They forgot Maftir on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh

The substance of the incident was as follows. On the morning of a great Shabbos, before the arrival of the great and awesome day, the beginning of redemption, when some of Anash are accustomed to be called up to the Torah on this Shabbos, a number of worshippers at the shul organized a minyan for the Torah reading, in order to advance rinah^[1] to tefillah—except that they took out only one sefer Torah, and by mistake they read the maftir from the weekly parsha instead of the obligation of the day from the parsha of Rosh Chodesh, and before the hagbah they noticed their error. And I am a worm and not a man, but in a place where there is no man, and their souls were in their question as to what they should do, I instructed them that they should call up an additional oleh for the maftir of Rosh Chodesh, and continue as usual with the reading of the haftarah of Rosh Chodesh by the one who was called up for the maftir of Rosh Chodesh (and the one who was called up last—even though they had called him up for maftir, yet since he read from the weekly parsha and a maftir was called up after him, he is considered as an addition to those called up, and need not be called up again^[2]).

However, I was in doubt regarding the Kaddish, for in such a case the Sha'arei Ephraim, Sha'ar 8, writes in several places (and from there to the Mishnah Berurah 601:1, 685:2) that one should recite Kaddish again after the maftir, since one did not have this reading in mind when he recited Kaddish after the seventh aliyah. But on the other hand, we hold like the Rosh, that if one read six and recited Kaddish, he does not recite Kaddish a second time; and I am also in doubt whether their words accord with the words of the Rebbe [Admur HaZaken], who brought only one reason for the Kaddish of the Torah reading—that it is an ordinance of the Rabbanan Savora'i to make a separation between those called up who count toward the minyan and the maftir (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 282:12), and especially in light of our stringency not to multiply Kaddishim, as is explained in many places in the Igros Kodesh of the Rebbe שליט"א, and also not to make a separation between the maftir and the haftarah (Sichah of 10 Shevat 5723); and there were sharp pangs in my flesh over the fact that words of Torah were not sharpened in my mouth. In any event, in practice, I thought that "sit and do nothing" is preferable, and I did not instruct to repeat the Kaddish. Therefore I girded my loins to clarify the halacha and to see whether I erred in my ruling.

The Nature of the Torah Reading of Rosh Chodesh

Before we discuss the above, we must investigate the nature of the Torah reading of Rosh Chodesh (even though it does not bear so much on our matter). Behold, we have found several levels in the obligation of Torah reading: d'oraisa^[3], the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu and Beis Din (the Early Prophets), the ordinance of Ezra and the Men of the Great Assembly, a later ordinance (Chanukah, which is why we are not exacting in its reading^[4]), and the ordinance of the Geonim^[5] (the reading of the Musafin on the festivals).

And there are several practical differences in this: 1) which reading is set aside before another (see at length below), 2) which reading takes precedence (see Noda BiYehudah Tinyana siman 11, that the reading of Chanukah relative to Rosh Chodesh is as nothing, and therefore one must give precedence to that of Rosh Chodesh, even if one began that of Chanukah), 3) if another Beis Din should wish to nullify the ordinance, it must be greater than it in wisdom and in number (see Chasam Sofer on the Shas at the conclusion of Megillah), 4) that which Admur HaZaken innovated in Seder Birkas HaNehenin chapter 2, halacha 12, that with an ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu it is fitting to be stringent in its doubt like a doubt of Torah law.

It is stated in the Yerushalmi Megillah, chapter 4, halacha 1: "Moshe instituted for Israel that they should read in the Torah on Shabbasos and on Yamim Tovim and on Rashei Chodashim and on Chol HaMoed, as it says 'And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem to the children of Israel.' Ezra instituted for Israel that they should read in the Torah on Monday and on Thursday and on Shabbos at Mincha." (And in the Pnei Moshe there, that Rosh Chodesh too is called a moed.) This baraisa is cited as halacha in the Rif 13a and in the Rosh chapter 3, siman 3, and from there it was brought to the Beis Yosef, beginning of siman 137, and so it is in the Magen Avraham at the beginning of siman 135, the Degul MeRevavah there, the Pri Megadim introduction to siman 135 in the Eshel Avraham. And so it is in Maseches Sofrim at the beginning of chapter 10. And so it is implied in Rashi Megillah 31a in the d.h. "as it says 'And Moshe declared,'" that the derivation^[6] of "And Moshe declared" applies to the entire mishnah^[7].

