Megillah 24a — the Talmud in English

And with the Navi:

he may read to the translator even

three

verses, if he wishes, for we do not care if he errs, since a ruling does not emerge from the reading of the Navi.

And if

all three were—

the three verses—

three sections [

and the Gemara explains where we find a case in which he reads three verses in three sections ]—

they read and

translate

one by one.

One may skip in the

They may skip in the reading of the

Navi

from one section to another.

But one may not skip in the

reading of the

And they may not skip in the reading of the

Torah, because one who hears the reader skipping from place to place does not have his mind settled.

And how far may he skip

in the Navi?

Until

the time

that

Until the time

he rolls the scroll to the place of the skipping— the translator should not stop

from reading the translation of the verses that the reader has already read, because if he stops, the congregation will have to remain silent, and this is not the honor of the congregation.

Gemara:

These three verses

from which one does not reduce in the reading of the Torah—

corresponding to whom

are they read?

Rav Asi said: Corresponding to Torah, Prophets, and Writings.

We learned in our Mishna:

“And he should not read to the translator more than one verse, and in the Navi”—

“three verses. And if all three were three sections”—

“he reads one by one.”

What are three verses in three sections like?

For example: “For thus said the Lord: You were sold for nothing”; “For thus said the Lord God: To Egypt My people went down at first”; and “And now, what have I here, declares the Lord” [

they are not literally three sections; rather, since they are three different matters, they are considered like three sections. Ran and Ritva ] .

We learned in our Mishna:

“They may skip in the Navi, but they may not skip in the Torah.”

And we raise a contradiction:

the High Priest

would read

on Yom Kippur in the section of

“After the death,” and “But on the tenth.” Yet he is skipping,

for the reading of “But on the tenth” is in the section of Emor!?

Abaye said: It is not difficult. Here,

the matter of our Mishna—

it is in a manner that the translator will stop,

and in this manner they do not skip.

And

in the other case,

And here,

in the beraita—

it is speaking of a manner in which the translator will not stop,

and therefore they skip.

And we raise an objection:

But [

concerning it ]

it teaches

in our Mishna that

“they may skip in the Navi, but they may not skip in the Torah. And how far may he skip

in the Navi”—

“until the translator will not stop. It follows that in the Torah—

not at all

do they skip, even in a manner in which the translator will not stop!?

Rather, Abaye said: It is not difficult. Here,

the matter that we said, that they may skip—for example, in the reading of the High Priest, where the two readings

concern one matter

and both speak about the matter of Yom Kippur, and in this manner there is no confusion of mind.

But

here,

the matter of the Mishna, that they may not skip—

it concerns

skipping between

it is speaking of skipping between two matters,

for example, from the section of leprosy-afflictions to the section of gonorrheic men.

And it was taught [

agreeably, a proof for the matter ]:

“They may skip in the Torah”—

“within one matter, and in the Navi”—

even

“between two matters.”

Here and here,

whether in the Torah or in the Navi—specifically

in a manner in which the translator will not stop.

It was taught in another beraita: “They may not skip from one Navi

one

to another Navi,

because there is excessive confusion of mind here.

But in the Navi of the Twelve—

he may skip

even from one Navi to another.

Provided that he does not skip from the end of the book—

to

the

to its beginning,

that is, he should not read it backward.

Mishna:

The one who concludes with the Navi—

the Sages instituted that

he

also be

the one who leads the Shema,

and he leads before the prayer stand

to discharge the congregation’s obligation with the Kedusha in the prayer,

and he raises his hands

if he is a kohein.

And if the one who concludes with the Navi was

the one who concludes with the Navi

a minor—

his father or his teacher

leads before the prayer stand on his account.

That is, for his sake.

A minor reads in the Torah,

and translates.

But he does not lead the Shema,

since he comes to discharge the congregation’s obligation, and one who is not obligated in a matter cannot discharge others’ obligation.

And he does not lead before the prayer stand—

for this reason.

And he does not raise his hands,

because it is not the honor of the congregation to be subordinate to his blessing.

One whose

that is, a person whose legs are visible—

leads the Shema,

for he is obligated in the blessing.

And he translates.

But he does not read in the Torah

because of the honor of the Torah,

and

likewise

and likewise he does not lead before the prayer stand, nor does he raise his hands,

because it is disgraceful for the congregation.

The

blind person leads the Shema,

and translates.

Rabbi Judah says: Every

blind person

who has never seen lights in his life—

does not lead the Shema,

for since he has never benefited from light, he cannot recite the blessing “Creator of the luminaries” [and the Rabbis hold that even a blind person benefits from light, as follows in the Gemara].

Gemara:

What is the reason

the Sages instituted that the one who concludes with the Navi should lead the Shema, etc.?

Rav Pappa said: Because of honor.

That is, because he presented himself for a matter that is beneath his honor, for concluding with the Navi is not regarded as important, they instituted matters for his honor.

Rabba bar Shimi said: Because if

Rabba bar Shimi said: Because if not for this,

they would come to quarrel.

For the one who concludes will say: “I conclude with the Navi for nothing, and this one leads the Shema? Is he greater than I, that he merited to lead the Shema, to lead before the prayer stand, and to receive payment for this”?!

What is the difference between them,

between these reasons?

There is a difference between them

where it is customary

that

the one who leads the prayer

that the one who leads before the prayer stand does so for nothing.

There is no quarrel, for he does not care that another should lead before the prayer stand, since no payment is received for this. But there is [still] the matter of honor.

We learned: “And if the one who concludes with the Navi was

the one who concludes

a minor”—

“his father or his teacher leads on his account.”

And

if you say

If you say that the reason

is because of quarrelling,

is he, and is

a minor capable of quarrelling?!

And we ask:

Rather, what

is the reason?

Because of honor!?

And is

a minor capable of [receiving] honor?!

Rather,

necessarily, the reason is that honor is relevant in the case of a minor,