Close To Torah

 There is a well  known Gemara (Brachos 8a-b) that states: “A person should always complete his [study of the] parsha with the congregation – [by studying] shnayim mikra ve-echad targum – Anyone who does this will have long days and years.” Learning the text of the parsha twice with the targum is a segula for long life. What many do not know is that this ma’amar Chazal is actually codified in Halacha (Rambam Hilchos Tefilla 13,25; Shulchan Aruch O.C. 285,1) . The Ba’al HaTurim (Shemos 1,1) famously comments that this halacha can be gleaned from the first passuk in Parshas Shmos: The Parsha begins `V’aileh Shmos Bnei Yisrael’ – `And These Are The Names Of Bnei Yisrael`. The Ba’al HaTurim States that this stands for (Roshei Teivos) -V’adam Asher Lomed HaSeder Shnayim Mikra Ve-echad Targum B’Kol Na’im Yashir, Yichyeh Shanim Rabos Aruchim L’Olam - or `And the person who learns the weekly Parsha shnayim mikra ve-echad targum in  a sweet straight voice, will live many long years (have an extremely long life).

In this vein, I would like to present to the Close To Torah audience a dvar Torah from my close friend, Rabbi Yosef Radner, from his newest project, to bring lomdus out of the bais medrash to those who do not have the time to plumb the depths of a sugya and are thus deprived the enjoyment of lomdus.

Shnayim Mikra Ve-Echad Targum

by Rabbi Yosef Radner

The gemara (Brachos 8a-b) writes: “A person should always complete his [study of the] parsha with the congregation – [by studying] shnayim mikra ve-echad targum – including [the words] ‘Ataros ve-Divon.’ Anyone who does this will have long days and years.” Learning the text of the parsha twice with the targum is a segula for long life.

Why does the gemara say that this applies to the words “Ataros ve-Divon” as well? These are names of cities listed in Parshas Chukas. Rashi explains that these words have no Targum Onkelos. You might think that you are therefore exempt from learning that pasuk with the targum. The gemara is thus telling us that even when there is no Targum on a text, the words must be repeated in Hebrew yet a third time.

Tosfos notes that if the gemara was trying to give an example of words in the Torah that do not have Targum, they should have made a different choice – the Targum Yerushalmi does, in fact, translate the words “Ataros ve-Divon.” (These words are translated in our texts of the Targum Onkelos as well, but it is clear from the discussion in the Rishonim that this translation was taken from the Targum Yerushalmi and did not appear in the original Targum Onkelos.) A better example to prove such a point would have been a pasuk like “Reuven ve-Shimon.” There is no targum in the world for these names.

Tosfos argues that the gemara brings “Ataros ve-Divon” as its example precisely because there is only a Targum Yerushalmi on those words. The gemara is telling us that it is better to recite a targum of some sort rather than repeat the words in Hebrew a third time, as Rashi argued.

How can we explain Rashi’s interpretation? If the entire point of the targum is to translate the Hebrew words, what have you accomplished by reciting the Hebrew words again? How can Rashi respond to Tosfos’ question?

 The Purpose of Targum

 Tosfos notes that some hold that the targum can be in any language. After all, the entire purpose of the translation is to help the “amei ha-aretz” who don’t understand the original. Most people don’t speak Aramaic nowadays, so using an English translation would seem to be much more logical. Tosfos, however, rejects this possibility because the Targum is not simply a translation – it is an interpretation. The gemara says in Megillah that without the Targum, we wouldn’t even know how to read the words. A translation wouldn’t help; there are some words in the Torah that we can’t understand without the Targum. Tosfos concludes that the chiyuv of targum should thus be fulfilled by learning Targum Onkelos over any other translation.

 But an explanation is only helpful if you understand it. Since we are no longer fluent in Aramaic, perhaps studying Targum Onkelos is a waste of time!

The Rosh argues that if one learns the Chumash with the explanation of Rashi, he has fulfilled the mitzva just like if he had studied it with the Targum, since Rashi explains every word. The Rosh understands the obligation in the same way as Tosfos. The purpose of targum is not translation, but explanation, and Rashi’s commentary serves that purpose as well as the Targum Onkelos – and perhaps better!