However, in Shulchan Aruch HaRav we find a wondrous matter. In 282:1 he wrote: "It has already been explained in siman 135^[8] that Moshe Rabbeinu instituted for Israel that they should read in the sefer Torah five men on Yom Tov and six on Yom Kippur and seven on Shabbos—on account of the additional virtue and holiness that each has over its fellow, he added one man to it." And he did not mention the readings of Chol HaMoed and Rosh Chodesh with four men—unlike the Magen Avraham in the introduction to siman 135—for according to the aforementioned Yerushalmi, they too are from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, and this requires explanation.

And so it is stated in 282:13: "On a day when two sefarim are taken out, it is customary to complete the count with the first sefer, and the maftir reads in the second. Needless to say on days when the second sefer is only from an ordinance of the Geonim, such as on every Yom Tov, when one reads the parsha of the Musafin in the second sefer, and the reading of this parsha is only from an ordinance of the Geonim, as will be explained in siman 488—certainly it suffices that the maftir reads it, even though he reads it only for the honor of the Torah; rather, even on days when the reading of the parsha that is in the second sefer is from an ordinance of the Men of the Great Assembly, such as Rosh Chodesh that falls on Shabbos, and the four parshiyos of the month of Adar—even so, the maftir may read it, even though he reads it only for the honor of the Torah, for the reading of the parsha on every Shabbos is from the ordinances of Moshe Rabbeinu, peace be upon him, and even so the maftir would complete it in the days of the Sages of the Gemara."

And this requires explanation, for ostensibly the words of Admur HaZaken and the Tzemach Tzedek contradict the aforementioned Yerushalmi and all the Rishonim and Acharonim who followed in its footsteps!

And so it is in the Tzemach Tzedek siman 75 in the d.h. "Magen Avraham subsection 8," where he concludes that one should not recite a bracha over a posul sefer Torah "even on Shabbos and Yom Tov at Shacharis, when the reading is from an ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, peace be upon him." And so it is in his Pesak Din in the Chiddushim on the Rambam chapter 1, halacha 4. That is to say that the other readings are not from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, unlike the Yerushalmi (and ostensibly even unlike the Bavli in Bava Basra, that the reading of Monday and Thursday is from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu).

In truth, when you examine it well, it is proven that Admur HaZaken followed in the footsteps of the Great Eagle. In Hilchos Tefillah chapter 13, halacha 5, the Rambam wrote: "We interrupt for the festivals and for Yom Kippur and read concerning the matter of the festival, not in the order of the Shabbos. And Moshe Rabbeinu instituted for Israel^[9] that they should read on every festival its matter, and inquire and expound concerning the matter of the day on each and every festival." That is to say that the reading of Rosh Chodesh is not included in the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, and therefore it does not set aside the weekly parsha.^[10]

Except that it still requires explanation as to why the Rambam and Admur HaZaken set aside an explicit baraisa in the Yerushalmi, when ostensibly we do not find anyone in our Talmud who disputes this?

And I found a goodly pearl in the Igros Moshe Orach Chaim part 1, siman 101, and part 2, siman 8, where he explains the aforementioned Rambam (and the words of Shulchan Aruch HaRav, which simply rule like the Rambam, were hidden from him) that the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu is specifically with regard to Yamim Tovim. And he brings two proofs for his words: 1. That Rosh Chodesh is not included in "inquiring and expounding in the halachos of the festival," which relies on that same asmachta of "And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem to the children of Israel," and is included in that same ordinance; and likewise Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are not included, for one does not expound on them in the halachos of the festival, as is explained in the Maharsha Chiddushei Aggados at the end of Megillah (and see below the Rebbe's explanation of this); 2) that Shabbos is not included in "moed," as is explicit in Erachin 10b and Bava Basra 121a (and one should add Nedarim 77a).

