Explanation: This is a decree due to people who enter, lest they err to say that the one who read before read only two verses.

Question #1: Our custom is to read Parshah "va'Ychal" on fast days. The first Oleh begins there. It is two verses after the previous Parshah!

Question #2: On Chol ha'Mo'ed Pesach [and the final Yom Tov], the Maftir begins from "v'Hikravtem", which is two verses from the start of the Parshah!

Answer: These Parshiyos are different, for everyone knows them, and will not err about them.

Support: Likewise, in Parshas Rosh Chodesh, the third reads "uv'Yom ha'Shabbos." We are not concerned lest people who enter say that the third read only the two verses starting from "uv'Yom ha'Shabbos", for everyone knows [that he begins before this].

Note: Perhaps everyone knows these Parshiyos because we read them so often. We read va'Ychal nine times a year, Parshas Rosh Chodesh about 13 times, and v'Hikravtem on six consecutive days! According to our tradition of Parshah breaks, va'Ychal (Shmos 32:11) was not difficult, for it is four verses into the Parshah (Maharsha). We could say that v'Hikravtem is known, for people know that the Maftir is from a second Sefer Torah (and even when it is not, the Maftir repeats verses already read), so we may not infer how much the previous Oleh read. Tosfos connotes that even if one begins or ends a Parshah, he should not do so if the Parshah is less than three verses. It seems that our custom is not concerned for this. We begin Chamishi of Mishpatim after a Parshah of one verse, and begin Revi'i of Re'eh with a Parshah of two verses. We do not totally rely on the fact that people know the Keri'ah of Rosh Chodesh, for the second or third (there are two customs about this) repeats from what the previous Oleh read, to avoid reading less than three verses in a Parshah!

Also, they should think that if so (the third read only two verses), he should not have stopped when he reached the Parshah [of Musaf Rosh Chodesh], for it is like the Parshah he ended with [Musaf Shabbos].

Note: Why won't they say that he left Parshas Musaf Rosh Chodesh for the fourth Oleh? Presumably, it is unreasonable to read only two and leave five for the fourth, if not for the Isur to end one or two verses into a Parshah. One who knows the Isur, knows that it was decreed because one must read at least three verses!

Explanation #1 (Rashi): According to the opinion that one breaks (reads a half-verse), this is not difficult at all. Since the first read three verses, there is no longer a reason to break.

Note: It seems that Rashi's and Tosfos' text did not say "ul'Man d'Amar Posek Nifsok." According to our text, there is no question.

Objection: The one who says that we break, he agrees that we would repeat, if not for the decree due to people who enter and leave;

Here, granted, we cannot fix what the first one did, i.e. he misled those who left, for they will think that the next will read only two verses...

However, in any case we should fix matters lest those who enter err, for they will see the second begin two verses before the Parshah. (They will think that it was permitted for the previous one to leave two verses before the Parshah. The second should repeat half a verse to fix this (Malei ha'Ro'im)! Perhaps Rashi holds that since we cannot fix matters for the majority who were in the Beis ha'Keneses, we do not fix for the minority who enter. Also, this is like decree for a decree, since even if one who entered will come to err and leave two verses before the Parshah, this is forbidden only lest others err. Tosfos holds that we should fix whatever we can. Perhaps since it is very prone to happen, it is as if this is all one decree (PF). Tzlach suggests that the text of Tosfos should say "Yotzim" in place of Nichnasim. The Makshan was concerned for people who will leave during the Keri'ah. They will think that he will read only two verses. He should repeat half the verse before the two verses to fix this!)

Explanation #2: Rather, this is not difficult for the opinion that one breaks. He answers properly that here (Ma'amados), there is no solution [without breaking]. However, when it is possible [to avoid concern for error] without breaking (e.g. in the Beraisa, when one can read three verses of the next Parshah), surely we do not break.

However, according to the opinion that we repeat, this is difficult. (In the Beraisa, the latter should repeat the last verse read! The Gemara answers that also he holds that we repeat only when there is no alternative.)

Question: Why do we [in Chutz la'Aretz] have the custom during Chol ha'Mo'ed Sukos, that [the first three read the Korban Musaf of three different days of Sukos, and] the fourth reads all that two [of them] read (i.e. the Musaf of the two days about which we have a Safek)?

Here, we permit to repeat or break only when it is impossible [not to], and even when there are [concerns for misleading] people who enter or leave! (Here, all four could read the Musaf of different days.)

Assertion: However, obviously if the one before the end reads until two verses before the end of the Parshah on Pesach or Shavu'os, the last one repeats above (the last verse he read);

He does not read the two verses he left over and into the Parshah afterwards, since it is not relevant to the day.

Question: In Chagigah (18a), we say that Rosh Chodesh refutes [the suggested Kal va'Chomer]. It has Korban Musaf, and one may do Melachah on it!

Answer: Surely, men may do Melachah on Rosh Chodesh. However, women are forbidden, since they did not remove their rings [to donate them] to make the golden calf [so it became a Yom Tov for them].

Question: Perhaps it is R. Yosi. It means that always, three read, and the fourth, i.e. Maftir, is [another] one. We need not say that he is one of the three!

Answer: Just like according to the first Tana, we cannot say that "one Maftir" is the fourth, for he holds that less read on Tish'ah b'Av when it falls on Tuesday or Wednesday than on a regular Monday or Thursday...

If so, presumably he is not more stringent when Tish'ah b'Av falls on Monday or Thursday to obligate a fourth Aliyah. He is stringent only to read Maftir (i.e. a Haftorah);

Similarly, according to R. Yosi, the Maftir is one of the three who read.

Question: Didn't he know that he can answer this? Did he initially think that it is forbidden without spreading hands and feet?!

Answer: Initially, he forbade mid'Rabanan without spreading hands and feet;

At the end, he says alternatively, you can say that there is no Isur mid'Rabanan. Rav spread hands and feet. The Torah forbids this.

Question: However, according to the first version, which forbids mid'Rabanan without spreading hands and feet, in our Batei Kenesiyos that have a [stone] floor, why may the Shali'ach Tzibur fall on his face?

Answer: It seems that he leans to the side. Therefore, it is permitted.

Support: Below, we bring from Berachos 34b "I saw Abaye and Rava lean to the side (during Nefilas Apayim, i.e. Tachanun)." Rav Hai Gaon explained like this.

Explanation: The Yerushalmi says that this is when he prays for the Tzibur. When he prays by himself, it is fine.

Observation: We do not derive this from the verse, for it says also "Apayim Eretz Yishtachavu Lecha"!

Rather, he had a tradition from his Rebbi that "Kidah" applies to on the face.