Elsewhere (Megillah, third perek, se’if 6), the Rosh proves that even in the time of the gemara, there were communities who no longer used a meturgaman to simultaneously translate the Torah reading into Aramaic. That being the case, and given the fact that we no longer understand the Targum anyway, there is no need to use the Targum specifically.

Rashi clearly views the obligation of targum as that of translation and not of interpretation. That is why he insists that the words “Ataros ve-Divon” be repeated a third time in Hebrew. The point of repeating it is not to aid our understanding.

The Tur records (siman 285) the mitzva of shnayim mikra ve-echad targum, citing both the opinions of Rashi and Tosfos but concluding that the minhag is to be machmir like Rashi and recite “Ataros ve-Divon” three times. The point is translation, not explanation.

 Understanding Rashi’s Approach

Tosfos (Bava Kamma) writes that Aramaic should not be taken lightly, because the Torah was given in Aramaic. There is a famous machlokes between the Rama and Rav Shmuel Yosef Katzenellenbogen regarding what Tosfos means. Rav Shmuel Yosef Katzenellenbogen argues that Aramaic is Lashon Ha-Kodesh that became corrupted. In fact, the grammar of the two languages is similar. It must therefore be treated respectfully. The Rama argues, on the other hand, that Hashem gave us the Torah in two languages – once in Hebrew, again in Hebrew, and a third time in Aramaic.

The Pri Megadim explains the reason for the obligation of shnayim mikra ve-echad targum – it parallels the giving of the Torah at Har Sinai and the Ohel Moed and the Mishna Torah, which was “be’er heitiv.” Moshe’s repetition of the Torah was accompanied by explanation – this is targum. Through shnayim mikra ve-echad targum, we are recreating Matan Torah. It makes no difference if we understand Aramaic or not, just as it makes no difference if you understand Lashon Ha-Kodesh when you read the Torah. The language has importance in and of itself because that is how the Torah was given. Torah she-ba’al peh is not like that – if you don’t understand an interpretation, you have done nothing by reciting it. But reading targum has significance even if you have no idea what it means.

The perspective of the Rama and Pri Megadim sheds light on why Rashi was so insistent in viewing targum as a translation and not an explanation. We must read the Torah in Aramaic the same way that it was originally given in that language. The obligation is shnayim mikra ve-echad targum, not shnayim mikra ve-echad perush.

Tosfos, the Rosh, and other Rishonim understand that the point of the obligation is not to recreate Matan Torah, but rather to learn it in a way in which we understand it. Hashem gave Bnei Yisrael the Torah in a way that they understood it, and we should therefore learn a perush that we understand. That perush, according to the Rosh, is that of Rashi.

The result of this machlokes is that Rashi holds that Targum is better and the Rosh holds that Rashi is better!

Practical Applications

What should a person do if he doesn’t even understand Rashi’s explanations? How should he fulfill the obligation of shnayim mikra ve-echad targum? The answer is dependent on this machlokes between Rashi and the other Rishonim. According to Rashi, Targum is better whether you understand it or not. According to the others, the whole point is to understand the text. If someone understands an English explanation better, he should certainly use that over Rashi’s commentary. The Taz writes that one can rely on other explanations as well.

Practically speaking, what are we to do? The Smag suggests that logically, Rashi’s commentary is preferable to the Targum, but he notes that many Rishonim insist on the preference of Targum over other options; the Targum was “zocheh” because it was given at Har Sinai, and shnayim mikra is a recreation of that experience.  The Beis Yosef concludes that a “yarei Shamayim” would fulfill both opinions – reading both the Targum Onkelos and Rashi’s commentary!!

Clearly, no matter what a person chooses to do, there are Rishonim who support him. Why is the Beis Yosef concerned with a “yarei Shamayim”? And why should he fulfill both opinions? We are dealing with a safek de-Rabbanan, about which we are usually lenient.