And he proceeded to innovate that there are two natures in the reading of the Torah. Moshe Rabbeinu instituted that three days should not pass without Torah study^[11], as is explained in Bava Kamma 82a, and therefore he instituted that one should read on Shabbos and on Monday and Thursday. And he likewise instituted to read in the Torah on Yom Tov^[12] on account of Torah study in the matter of the day. And he also instituted the number of those called up in these readings according to the measure of the holiness of the day (except that on Monday and Thursday there is a doubt in the Gemara whether Moshe instituted three men or Ezra did). Whereas the rest of the Torah readings were instituted on account of publicizing remembrance and notice, and on a fast on account of arousal to repentance, and these readings are not from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu.

And therefore we interrupt the reading of the parsha for the reading of a festival, which is also on account of Torah study, and we do not interrupt for Rosh Chodesh, which is an ordinance of the Men of the Great Assembly on account of publicizing and giving notice that today is Rosh Chodesh. Whereas on Monday and Thursday, in which there is the element of cessation from work, we interrupt and read the parsha of Rosh Chodesh, and thereby fulfill both Torah study and the ordinance of publicizing.

(And in part 2 there he explains the Yerushalmi that in all of the above, including Rosh Chodesh, Moshe Rabbeinu instituted the number of those called up, and therefore the Yerushalmi did not mention the reading of Monday and Thursday, and this requires examination.)

However, in the Sichah of Purim 5725 in the Hadran on Maseches Megillah (Toras Menachem volume 43, page 18), the Rebbe שליט"א dwelt on several details in this sugya and innovated a wondrous innovation in the nature of "inquiring and expounding on that very day," which places the entire aforementioned discussion in a new light:

At the conclusion of Maseches Megillah, the Gemara brings the words of the Mishnah: "And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem to the children of Israel, their mitzvah is that each and every one of them should read them in its time."

– In the aforementioned Mishnah are enumerated all the parshiyos that are read on all the Yamim Tovim: "On Pesach one reads in the parsha of the festivals etc., on Chanukah .. on Purim .. on Rashei Chodashim etc.," and the Mishnah concludes: "On Monday and on Thursday and on Shabbos at Mincha one reads in their order, and they do not count toward the reckoning" (when Shabbos comes one repeats what was read on Shabbos at Mincha and on Monday and on Thursday), and on this they bring a proof – "as it says 'And Moshe declared .. their mitzvah etc.,'" and Rashi explains: "It applies to the entire mishnah, to learn from here that it is a mitzvah to read on the day of the festival from the matters of the festivals."

[And even though in the verse it speaks concerning "the appointed times of Hashem," and not concerning Monday and Thursday and the Mincha of Shabbos – one may say:

In the word "moed" there are two interpretations: (a) the simple interpretation that it refers to Yom Tov, (b) from the expression "and they shall be for signs and for appointed times [moadim] and for days and years," "the appointed time passed," that is to say a fixed time, and indeed Monday and Thursday and the Mincha of Shabbos are also fixed times that are distinct from the rest of the days of the week.

And in our case: even though the verse "the appointed times of Hashem" refers to the main matter of the festivals, which are the Yamim Tovim, that it is a mitzvah to read on the day of the festival from the matters of the festival, nevertheless, included in this is also the teaching concerning the reading on Monday and Thursday and the Mincha of Shabbos – whether on account of the secondary interpretation in the word "moed," or on account of the reason for the reading from the matters of the festival on the day of the festival, from which we learn incidentally also concerning the reading on Monday and Thursday and the Mincha of Shabbos.]

* * *

And after the Gemara brings the words of the Mishnah – as is the way of the Shas to bring the words of the Mishnah in which there is the discussion in the Gemara – the Gemara concludes: "Our Rabbis taught: Moshe instituted for Israel that they should inquire and expound concerning the matter of the day, the halachos of Pesach on Pesach, the halachos of Atzeres on Atzeres, the halachos of the festival on the festival" (and as Rashi explains: "Why was it necessary to write here 'And Moshe declared,' for did not Moshe say all the commandments to Israel? What is 'And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem to the children of Israel'? It teaches that he would speak with them the halachos of each and every festival etc.").

That is to say: in addition to the fact that on every Yom Tov one must read verses in the Written Torah from the matters of the festival, one must also expound on the matters of the festival in the Oral Torah, "the halachos of Pesach on Pesach, the halachos of Atzeres on Atzeres, the halachos of the festival on the festival."

