Table Of Content. .
,.
· ... ·· .
Options and Limitations
ז
DANIEL SPERBER
Lf'iDIANA
uז-cדVERSl'I'"t
LIBRAR,Y
..- *·f""MUG·· · 1·
BLOכo . _ .· א... .-
י !Y--..נ ,,י "l!o·
...
·.· -·· ·.·_
URIM PUB,LI.CATIONS
Jen1s;alcm •· New York
Go g ,e
Original from
Digitized by
IND ANA UN
VERSlזY
On. Chan,ges i.n.Jcwis.h Liturgy:
Opcion.s and
Limiיtations
by Danicl Sperber
Co·pyright by Daniel Sperbcr
@ נ.010
AJI rights reserved" No parr of book may bc uscd or reproduced in any
·tlוis
manner whatsoever withour writtcn pcrmission from the copyright
ownerי
,exc:ept in the casc·o ·f bncf in and
quotations cmbodicd rcview.s
arזicles.
in
Printtוl lsrוul
First Edirion
978-9 ... S
I SBN: 65-s..ג.4 0,40 ...
Urim Publi.cacions, Box. s~18·7,Jerusalem lsr,acl
P~O .. 91s.2.1
Ty pcsct 'by Aricl Walden
Lambda Publishers lnc.
3709 13th Avcnuc Brooldyn, N'ew York U"S ..A .
111.18
Tel: 718-971-s.449 Fax: 718-97נ.•6307" [email protected]
www.
UrimPu.blicaיcions~com
g
Go e
from
Origiחal
Digitized by
ND ANA U IVERSJTY
-
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 9
The Complexity of thc: Hc:brc:w Prayc:r Book
21
Thc: Constant Evolution of Our Liturgical Text
24
The Variety Versions
ofLiזurgical
31
Blessings Offc:nsive סt Womc:n 33
Rc:commended Changc:s
41
s1
The Lc:gitimacy of Changc:
Nc:w Prayers and lnnovative Crc:ativity
S4
Talmudic Sources Forbidding Change in the Liturgy and
Maimonides's Undc:rstanding ofThem S7
Limits of Flexibility in Change 66
The Dynamic Process of Change in Our Liturgy
70
The Main Reasons for Change
72
Examples oflnternal Censorship 86
The Talmudic Sources Revisited 93
The Positions ofGeonim and Rishonim 96
Attempts to Fix a Single, Crystallized Version, and Their Failures 99
Nusah ha-Ari and the Hasidic Position
103
The Response of the Mitnaggedim
108
The lmpact of Printingon the Hebrew Prayer Book
114
The Pc:rmissibility ofMaking Changes
120
AFTERWORD 131
G oogle
Original from
Digitized by
INDIANA UNIVERSITY
- ~-~
..
. . ~. . . ---- ... - - .. -- .. -
,-
CONTENTS
APPENDICES
On the Licurgical Theories of Hasidei Ashkenaz 143
1.
Sevcn Versions ofB irkat Nahem 161
2..
3. The Ha-Siddur ha-Meduyak Affair 168
4. Corrupt Versions or Alternate Versions? 174
5. The Piyyutim Controversy 181
6. The Avodah Prayer - An Example of the Complex
Development of a Benediction 192.
7. "For Your Covenanc which You Sealed in Our Flesh"
199
8. On R. Meir's Three Benedictions 2.04
Index of Primary Sources 2.09
lndex of Prayer Books
2.11
lndex of Prayers, Benedictions and Piyyucim
2.13
General lndex
2.15
6
G oogle
Original from
Digitized by
INDIANA UNIVERSITY
8
Mishnah Berachot 4:4: R. Eliczcr says: Hc who trcats his praycr as a per•
functory obligation (.keva) - his prayer is no supplication.
trטc
8
BT Berachot 1.9b: What does leeva mcan? Rav Yosef [e xplains] ..• He who
h · ] ( · h ..
cannot ma-A1.·-:c some 1• nnovat1• on [ m.. ·· 1s prayer 1.c., cannot ש·· · re,ct 1s
י י.
hcart to rcqucst his needs - Rashi).
