Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Can I fulfill the obligation of shnayim mikra by saying the pasuk two times and then the English translation one time?

share|improve this question
How good of a translation is it? Artscroll might work but I doubt JPS does. – Double AA Jul 11 '14 at 15:06
@DoubleAA I'm not sure I agree with the edit: true, it should be clarified that the translation is being used as the targum in 'shnaim mikra veechad targum', but it isn't agreed upon that the proper/required manner of doing so is pasuk by pasuk – Matt Jul 11 '14 at 15:08
I don't know enough to write an actual answer, but I believe that most agree that Rashi is a good substitute for Onkelos, so if you go the Chabad Daily Study website, read the Hebrew twice and the English once, and read Rashi's commentary (which is also available in English on the website), then that's a way to fulfill the mitzvah. The problem I see with the English alone is that Onkelos was an interpretative rather than a literal translation, so it is like reading a commentary as well as a translation. – Kordovero Jul 11 '14 at 15:20
@DoubleAA, Artscroll is not that accurate a translation as NJPS and likely on par with OJPS for accuracy. Personally I use Koren due to the scholarly nature thereof. – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 11 '14 at 15:36
@NoachmiFrankfurt That's my point. The less accurate the better. – Double AA Jul 11 '14 at 17:08

SA OC 285:1 States the requirement is 2 times mikra and 1 time Targum. It is clear from the commentaries that Targum means Targum Unkilus. 285:2 allows Rashi, stating the both are done by one who fears Heaven. MB 5 (and Be'er Heiteiv 3) quote the Taz, recomending a good explanatory text such as Tzeiena Ur'ena, to be used in place of Rashi, if the person is not holding by understanding Rashi.

So, for a translation of the p'sukim to fulfill the obligation, it must incorporate an explanation.

share|improve this answer
And for any names that are not translated one must either read the hebrew a third time or possibly the the transliteration. – user6591 Jul 11 '14 at 17:02
Why can't it be Targum Yonason? Or Neofiti? (And, yes, I know someone who did this after getting tired of Onkelos.) – Double AA Jul 11 '14 at 17:09
Did the mechaber even have access to those? – please delete me Jul 11 '14 at 17:53
@BoruchTkatch It's not unreasonable that he did, but even if not why should that matter? – Double AA Jul 11 '14 at 18:36
The meforshim say he meant Targum Unkilus. Whether Targum Yonoson and the others are (just as) acceptable, is not the question. Since we want to know what he meant, knowing what he had available is likely to matter. – please delete me Jul 11 '14 at 19:41

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.