C. And to note, that this law also applies on the days of Purim – in which the connection of the matters of Purim also with the conclusion of the maseches is emphasized:

Even though in the aforementioned baraisa that "one inquires and expounds concerning the matter of the day" Purim is not mentioned – this is because it speaks concerning the ordinance that Moshe instituted for Israel, and in the time of Moshe there were only the festivals that are mentioned in the parsha whose conclusion is "And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem etc.," and the Yom Tov of Purim (and Chanukah) did not yet exist; but this law applies also with regard to Purim.

And as is explicit in the Gemara: "Purim that falls on Shabbos, one inquires and expounds concerning the matter of the day," and it asks, "Why specifically Purim, even Yom Tov as well, for it was taught: Moshe instituted for Israel that they should inquire and expound concerning the matter of the day, the halachos of Pesach on Pesach, the halachos of Atzeres on Atzeres and the halachos of the festival on the festival," and it answers, "Purim was necessary for it, lest you say we should decree on account of [the concern of] Rabbah (who decreed below regarding the reading of the Megillah lest one carry it four amos in the public domain, here too they should decree on expounding on account of the reading) it teaches us [otherwise]."

D. And one must be precise, that in the ordinance "that they should inquire and expound concerning the matter of the day," only "the halachos of Pesach on Pesach, the halachos of Atzeres on Atzeres, the halachos of the festival on the festival" are mentioned, and there is no mention concerning the halachos of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur–even though in the parsha whose conclusion is "And Moshe declared the appointed times of Hashem etc." Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are also enumerated, just as the parshiyos of the Torah that are read on them are enumerated in the Mishnah (as the Maharsha is precise, and other commentators).

* * *

E. And one must explain this according to the words of Rabbeinu HaZaken at the beginning of Hilchos Pesach, in explaining the distinction between the law of "one inquires and expounds .. the halachos of Pesach on Pesach," and the law of "one inquires in the halachos of Pesach thirty days before Pesach":

And by way of introduction, that which the Beis Yosef wrote, that "the laws of Pesach .. one must make known to the people thirty days before Pesach so that they should have ample time to occupy themselves with the grinding of the wheat and the baking of matzah and the kashering of vessels and the removal of chametz, for on Pesach itself they have no remedy if they did not do them according to their halachos beforehand" ("and furthermore one may say that in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah we say that the reason we require thirty days before Pesach is on account of the offering, in order to inspect it for blemishes etc."), "and that which it was taught that one inquires in the halachos of Pesach on Pesach and the halachos of the festival on the festival, this is to expound on the reasons for which we were commanded on that festival, and also to expound on the matters that are forbidden and permitted to do on Yom Tov .. but the rest of the halachos, before then one inquires and expounds on them etc."

But based on this, the question still arises: why do we not find the obligation of inquiring and expounding also on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur?

However, Rabbeinu HaZaken interprets and explains the words of the Magen Avraham, that "on Yom Tov itself one is obligated to expound on the matter of the day, such as Pesach with the Exodus from Egypt" – "that he should .. expound .. on each festival concerning the matter of the day, the miracle that occurred on that very day, such as on Pesach the Exodus from Egypt, and on Atzeres the giving of the Torah, and on the festival [Sukkos] the encompassing of the Clouds of Glory."

And based on this the question concerning Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur is removed – for since there is no matter of a miracle in them, therefore one does not inquire and expound on them.

F. But it is still not understood:

Even though on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur there is nothing to expound concerning a matter of a miracle that occurred on that very day – there is still a need to expound on the halachos of the day. And as Rabbeinu HaZaken wrote, that "he should expound to the people on each festival the halachos needed for that very day, that he should make known to them the forbidden and the permitted on that very day, the halachos of Pesach on Pesach and the halachos of Atzeres on Atzeres and the halachos of the festival on the festival, even though he expounded to them the halachos of the festival thirty days before it." And if so, also on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, even though there is no matter of a miracle in them, nevertheless, why should they not expound on them "the halachos needed for that very day"?

