TORAH READING ON FRIDAY

QUESTION:

At one of the smaller American colleges, because of the heavy student schedule it seems impossible to have services other than on Friday night. The students, therefore, have services at that time and also read the Torah. The local rabbi prohibits the reading of the Torah on Friday night (which is not a traditional Torah-reading time) and declares that reading the Torah at this traditionally unauthorized time would make the Torah unfit for proper use at regular services. Is this judgment of the rabbi justified by the legal tradition? (Question by Rabbi Stanley R. Brav, Cincinnati, Ohio.)

ANSWER:

BEFORE going into the legal question involved, it is worthwhile calling attention to a remarkable coincidence with regard to this question and to the geographical source of the enquiry. Naftali Zvi Berlin, the famous head of the Volozhin Yeshivah, was asked almost the identical question by a rabbi from Cincinnati in the United States (see Berlin’s responsum #16 in Meshir Davar).

The question from Cincinnati which was sent to Volozhin two generations ago was as follows: The syn-agogue was celebrating the dedication of a new Ark of the Law and the chief celebration took place on Sunday morning. The Torahs were carried around in procession. A lay leader in the congregation was not content merely with the fact that the Torahs should be carried around in procession; he also wanted to have the Torah opened and read in regular fashion as part of the celebration. The rabbi objected on the ground that it is a sin to add to the requirements of the law as it stands now (bal tosif) , and he based his objection against this Sundaymorning reading on the statement of the Mordecai to Megilah, Chapter I, objecting to reading the Megilah one day later than the authorized date on the fourteenth of Adar.

In answer to this objection Berlin says that there is no sin of “unauthorized addition” (bal tosif) involved here. He calls attention to the fact that on the eighth day of the holidays which are not authorized in Scrip-ture, we read the Torah and recite blessings. Since the public reading of the Torah is not a Biblical require-ment, but a Rabbinical one, it is not a sin to add to the readings. The sin of adding (bal tosif) applies only to Biblical commandments. However, although it is not prohibited, he is against it as a novelty and also because it involves reciting a blessing unnecessarily (berachah levatalah). He admits that the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud are at variance with each other and that we ought to lean over in the direction of strictness because reciting the blessing might be a blessing in vain (levatalah). But even so he is not too firm on the matter, since he asks the rabbi whether the lay leader is a learned man. If he is, then he may have a reason for this or some other precedent. But if the man is ignorant, he should be brushed aside for wanting such a novelty.

It can be seen from the above responsum that it is far from certain in the mind of this great scholar whether the reading of the Torah and the recital of the Torah blessings are really prohibited. He admits the possibility that the man who wanted it may have had some justification. But, of course, in accordance with the general Orthodox mood, he objects to any unauthorized novelty (that is, if it really is unauthorized) .

On the basis of the above it is clear that the rabbi in the college town has no basis for being so sure that the Torah may not be read at any other than the customary times. As for his statement that the reading of the Torah on Friday night will make the Torah unfit for use at other times, that statement, with all due respect to him, is absurd. A Torah is unfit for use (pasul) if it is incorrectly written, or if it is punctuated, or if written by a heretic. The various conditions under which a Torah is unfit are all clearly defined (cf., Yoreh Deah 274 ff.). But to say that reading the Torah at unau-thorized times makes it unfit (pasul) for reading at authorized times is totally unjustified. It is hard to believe that he actually made such a baseless statement. I would say to him exactly what Naftali Berlin said concerning the layman in Cincinnati: If he is a learned man (and in the case of a rabbi, we assume he is) then we would like to know the reason for his statement that the Torah can be made unfit by an irregular reading. In general one must say with regard to such a dire possibility that in Jewish traditional law the Torah is considered remarkably resistant to being spoiled. Any unclean person may read the Torah because of the general principle that the Torah is proof against uncleanness (see Talmud Berachot 22a). The Torah scroll which is, according to older custom, taken out to be read to a bridegroom (not at the regular reading hours), the Torah which may be read by any unclean person and the blessings recited by him or her, is not so easily made unfit.

To sum up: While Orthodoxy naturally objects to any new custom, it is far from clear (judging by Naftali Berlin’s response) that it is forbidden to read the Torah at other than the regular times. As for making the Torah unfit if it is so read, there seems to be no justification at all for such a decision.