8
And whcn you prayי add to each and cvcry bcncdiction somediing suitable
to םi csscncc rclating to yo·ur own nccds"
G o .··. . e
i na m
סו·ig ו fו·o
Digitized by
JND ANA
UNIVERSJדY
g
Go e
i na m
סו·ig ו fו·o
Digitized by
JND ANA
UNIVERSJדY
INTRODUCTION
ln rcccnt ycars, there has bec.n a number ofi nitiativcs in thc Orthodox
growiתg
Jewish community to m:ake certain changes in the text ofo ur .liturgy. Orthodox
feminists have fel·r that it is too or, as Tamar Ross exprcssed it, it
male-orienו:cd
has an. "androcentric O·thers havc asscrtcd thac it does take into ac
bias.יי·i מ10t
count majo.r events that have raken place i.n our recent history. To cit-e scvc:ral
exam.ples, the Holocaust is hardly represented in the praye.rs our fast d.ays,
ס•f
hard.Jy any
the establishment of th•e Statc of lsrael receives mcntion (o th;er
than a. single prayer for th:e state1 nor does the re:טni.fi.cation of.J.erus·alem
),
Ross, Tamar. Expanding tht Palace of Torah: and Fe.minism. Waltham,
נ Oזthodoxy
M.A: 37·-38. Therc ,{:z.1) she writ,cs:·
2004., 2.1 •.
prayers are also phrased w.ith refcrence to men only. . T.he femal.e ,pro•
Staתdard
no,un appears only brackets, ifa t all. This same androcentric b.ias aJso applies
תi
to all classics ofJ ewish thought. Thus~ women the traditionaJ sources
readiתg
are: li.kely have thc sense of eavcsdropping on a m:ale"onl·y conversatio-.n.
oז
Women's do figur,e in thc discussio·n"
opiתioתs תot
On p. 2.s7, n .. 9S, she refcrs us, Rachel AdJer, "l Had Nothing, So I C,an't
oז 7VC
Take More" (Moment 8:8 [Septembcr 1983]: ..
z.~-ב3)
On Tamar Ross's book. scc thc rev.icw 'by Arye·h Frimer BDD ((2,007]:
תi 8נ
1
67-10,6), Ross's rejo,indc.r in BDD 19 93-1.:&3), and. rcply (ibi.d.,
·([:גooB]: Frimer·sי.
נzs-1i6)·.
O·.n the qucsti,o,n of the authors,hip of the prayer for State Jsrael, has
ב זhe ט•f theז•e
bee·n a gre:at deal of conuoversy. S·o.me suggcsted Agnont others Rabbi He.rzog, still
others Rab:bi Uziel. See thc articles by M. Hovav in HA~Tzofth and Shaul.
(11/10/'oב)
Schiff (ibid., 1,8/10/01-), erc ..
most recently Yoel Rapp,cl published an article (Maleor Rishon,
H-owיev•er,
19/9/.2;008, Shahbat proving most assenively and that it w.as
6-·ד). conviתcingly
Go .· • e
Original from
Digitized by
INDIANA UN VERSITY
C:HAN'GES JN J'EWISH. LIT'U.R.GY
אס
(o rhcr than on Jerusalem D·ay). Some ·of those who live in lsracl reci.te in the
Grace· afc•er Meals: ••• and not •May
בארצנר קרםםירת ידליכנר הוא י,הרחכון רצנו.-לא·
the Merciful One ... lead us upright in our r.ather than "to our land."·
land,מ 3
the
Others have ,expressed the unsuitability of the formulation of
Nיahem
praycrt whic,h is rccited in ,the afternoon prayer on the Ninth. of Av:
העיר ת.וא
- '"th,c c.i.ty [i.c.,Jerus.alem.] .in .in ruins,
רהשרכוםה זדיה.רהב והחרבה האבלה moטrn:ing,
defiled and c·mpty·• (i.e.,,a ruincd ghost town_), .in.v icw oft he radical historical
changes th,at havc altcred the face ofm odern-... day Jerusalcm. Further ex.amples
4
could be given. 5
Rabb-i Herzo-g who composed the prayer and that Agnon made only the most minor
1
editorial changcs. He also lists seve·ral carli,cr ancmpts by vario-us rabb-is to formulate
such a prayer. He: statcs that his book on this subject will appe·ar .shonly.
3 This change ap_pears in Ha-Sjdd.,ur·h a~Meduya/c (see b,elow app. and apparen·tly
ב),
was :first i,nuo-duccd by R. Shl.omo Goren, the Chicf Rabbi of Is.rael. Needless ·to say,
thi,s emendati.on was also bitterly attacked in the· pamphlet:K o·vetz li-·G8dor-Peretz,,
42 (app. 3).
va ...
in Isb pub.lished .i.n Yaan Shmuel (vol" 3.
Funhermoreי Kuמtres M11.tzliahי
332.) the au.thor points out ·that t,his is th:e version ·found in R. Moshe Hagiz's
:בooo,
manuscript resp,ons·um, cited by R.. Hayyim Sitho.n, in his Eretz Hayyim, sec. 60"
who writes R. Moshe b·en Haviv also had this version. ., So" to,o, .is R. Yaakov
יthat
Hagiz s Halacb,ot (vol" sec. Hcncc, this vcrsion has ,a. fine pe·digre·e
1 Ketaמot 1, 18s)י.
indeed.