And it will be understood according to the precision in the order of the words of Rabbeinu HaZaken in the Shulchan Aruch (as is well known that the order in the Shulchan Aruch of Rabbeinu HaZaken is also precise) – "that he should .. expound .. on each festival concerning the matter of the day the miracle that occurred on that very day .. and he should also expound .. the halachos needed for that very day, that he should make known to them the forbidden and the permitted on that very day .. even though he expounded to them the halachos of the festival thirty days before it":

The order of the words of Rabbeinu HaZaken, that he places the expounding "concerning the matter of the day, the miracle that occurred on that very day" before the expounding on "the halachos needed for that very day," is (not only because it is impossible to say two matters in a single utterance, but also) on account of the precedence in the matter itself, that is to say, that the expounding on "the halachos needed for that very day" is only when they gather in any case in order to hear the expounding "concerning the matter of the day, the miracle that occurred on that very day."

That is to say: on account of the "halachos needed for that very day," there is no reason to trouble the congregation to gather to hear these halachos, since they have already expounded to them "the halachos of the festival thirty days before it" (which includes not only the study of the halachos needed up to the eve of Pesach, but also the halachos needed on Pesach itself, for otherwise they would not know how to conduct themselves on the night of the Seder, and all the details of the halachos needed up to the time of the expounding); but when they gather in any case in order to hear the expounding "concerning the matter of the day, the miracle that occurred on that very day," then they take advantage of the opportunity to repeat once more also the "halachos needed for that very day," in the manner that we find in many places that "one urges a person before the act and repeats and urges him at the time of the act," even though for these halachos alone they would not have troubled the congregation, since they already learned them thirty days before the festival.

And based on this is understood the reason that one does not inquire and expound on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur the halachos needed for that very day – for on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur there is no new matter (a matter of a miracle) on account of which the congregation should be gathered, and for the halachos needed for that very day alone the congregation should not be gathered, since they have already learned these halachos beforehand.

End of the holy words.

Behold, according to the words of the Rebbe שליט"א concerning "inquiring and expounding," incidentally we find that we have learned also concerning the natures of the ordinance of the Torah reading^[13] according to the two interpretations in the word "moed" in the aforementioned explanation—1) that Moshe instituted to read the matters of the festival on the festival—that is, on Yamim Tovim and Chol HaMoed, in addition to his ordinance to read on every Shabbos seven men in the order of the Torah, and 2) that he instituted that on every "moed" that Israel would have—whether Rosh Chodesh, or festivals that would be innovated in the future, or on fasts, and also on Monday and Thursday and the Mincha of Shabbos (even though it was ostensibly added in the days of Ezra, as the words of the Gemara in Bava Kamma, that he instituted it on account of those who sit at the corners, but it is still included in the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu to read on every "moed"—and to note that according to the Kabbalah of the Arizal, the reading of Mincha is more sanctified, for it corresponds to the first three [sefiros] and the reading of Shacharis corresponds to the seven lower ones, and this is not the place [for it]).

And according to the above it emerges that there is no dispute between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi, and the words of the Rambam and Admur HaZaken are of wondrous precision, for on Shabbasos and Yamim Tovim, he instituted the content of the reading and also the number of those called up (except for Chol HaMoed, where the implication of Admur HaZaken is that the number of those called up is not from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, but this makes no difference regarding the content of the reading), and therefore we interrupt to read the parshiyos for these readings, whose content too is from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu (and from the outset he instituted them to set aside Shabbos). Whereas on Rosh Chodesh, Monday and Thursday, the Mincha of Shabbos, Chanukah and Purim, and fasts—although they are included in the ordinance to read in the Torah on every moed, the particular reading is not from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, and therefore one should not set aside the reading of the weekly parsha before it.^[14]

And in light of the above, it is well settled what is written in Shulchan Aruch HaRav 282, that on Rosh Chodesh that falls on Shabbos, "the reading of the parsha that is in the second sefer is from an ordinance of the Men of the Great Assembly," for one has already discharged the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu to read on a moed by the very Torah reading that one already read in the weekly parsha, and that which one adds to read the parsha of the day of Rosh Chodesh is only from an ordinance of the Men of the Great Assembly.

And likewise are understood the words of the Tzemach Tzedek, that there would have been room to be more stringent in the reading of Shabbos and Yom Tov, in which the reading itself is from the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu, that one should therefore fittingly be stringent in its doubt like that of Torah law, whereas in the rest of the readings, that even though they were included in his ordinance to read in the Torah on every "moed" and that three days should not pass without Torah, the reading itself (the "cheftza" of the reading) is not from his ordinance.

