Why is Parshat Ha'azinu Written in Two Columns?

Parshat Ha’azinu’s layout in the Torah scroll is different from any other parshah.1 Unlike the rest of the Torah, it appears as a block of text split into two narrow parallel columns, forcing the reader to jump back and forth from column to column. Here, we will explore why Ha’azinu is written in two columns specifically.

The Talmudic Sages established special formats for writing the “songs” (poetic sections) in Scripture. The general rule is:

All the songs in Scripture are written in the form of a half-brick over a whole brick, and a whole brick over a half-brick, with the exception of this one (a reference to the section of the Megillah which records the death of Haman’s sons) and the kings of Canaan (Joshua 12), which are written half-brick over half-brick and whole brick over whole brick.2

In simpler terms, most biblical songs are written in an alternating pattern of staggered lines—a short line above a long line, then a long line above a short line—resembling interlocking bricks. This is the layout used, for example, for the Song of the Sea.3 The Talmud points out two notable exceptions—the list of Haman’s sons in the Book of Esther4 and the Canaanite kings in the Book of Joshua5—which are written in a fully aligned format, short over short, long over long, forming two columns.

"Half-brick over a whole brick, and a whole brick over a half-brick" as it appears in Song of the Sea.

Rabbi Yosef Y. Rabin, Craft Sofer

Both those texts list the downfall of evil individuals, the Talmud explains, and writing them as solid brick columns symbolizes that “they should never rise again from their downfall.”

In all other songs, the normal staggered format is used.

What About Ha’azinu?

Ha’azinu as it appears in the Sefer Torah of Bologna, the oldest complete Torah scroll known to exist, dated to the 12th century.

The Torah explicitly refers to Ha’azinu as a song: “Write this song for yourselves, and teach it to the Children of Israel,”6 G‑d commands Moses, which Rashi and others understand to refer to the poetic verses of Ha’azinu.7 Unlike the Song of the Sea, however, Ha’azinu is not written in the staggered “brickwork” format but in two side-by-side columns. Why the difference? And if it is indeed an exception to the Talmud’s rule, then why is it not mentioned with the other two exceptions?

The key is to note that the Talmud only speaks of instances where we have half-bricks upon half-bricks and whole bricks upon whole bricks, implying an asymmetrical arrangement, which is indeed the case in Joshua and Esther. This song, on the other hand, says Rabbeinu Nissim of Gerona, known as the Ran, is divided neatly into two equal-sized columns.8

This also explains why we do not find Ha’azinu mentioned as being written “half-brick over half-brick and full-brick over full-brick” in Masechet Soferim, in the rulings of Maimonides, the Tur, or the Shulchan Aruch—as we do with the sons of Haman. Alternatively, Meiri explains that this section of Talmud is only concerned with songs that celebrate miracles; since this is not the case with Ha’azinu, it is not included.9

The Source for Ha’azinu’s Unique Formatting

Now that we have explained the Talmud’s rule and why it doesn’t reference Ha’azinu, we must address the more basic question: If not the Talmud, what is, in fact, the source for Ha’azinu’s unique format?

The truth is somewhat murky and the text cited as the source is somewhat perplexing.

Let's begin with Maimonides, who writes:

This is the form for the song Ha’azinu. Each line should have an empty space in the middle as appropriate for a “closed” paragraph break (i.e., a space that can contain nine letters). Thus, each line will be divided into two (thus the song will appear in two columns).10

A “closed” paragraph break (setumah) as it appears in a Torah Scroll.

Although Maimonides does not provide a source, Rabbeinu Asher, known as the Rosh, writing approximately 100 years later, does:

The forms of the songs are explained in Masechet Soferim (chapter 12): the Song of Ha’azinu is written with a space in the middle of each line, equal in width to a closed paragraph break. Thus, every line is divided into two sections. The beginnings of the lines are also written in Masechet Soferim (chapter 12), and Maimonides, of blessed memory, recorded them as well—though he made some small changes.”11

The Rosh cites Masechet Soferim—a post-Talmudic work, part of the group known as the minor tractates (masechtot ketanot) which were compiled shortly after the close of the Talmud. However, if you peruse the text as it exists today (often printed at the end of tractate Avodah Zara in the Talmud), the citation of the Rosh does not appear in the text.

The layout of Ha’azinu is referenced twice in the text, once in chapter one, which states:

If Ha’azinu Hashamayim was arranged like the Song at the Sea, or if the Song at the Sea was arranged like Ha’azinu, the scroll may not be used for the reading (in the synagogue).12

It is clear that Ha’azinu is to be written in a distinct format, but that the format is not specified. Later, in Chapter 12, more detail is given:

R. Jose b. Abin said: For the Song of Ha’azinu, not less than six persons are to be called up … It must also be provided with the space of a full line above it and of a full line below it … A mnemonic sign for the beginnings of the lines is the following: ha’azinu, ya‘arof, kise‘irim

… The Song at the Sea and the Song of Deborah are written in the form of a half-brick over a whole brick, and a whole brick over a half-brick.13

Nowhere is it explicitly stated that it must be written with a break in the middle, as Rosh et al assert. (Although some infer from the details in Masechet Soferim that some spacing in the lines must be present.14) This led the Gaon of Vilna to conclude that the text of Masechet Soferim as we have it today is not fully accurate, and the description cited by the Rosh was once in the text but was lost over the generations.15

(It must be noted that a 14th-century manuscript held at Oxford University's Bodleian Library, checked by this author, has the text as it appears in print today with no amendments.16)

The Reason for the Two-Column Format

Ha’azinu as it appears in the Codex Sassoon, dated circa 10th century.

In sum, we have traced the Talmud’s omission and identified the sources that establish the formatting of Ha’azinu. What we have not yet explained, however, is why its layout is distinct—unlike the format used for the other songs in Scripture.

In the section of Talmud cited above, the Sages provide a reason for the two-column format used for the sons of Haman:

What is the reason (that these songs are written in this anomalous fashion)? So that they should never rise from their downfall.17

Meaning that just as a wall built brick upon brick, without any overlap, cannot endure, so these individuals have fallen never to rise again. Or, as the Ran explains, when a wall is perfectly even on both sides, with no protrusions, nothing further can be added to it. Only when there are jutting edges—like the teeth of a wall—can more be built upon it. In this case, the uniformity of the structure indicates a downfall from which there is no recovery.

The Ran continues to explain why Ha’azinu is also written this way: since it “speaks of the downfall of the wicked,” for example, it contains verses about G‑d’s vengeance against Israel’s enemies, “He will avenge the blood of His servants … and wreak vengeance upon His adversaries.”18 In this respect, Ha’azinu shares the theme of the downfall of evildoers, similar to the lists of Haman’s sons. Ran therefore asserts that Ha’azinu is also written in the aligned “brick over brick” pattern for the same symbolic reason: to show that the downfall of the wicked described in the song will never be rebuilt.