4 See app. .
2..
s
I should like to quotc fro.m Rabb-i Jules Harl-ow's c·ssay~ "Thc Siddur· and the
Contemporary Community" (in Prayer in]uda.ism.· and e·dited
Coמtinui'ty ·Chaמge,
by G. H. Cohen and H., Fish, 2.03. Nashville., New Jers-ey and London: 199,6):,
A conccrn for contcmporary relevance is not some·thing invented only with the
.appeacan.ce oft hese booklcts [i"e ... thc 17s booldets
coתtain.i.ng eנ:perimental seז-·
vi-ce.s and fro.m Reform and the Unitcd
readiתgs, Conservaזive congregatioתs תi
States tha.t he co:l)ected; see ibid. . , If you wil,I p•r,ayer books pub
2.01]. coת.sidcr
lished with Eng)ish uanslatio.ns in States in ·this ccnrury, including
זhe Uמit~d
the Sabbath and Fe:stival Prayerboo.k published for the On.hodo-:x: Rabb.inical
Co·uncU of America in 1960 edited b,y Ra.bbi D,avid De Sola Pool, you
aתd שw
see that they suppl.e.mentary p·rayers, usually set up as responsive read. ..
contaiת
ings, various topical subj;ects ofg cneraJ as well as Jewish .. Such read-
·תO coתcerת,
are collected at the cnd of the book, or at the end of sec•·
iתgs geתerally fo·uתd
Thc are bowever. in, t.h.at their compilers obviously
זions" bookleם diffe·reתt,
feel that the new matcrial s.hould. bc int·c_gral to the: fabric of a scrvic:e, that ·y·ou
should not have ·to look to thc back of the book :for the rdevant readin,gs, that
they· pan of th.e. service .itself.
זa,e
.1 ·wouJd. Jike to run through some of t.he most popular themes in the .ncw
G o g e
0 i g i a f ,. m
&ו ח ו ס
10
Digitized by
JNDIANA U IVERSJTY
INTRODU·CT'ION
lndeed, there seems be evidenc·e for the le.gitimacy of such change in
to,
a passage in the Talmud (BT Joma
69b)י:
R" Ychoshua bcn Lev.i said: Why wcrc thcy call.cd .Ansh~i ha•G~JoLJ,
Kenםs~t
Asscmbly) '? thcy c·o
(Mcn of the Great For crown its ,erstwhilc·
retטmcd וd.e·
[gl•ory]. M·oses camc and said., •God, thc great. and the awcsomc
·dוc mighז:y,.
·(Dcut. 17) .. Camc Jcremiah and said, •,G,entilcs are cackling in His holy·s anc
10:
say
Where is His awcsomencss,?• Hc did not Came Daniel
aנary. "awesome.י
,and said, "Gc.ntiles arc· His childrcn. Whcrc is His might ?·• H'c
subjיugating
"o··
d_•·d . not· say • m1· g_.1··. ·ו ty~• Th. en· th_ c·y ··· ca·m e and _· s·a 1· d_ -uL1 c· c· ontrar· y, th 1·S 1·s . t_-h·_ c
ו י מ י
1, - · ·
•of H'is.m ightiness: thar he His and sh.ows pro
strcngdו overcס·mes .inclinaזio·ns
longed mercy to the wicked. lt is His aw,esomcnc-ss, for wcre it not for His awe•
somc naturc, how could a singlc pc·ople survivc among thc nations ?"
T.hc mean.ing is that they .rcinsta~ed .Moscs's original formulations. Surely
from here we may learn that at cen.ai,n ,changes i.n the lirurgy could be
times,,
ma.terial: Often .found as a s,ort o:f lu,uvauh, or
S1if-uמthrs·t11nding. d~voו:ional
·ro a s,ervice. Brothnhoo.d" This th,e in the Unitcd
iתtroducזion refie,cזs. situaזion
States, nor so much at moment,. c!ena.inly .in previ.ous years. There were
זhjs buז
a number of readings 'brotherhoo,d, trying to• reflect thc fact that black
תם.
and white, rich an,d poor, are brothers. AII men are cr·ca.ted •equal.
Democrונcy.
Ght.ttoes. in the· Unite•d States. days, ghetto does
Int·erestiתgly, theseי מot meaת
a wher·e J,ews live .. whcn,ever the word appears thesc booklets,
placeי Aתd תi
as the newspapcrs. it refcrs to ·thc· "bla,ck. ghcttoc·s." .Poverty. Love,, Holiness ..