And ostensibly it is possible to harmonize this explanation with the distinction that the Igros Moshe innovated (even though in a somewhat different manner), that the readings of Shabbos and Yom Tov, in which Moshe Rabbeinu instituted the content of the reading, are on account of Torah study, and likewise the ordinance that three days should not pass without Torah, whereas the rest of the readings, which he only instituted that they should be read on certain days, the essence of the ordinance is on account of publicizing and giving notice, and this still requires examination.

The Obligation to Repeat and Read the Parsha of Rosh Chodesh

After the aforementioned introduction in the delights of Torah, let us return to our matter. Behold, the matter is simple (and explicit in many places in the Shulchan Aruch as the matter requires) that whenever they omitted the obligation of the day (except for Chanukah, as stated above)—whether on Rosh Chodesh, whether on the four parshiyos, whether on the rest of the readings, and even with the ordinance of the Geonim to read as maftir from the parshiyos of the Musafin on the festivals (see Magen Avraham 137:6 and in the Machatzis HaShekel there)—they have not discharged their obligation and are obligated to take out a sefer Torah and to repeat and read what they omitted.

Except that in the case at hand, there was one who argued that since everyone would hear the obligation of the day of Rosh Chodesh in the fixed Torah reading at the time of tefillah^[15], but in my humble opinion, "this matter requires no delay," that from the moment they separated and became a congregation unto themselves, the obligation of the congregation in all the details of the reading fell upon them, including the obligation of the day which is from the ordinance of the Men of the Great Assembly, and it is impossible to regard them once more as individuals to join them to the fixed congregation so as to discharge them by their reading. To what may the matter be compared? To those who would wish to take out a sefer Torah to read half of the reading, according to the number of olim who wish to be called up, which is obviously forbidden to do.

However, if they had not recalled that today is Rosh Chodesh before they finished the reading and the haftarah and had returned the sefer Torah and dispersed, reason inclines that they are not obligated to gather anew, and they can hear the obligation of the day in the fixed minyan^[16], but as long as the status of a congregation remains upon them^[17], they cannot exempt themselves from reading the obligation of the day by joining afterward to another congregation.

Kaddish

And now we come to discuss that which I was in doubt about, whether they should recite Kaddish once more.

Behold, in the Tur siman 282 he brings in the name of the Maharam of Rothenburg "that if the chazan erred and concluded the parsha with the sixth and recited Kaddish, there is no need to call up another, rather he should read with the maftir what he read with the six, and recite Kaddish after him, for the maftir counts toward the count of seven," and the Rosh disputes him and holds that one should not recite Kaddish again, and the ruling of all the Acharonim is like the Rosh^[18].

However, the Pri Megadim (siman 684 Eshel Avraham subsection 4) innovated that if they recited Kaddish on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Teves after they concluded the weekly parsha with the sixth, before they read the parsha of Rosh Chodesh, they should recite Kaddish a second time after the seventh. And several wondered, that ostensibly how does this differ from the fact that he ruled like the Rosh in siman 282 that one does not recite Kaddish a second time? Except that the Sha'arei Ephraim (Sha'ar 8, se'if 77, and in the Pischei She'arim there) ruled like the Pri Megadim, and even added that even if they read seven in the weekly parsha and recited Kaddish, they must recite Kaddish a second time after the reading of Rosh Chodesh, for the obligation of the reading was not removed until then and they did not intend toward what was to come.^[19] And not only this, but he is in doubt regarding the reading of Rosh Chodesh Teves that falls on a weekday, when they took out two sefarim and read four men in that of Rosh Chodesh and recited Kaddish, and now one must call up a fifth for Chanukah on account of the defect of the sefer Torah, whether perhaps he should recite Kaddish once more—unlike the Magen Avraham siman 684 subsection 4 (there and in the second se'if in the Pischei She'arim). And he based his support on the Eliyah Rabbah Hilchos Tisha B'Av in the name of the Likutei Pardes of Rashi, that there is no reading of verses after which one does not recite Kaddish. And the Mishnah Berurah (601:1, and 685:2 follows him).

