mafrei'a' is problematic in each case? Another way of stating the questions is: How do we interpret the term "l'mafrei'a'"? There are at least four distinct possible ways of interpreting l'mafrei'a': (a) reading words out of order -such that the result is jibberish; (b) reading phrases out of order (while maintaining word order within each phrase) - such that each phrase makes internal sense, but the phrases do not follow each other as they do in the original; (c) reading verses out of order (although each verse is kept internally intact); (d) reading Parashiot out of order - even though the integrity of each Parasha is maintained. (the terms used above are equally valid for Megillah, Hallel and K'riat Sh'ma; however, we must "transpose" for Tefillah: instead of "verses" ©, read "sentences within a blessing" and instead of "Parashiot" (d), read "blessings".) There is another thing to consider: Does the rule of l'mafrei'a' apply throughout K'riat Sh'ma? What if someone read the first verse correctly and then did a patchwork reading of the rest? What if someone read the entire first Parasha correctly but then hopscotched around the second and third Parashiot? Is the reading invalidated at any point due to l'mafrei'a' - or is it limited in scope to one part of K'riat Sh'ma? III. MEGILLAH AND K'RIAT SH'MA Page: 2 Torah.org Kriat Shema 2:11-12 The Judaism Site https://torah.org/learning/rambam-kriatshema-ks2-11/ The Gemara (Megillah 18b) implies that the problem with a l'mafrei'a' reading of the Megillah applies up to level (d) above - even if you read each chapter properly, but read chapters 6-10 and then chapters 1-5, this would be invalid. The Gemara states that if you enter a Beit K'nesset (on Purim) and found that the community had already read half of the Megillah, you shouldn't read the second half with them and then go back and read the first half; rather you should read it from beginning to end. The reason here seems to be that the whole point of the Megillah is to see how each event (seemingly a coincidence) leads to the next one (for example, Vashti's rebellious attitude necessitates a new queen, Haman's ego makes him come to the king late at night, Mordechai's overhearing the plot against the king gets him raised above Haman etc.) This whole message is lost if not read in order. However, there is good reason to suspect that the level of l'mafrei'a'-invalidity is less in the case of K'riat Sh'ma. The Mishna (Berakhot 2:1) states that if you were reading from the Torah and read the section(s) of K'riat Sh'ma and it happened to be the time for K'riat Sh'ma, depending on your intent (and style of reading), you may have fulfilled the Mitzvah of K'riat Sh'ma. Since the assumption is that you were reading the Torah straight through (e.g. checking a Sefer Torah for mistakes), that means that you read the Parashiot of K'riat Sh'ma out of order - first the final Parasha, from Chapter 15 of Bamidbar [Numbers], then the first (Chapter 6 of Devarim[Deuteronomy]) and then the second (Chapter 11 of Devarim). Since the Mishna allows for the possiblity that you have fulfilled the Mitzvah, it stands to reason that there is no concern of l'mafrei'a' between Parashiot, as long as (at the most) each Parasha is read correctly. RASHI'S APPROACH Rashi, cited above, gives the "jibberish" example of words being read backwards. There are two implications to be drawn from this Rashi: (1) The rule of l'mafrei'a' applies at least through the entire first Parasha - and (2) l'mafrei'a' only applies to mixing up the words (level (a) above). (The inference is based on the idea that if Rashi also held that a verse-mixing reading was invalid - where each verse was read correctly - he would have mentioned that, which is a less egregious form of l'mafrei'a' and is a more novel idea which obviously implies the invalidity of "jibberish".) Why would Rashi apply l'mafrei'a' only to "jibberish"? And - why throughout the first Parasha (but, possibly, no further)? Rashi holds that the first Parasha alone is sufficient to fulfill the basic requirement of K'riat Sh'ma (Rashi at the beginning of Berakhot - also, see the Introductory Shiur). One of the explanation for this approach is based on the notion that K'riat Sh'ma is essentially the minimalistic Talmud Torah of the day - which, in its most basic form, must be an entire Parasha of Torah. It stands to reason that, just as with any other learning, as long as the words are comprehensible and Page: 3 Torah.org Kriat Shema 2:11-12 The Judaism Site https://torah.org/learning/rambam-kriatshema-ks2-11/ the reader is following the meaning, this is a valid fulfillment of Torah study. According to Rashi, then, the invalidity of l'mafrei'a' cuts to the nature of K'riat Sh'ma itself - it is only a valid reading if it makes sense as it is read. Reading whole phrases or verses in alternate sequence is not invalid as all of the ideas make sense and, as long as they are all read, the Mitzvah has been completed. (See the Turei Aven on Megillah 17b s.v. Shelo yikra - I believe that this comment answers his challenge to Rashi) IV. RAMBAM As we see in our Halakha, Rambam rules that l'mafrei'a' only applies up to level © - and his argument (phrased as "I say" because it is not explicit in the Gemara and, as we shall see later, there is room to argue against this position from the Tosefta) is fairly straightforward: Clearly there is no concern for reading the Parashiot in order, since the Torah itself didn't place them in that order. Obviously, whatever message and/or meaning is implied by the sequences of ideas in K'riat Sh'ma doesn't move from Parasha to Parasha - just within each Parasha. Rambam, then, must hold that l'mafrei'a' isn't just an issue of making sense (Rashi's approach); rather, it is a question of conforming to the order of the Torah - perhaps, in order to "get the message" as clearly as possible.