תi
Pollution. Ecology and pollution are very muc·h. the minds of'c hildren and
תo,
adults" Thc thre,at of disaster is mor·c real for them. rhan th.e threat
ecologi.caנ
of by a .. Co.ncer.n over· .an,d poll.ut·io-n aniculates.
cniתction cnנsade r~actioת ו:o
peop.le f~el" EspeciaJly the war in Vietnam. Peace"
somethiתg thaז Waז. Violeוu:e.
For more stri,cdy Jewish themes: Soviet Jcwry, Je'WS in Arab lands, lsrael,
Jerusalem, Six Day War, the Holocaust. and Jew.ish commitment head
זhe
the list.
We may. for cxample ,call to the addit.ion found the C.onservati.ve siddur.
atteתtion תi
s,
Sim Shalom (N•ew York: 19 8.9 י) 414- 41. in the mi•s·he-יberוגth after the Torah re·ading
on Shabbat, which has:
And al.l who devoted.ly involve thems,el.ves with
רובצי יכר,צב םיקסועש ם' לכו
r
the needs of this community Aמd the Land of .. ... הנומבא caלוום• cרין בננו
lsrael"
Se·e the introd.uction by the Rabb1Jules Harlow, ibid., xxii.
editס•r,
Go g ,e
Original from
11
Digitized by
IND ANA UN
VERSlזY
ON IN JEWISH LITUR.GY
יC:HANGES
by
and wcre made ·(albeit according to this, passage) v.iew of the
prophetsי מi
cont,emporary
cir·cשnstances.6
On the other hand, there is a commonly ;accepted notion that one ,may
not make any change in our standard liturgy.,T his notion was very dearly and
forcefully articulaced by Rab'bi Hirz Scheur, rabbi ofM inz, in hi.s letter, ·whic·h
was printed in Eleh divrei ha-bnt (These .Are the Words of the Covenant) a
1
,
documcnt published by order of the Orthodox of Hamburg. in
Co·mmט.nity
Al·tona i.n
18.19::
No changes .in prayers are permittcd. This pertains not mcrely to prayers.e stab
lishcd more than two thousand ycars ago by· die Men of the Assc·mbly.
יGreat
but also to latcr· t.raditional praycrs ofA shkcnazim and S,efaradim. By the least
change, the origi.nally mcaning woul,d be alcercd .... Changing thc
inזended
conte·nt and text of our praye.rs is the wont from the ]ewish .fizith
aheוratitנn
[cmphasis mine - D. S!!], since the regular· prayers constitutc our basic servicc
in place o:f the s.acrifices. Changing che praycrs would split Judaism into two
religions.
7
sB.
6 See. R. remarks on this passage in So,me great
HayyimNavoת's Tzoh1גr32, (.ג,008):
sc.ho)ars did indeed suggest radical ch.anges in thcir praycrs, Thus, R. Yehiel Michel
Epstcin, in his work Orah Hayyim writcs:
Anu:hי ha-Sh.ulhaמ, 42.s:ג,
Know that 1. have always questioתed our versi.on as it appears in Ata yaturta
(from. the mu.na/.prayer of Shabbac Rosh Hodesh), .in which. after the phras,e
ערן לםnילת one says: יקדשך ושכת .... בחרת ·ישראל םן,בע כי1• ecc. Why does one not say:
.. , שםך םקרסזי ישראל נר ,ינוחו .... ררnיוילנו .. ,. בתורתן חלקכן רתך בםצmז ,קרשם ,continuing:
For surely on every fest.ival falJs. on Shabb.at, and so on Ro,sh
ישראל כעסך "כי זhat
ha. ... Shanah and Yom t.hat fall. Shabba·r,. we recite this text,
ha-יIGppurim תo
which is the essence of'l udushat Shab·bat, at the en•d of the middle
beתedicti.on,
and why should. we not recite it Rosh Hodesh that falls on Shabbat? 1n the
O·ת
Scfardi ve.rsion, this indeed is the ve.rsion. 1n my opinion, this is from
missiתg
the Ashkenazic edition.s, I am acc:ustomed to saying iti for I see rcason
aתd oת
n.ot to do so. But I have found no who on this issue"
תo,c commenזcd
1n other words, this great authority wish:ed t,o add some twcnty-·fivc wo.rds to
the ,commonly accepted vcrsion:!
See further in the dis.cussion" and an ex.planation .for this "lacuna," in Mavo le
,Siddur Maharsba by R.,Y itzhak Satz (Baltimore·: 464-478).
2-002.,
:1 have foUowcd the ,o:f Alexander .his The Struggle over
7 translatioתs Guttmaת.n, תi
Reform in Rabbinic during the Las.t a:nd a Half and
Literatuזe Ceמ.tury י(Jerusalem
NewYork: 1977,
oזג:·-ו.זנ).
Go
Original from
11
Digitized by •·- _ _e --..
INDIANA U JVERSITY
" .
- -