It emerges that three pillars of instruction established that one should recite Kaddish a second time, and who shall come after them? Except that it is Torah and I need to learn, and I did not merit to understand their words, for ostensibly in the case in which the Rosh and the Maharam disputed there is more reasoning to recite Kaddish once more, since there they did not fulfill the ordinance of Moshe Rabbeinu to call up seven men, and what does it matter to us that he recited Kaddish before the reading of Rosh Chodesh—in the manner that one does l'chatchilah every Shabbos Rosh Chodesh, when one reads the parsha of Rosh Chodesh for the maftir?!

And as for that which the Sha'arei Ephraim is concerned that they should recite verses without Kaddish, behold we are not exacting to always recite Kaddish after verses. And even after Ashrei—for which several poskim cried out not to make a separation between it and the Kaddish before Musaf—go and see that in most shuls they make many separations for sermons and announcements etc. And the discussion concerning a doubtful obligation of Kaddish is well known, whether it is in the manner of a bracha l'vatalah, that one is lenient in a doubt of Kaddish, and this is not the place [for it]. And especially since the essence of the ordinance of the Kaddish in the Torah reading by the Rabbanan Savora'i was to make a separation between the obligatory reading and the maftir who does not count toward the count of seven, as is explained in the Responsa of the Ri Migash siman 89 and Shulchan Aruch HaRav siman 282, se'if 12 and se'if 15. And it is explained there in the Ri Migash that one cannot at all recite Kaddish after the maftir, for the entire reason for which one reads the maftir is for the honor of the Torah, that its reading should precede the reading of the Prophets, and if we make a separation with Kaddish, the reader has reverted to being like the rest of the people, and therefore one does not recite Kaddish in the Torah reading on Yom Kippur, Tisha B'Av, and the rest of the fasts at Mincha, because one cannot make a separation before the haftarah. And even though in the Responsum of the Rivash siman 119, brought in the Beis Yosef at the beginning of siman 282 subsection 5, he is in doubt about this, whether the slight separation of Kaddish makes a separation for that reader, it is clear that one should not do so without absolute necessity (there it speaks of a case where there is no other who knows how to read the haftarah).

And in practice, even with the same oleh, the ruling of the poskim is like the Ri Migash that one does not make a separation with Kaddish between the maftir and the haftarah.^[20] And therefore it ostensibly appears that we should not return to recite Kaddish after the reading of the parsha of Rosh Chodesh before the maftir is read, and all that remains to discuss is whether to recite Kaddish after the haftarah.

And if so, in the case at hand where they stand before the tefillah, there is room to say that it is preferable to rely on the Kaddish d'Rabbanan before "Hodu," that it should apply also to the Torah reading, and not to enter into the question of multiplying Kaddishim.^[21] And come and see how much the Rebbe שליט"א was stringent to minimize unnecessary Kaddishim.^[22]

And now let us return to the earlier [matters], in the Igros Moshe Orach Chaim part 1, siman 101, where the essence of the discussion there is regarding a question very similar to our matter, where he was asked "concerning the matter of one who erred, the reader, on Chol HaMoed Pesach after he finished reading in the first sefer Torah, who is the third, whether he must recite Kaddish once more after the fourth." And after he discusses the reason for the dispute of the Maharam and the Rosh, and whether this case would depend on their dispute, and after he innovated his innovation regarding the two types of Torah reading, he concludes as these words:

And behold, on account of the reading of the verses they would not have instituted to recite Kaddish, for the Kaddish that one recites after Ashrei would have sufficed, and it would apply to all the verses that were read beforehand, and only on the Torah reading that is from the law of study did they institute a Kaddish of its own, on account of the importance of the mitzvah of study, or because it is an entirely different matter. And this that one recites Kaddish even after the reading of Rosh Chodesh and Chanukah and Purim and a fast is because in them too the law of study is also fulfilled, as I have explained.

And if so, on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh and the four parshiyos, where the law of study is discharged in the parsha of Shabbos, and only that in any case one must read that of Rosh Chodesh and the four parshiyos to publicize and to give notice, and consequently it is also in the law of study, the law of study in it is only secondary to the reading, since the reading itself is not for study. And for this reason it does not matter to us that this maftir reads it, even though his reading is not for obligation but only for the honor of the Torah, since in any case there is the publicizing from it, and also on account of the honor of the Torah he reads it also in the law of study consequently, and the reading of the maftir too is like the ordinance of this reading, both regarding the essence and regarding the secondary [aspect] in it. And therefore, since the law of study in it that requires that they recite Kaddish after it is only secondary, it emerges that it is secondary to the reading of the parsha whose essence is for study, like every maftir whose reading too is in the law of study, but since its essence is not for study but rather for the honor of the Torah, it is considered secondary to the essence of the reading, so too the reading of the four parshiyos and Rosh Chodesh and Chanukah, in which the study that requires it to a Kaddish is not the essence of the reading, is secondary to the essence of the reading, which is the parsha of Shabbos, and it is discharged with the Kaddish that is after the parsha, like every maftir. And the question of the Rabbi Yeshaya that the Beis Yosef brought is resolved, and it is our minhag and very correct.