At the conclusion of the drama of Yosef and his brothers – after they had decided that he was a rodef and sold him, after the shevatim had come down to Egypt, after Yosef had given them so much trouble, and after Yehuda had threatened to take down the world superpower if Binyamin was not returned – Yosef finally revealed himself. “I am Yosef – is my father still alive?” The brothers were so overwhelmed that they couldn’t respond. The famous midrash relates, “Oy lanu mei-yom ha-din, oy lanu mei-yom ha-tochecha!” Woe is to us from the Day of Judgment and Rebuke! When Hashem shows each person who he really is, our reaction will be similar to that of the brothers. If the brothers couldn’t look their little brother in the face, how are we going to face Hashem?

The Beis HaLevi explains that Yosef accused his brothers of hypocrisy. You told me again and again that you need to bring Binyamin back home because otherwise his father would die because he loves his son so much. Well, I’m Yosef – is my father still alive? When you sold me, your father’s pain didn’t seem to bother you! You had no problem trying to kill me or sending me down to Egypt, even though you knew it would kill your father! This is exactly what Hashem will one day say to us – your own actions overrule your defense!

Take a man who has been successful in business; he gives tzedaka and has some spare money to take vacations and redo his house and go to Eretz Yisrael for Sukkos. He’s living the good life. Then he hits a snag. I can’t give tzedaka anymore, he argues. What will Hashem tell him on the yom ha-din? What about Sukkos in Israel? You still have enough money for that. Why did you renew your lease? Why do you have enough money for those things and not enough for tzedaka? (I heard a great explanation relating to this point: “Ani rishon ve-ani acharon” – when the economy is bad, Hashem is the first to get cut, and when things are good, He’s the last to be paid!)

A yarei Shamayim fulfills both options because he is afraid that when he gets up to Shamayim, they will ask him how he fulfilled shnayim mikra. If he answers that he read Chumash with Rashi, they will respond that Rashi himself holds that you are not yotzei with Rashi! If you like Rashi so much, you should have listened to Rashi!

Parallel Machloksim

The Magen Avraham asks if you should read each pasuk independently with its Targum or if you should read a whole section followed by its Targum. This is dependent on our same machlokes. If the point is to recreate Matan Torah, it would be best to read three complete sections, while if the point is to understand the psukim, it would be better to understand each pasuk independently with its explanation.

The obligation is “im ha-tzibur” – it applies to the Shabbos on which the parsha is read. It is best to finish before the meal, but one can do it by mincha as well. After that, there is a machlokes Rishonim if you have lost your chance. The Tur says that time is up after mincha. The Beis Yosef cites Rabbenu Simcha, who argues that you can be yotzei bedieved until Simchas Torah, when we finish all of the parshios. Bedieved, we pasken like Rabbenu Simcha. This machlokes also parallels our original dispute –  Whether the mitzva is to conclude reading the whole Torah shnayim mikra ve-echad targum, like it was given at Har Sinai –  in which case you can fulfill it up until Simchas Torah, or whether it is an  independent obligation every single week, as the point is to understand the text.

——————————————————————————————

 Rabbi Yosef Radner, a popular Rebbe in Yeshiva Gedola of Waterbury, has earned a reputation as an engaging and inspirational Maggid Shiur with the unique ability of conveying complex ideas culled from an encyclopedic knowledge of Torah Literature  in clear and simple terms. He shares his ideas with an infectious enthusiasm and a passion that excites and inspires his talmidim; imparting a wealth of information in a thoroughly enjoyable style, making the sugya come alive. He is the author of the three volume set of Nachalas Mayim on sugyos haShas, and makes an annual siyum haShas. In addition, he gives a weekly shiur at the Monsey Night Seder Bais Medrash, presenting an original approach to a sugya in Shas which generally relates to the weekly Parasha in a lucid and articulate manner, enabling participants to reconnect with the geshmak of lomdus that they experienced in yeshiva.        

To sign up for Rabbi Radner’s weekly lomdus/Parsha Dvar Torah, or for any questions or comments, please contact him at  ryradner@gmail.com.

 Print

Categories: Halacha, Halacha For the Layman, Machshuvah, Shemos Tags: