Some mistakes in the Torah reading are significant enough to require repeating words, whereas some are not.[1] Furthermore, repeating words in order to fix the mistake can introduce other concerns. If the pasuk in question contains HaShem’s Name, two primary issues must be considered. One is the general concern to avoid saying HaShem’s Name unnecessarily; repetition ostensibly causes one of the readings of the Name to be superfluous. Another issue is that we are generally not supposed to recite only a part of a pasuk.[2] How, then, does one correct a mistake while both maintaining the sanctity of HaShem’s Name and minimizing tampering with the completeness of the pasuk?
The earliest source[3] we have found on this topic is the Chayei Adam.[4] He writes that one may repeat part of a pasuk if he wants to make a correction (apparently even when it is not critical); he need not return to the beginning of the pasuk. Repetition is permitted even when it entails repeating HaShem’s Name. The Chayei Adam explains that we do not view the repetition as tantamount to reading only part of a pasuk or as inappropriately reciting a Name, but rather as completing a pasuk that was, in effect, incomplete because of the mistake.
In order to clarify this position, we will present a hypothetical example. Let us take the following pasuk: A-B-C-NAME-D-E-F. The ba’al korei made a mistake at C, but he only realized it at D, after he had said HaShem’s Name.
According to the Chayei Adam, the ba’al korei should return to C and read from there again until the end of the pasuk. Although he will thus read only part of the pasuk, and he will also be repeating HaShem’s name, this is the appropriate course of action under the circumstances. Various poskim have cited this ruling as the authoritative source.[5]
Two respected, yet not commonly studied sefarim arrive at a different ruling while presenting an apparently incorrect understanding of the above Chayei Adam. The Chesed La’Alafim and Sha’arei Rachamim[6] write that if one realizes that he erred after having already read HaShem’s Name, such that he will have to repeat the Name in order to correct the mistake, he should stop at that point and return to the beginning of the pasuk. The ba’al korei need not complete the reading of the pasuk first. Thus, upon realizing his mistake at D, he should immediately return to A and read the whole pasuk again. These authorities explain that although it will turn out that the ba’al korei did not complete the pasuk in its first reading, it is proper to return immediately to the beginning of the pasuk so that the entire pasuk with HaShem’s Name will be read properly. They posit, unlike the premise of the Chayei Adam, that repeating HaShem’s Name is problematic if one does so in the context of a partial pasuk, even though the intention is to turn the incomplete pasuk into a complete and correct one.
The Tzitz Eliezer[7] claims convincingly that the Chayei Adam should be understood as we previously cited him. Thus, there is no need to restart a pasuk in order to avoid the repetition of HaShem’s Name in a partial pasuk. It is possible that the other sources understood the Chayei Adam as they did because they were already aware of a minhag to return to the beginning of the pasuk. In fact, the Tzitz Eliezer concedes that the minhag does not follow the view of the Chayei Adam, but rather is to restart the pasuk, and he posits that one should conform to the minhag.
Furthermore, the Tzitz Eliezer writes that the minhag is to first complete the pasuk so as not to leave it unnecessarily incomplete, and to then return to the beginning of the pasuk. Thus, upon realizing his mistake at D, the ba’al korei should finish reading until F and then return to A and read the entire pasuk again. Admittedly, if the mistake renders the reading invalid, completing the pasuk may not have full value. Considering this, we can understand the Tzitz Eliezer’s distinction that if one has to recite another Name in order to complete the pasuk (between D and F), he should rather “cut his losses” and revert immediately to the beginning of the pasuk, as the Chesed La’Alafim recommended. Note that if the mistake occurred before or after reading HaShem’s Name in such a way that one can make the correction without repeating the Name,[8] there is neither need nor justification to return to the beginning of the pasuk.
Since all of the systems that one can employ are reasonable, a gabbai can allow the ba’al korei to act as he is accustomed. He should not confuse the ba’al korei by instructing him to do otherwise. (In a case in which he will do something as confusing as repeating a whole pasuk, banging civilly on the bima or otherwise alerting the congregation that something out of the ordinary will be occurring is often advisable.) Those who do the correcting should also consider whether their proposed correction is indeed warranted,[9] especially in proximity to HaShem’s Name,[10] in order to avoid the confusion that often results, as we have seen.