Branch 3. And it emerges according to this that the Kaddish was instituted to be recited after they finished all the reading whose essence is for study. And if so, according to what I have explained, that the sum of those called up is only from the law of study, the verses of the reading of all seven olim are from the law of study, that they instituted that they should study on this Shabbos this parsha and divide it into seven olim. And if so, on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Teves, Adar and Nissan, when there are three sefarim, since they were compelled to institute that one of the seven olim should read the parsha of Rosh Chodesh, for they did not institute that they should read more than seven olim for obligation, they were consequently compelled to regard the parsha of Rosh Chodesh on this Shabbos too as part of the parsha of the day whose essence is for study, and it is considered that the parsha of the day was not completed until after the seventh read the parsha of Rosh Chodesh in the second sefer Torah. For therefore, even though according to the Rosh, if they finished the parsha with the sixth, the reading of the seventh is only secondary, because with six they finished also what the seventh needed to read, and if so they finished all that they instituted to study today, only that they did not study according to the ordinance with seven, and it emerges that they discharged the essence of the reading and the law of seven olim is only secondary—but on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh and the four parshiyos, where the seventh reads in that of Rosh Chodesh, even according to the Rosh it is part of the essence of the parsha that they instituted to read today for study, for even according to the Rosh, all that they instituted to read for the seven, that very thing is the parsha that they required to study today, and therefore the parsha is not considered completed until they also read that of Rosh Chodesh. And likewise, if the minhag were that the seventh should read in the third, it would be considered that the parsha was not completed until after all the readings, and the maftir would need to repeat.

And the language of the Rosh is very precise, that he wrote that they should not recite Kaddish until they finish the parsha, and he did not say until after they read seven olim, because the exactitude for the Kaddish is not in the reading of seven, only that what one must read for seven olim is the sign of how far the parsha extends, and one should not make a separation in the middle with Kaddish, and one must recite the Kaddish after the second [sefer] according to our minhag, where the seven olim are completed in the second, for in this it is considered that the parsha was completed, even though they finished the sidra in the first. And even b'dieved, if they recited Kaddish after the first, they would need to recite it a second time, just as if they recited it in the middle of the parsha, and only when they finished the parsha, where all seven needed to read in six, and they recited Kaddish, the Rosh holds that even the seventh who will read afterward is discharged, on account of being secondary, as it is stated in the Tur in his name, and there is no contradiction at all, and his approach is correct. End of his words.

And he continues to explain based on this the aforementioned difficult Pri Megadim, and unlike the Sha'arei Ephraim who built from it a binyan av; rather, according to what he raised, that one must recite Kaddish specifically after that which they instituted in the manner of study, and on Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Teves, where they instituted to read the parsha of Rosh Chodesh for the seventh, behold by the very fact of its belonging to the seven men of the reading of Shabbos, its nature was transformed to be of the type of reading that is in the manner of study! And therefore it is understood why the Pri Megadim holds that even according to the Rosh one should recite Kaddish once more in such a case, [and his words] are fitting and pleasant. It emerges that we have found a great tree to hold onto, not to recite Kaddish in the case at hand, for there are two points in our favor: that they already read seven men and finished the weekly parsha before they recited Kaddish, and that which remains to read of the parsha of Rosh Chodesh is secondary to the essence of the reading, and they did not institute a Kaddish over it at all, and also not over the addition that they read by mistake for the maftir in the weekly parsha.

And all this is halacha and not for practical application, in the category of one who instructs after the fact, to whom one does not listen^[23], and I have come only to offer a defense for myself, the one poor in deeds and short of understanding. And if I have erred, may Hashem the Good atone for me.