Yoel Kahn traces the history of this prayer from its extra-Jewish origins to the present, demonstrating how different generations and communities understood the significance of these words. Marginalized and persecuted groups used this prayer to mark the boundary between "us" and "them," affirming their own identity and sense of purpose. After the medieval Church seized and burned books it considered offensive, new, coded formulations of the three blessings emerged as forms of spiritual resistance.
Book owners voluntarily expurgated the passage to save the books from being destroyed, creating new language and meaning while seeking to preserve the structure and message of the received tradition. During the Renaissance, Jewish women defied their rabbis and declared their gratitude at being "made a woman and not a man. Ships within weeks. Not available in stores.
Most rabbis in Germany were appointed to serve an entire community, and the liturgies they created had to serve a broad spectrum of the community.
Any innovations introduced to attract more reform-inclined Jews also had to accommodate the needs and values of the traditionally observant members of the community. The full articulation of the values of the early Reform rabbis had to be moderated in prayer books intended for general use as a replacement for the THE THREE BLESSINGS traditional prayer book in a community synagogue, and sometimes ended up being much more traditional than the editors themselves would have personally chosen.
The majority of the congregation was expected to read the nonliteral translation in German.
Maier intended for his book to be read silently in the synagogue as a companion to the traditional, public liturgy; it was not intended for public congregational use. Later editors printed these and similar alternative vernacular texts, which had been originally printed in separate volumes, in a single book with the minimally changed Hebrew original on the facing page.
A prime complaint that motivated European synagogue reformers of all kinds was the excessive length of the worship service. Because the introductory section was not part of the statutory liturgy, and was considered to have been intended originally for private devotion, it was eliminated from most of the abbreviated rites. For Geiger and many of his contemporaries, the vernacular translation was the most important part of the printed liturgy.
Indeed this technique of non-literal translation became a major vehicle. Notwithstanding his editing of the Hebrew, Geiger wrote a completely new paragraph for the German translation that bears no connection to the form, and only a vague relation to the content, of the blessings it represented. With each morning, our sight greets the light of day. You are praised, O God!
Aub, 58 I praise you and thank You, O God, for having given humans the ability to know You and for having called Israel to your service. Praised are you, Lord, our God, who has made Israel the guardian, proclaimer and custodian of your teaching and your love. For the early Reformers, the meaning of the traditional liturgy was bound up in its structure.
- Completely Stationary;
- See a Problem?!
- Movie Confidential: Sex, Scandal, Murder and Mayhem in the Film Industry.
Within the Reform prayer books, there was universal agreement about being called to a special mission. Large-scale immigration from German—speaking countries began in about ; by , approximately , Jews had emigrated to America.
As mass immigration from eastern Europe began during the late nineteenth century, the American Conservative movement emerged as a less radical route to mediating the claims of tradition and the needs of immigrant American Jews. Wise set out to create a middle-of-theroad prayer book that could serve the needs of the entire American Jewish community. He hoped Minhag America would replace the German, Polish, and other European rites that the immigrants had brought with them.
Although his book was theoretically available to any congregation, Wise was attacked from both right and left for his idiosyncratic editorial choices. To make the transition between Hebrew and English convenient, Wise was careful to lay out the page so that liturgical units did not extend from one page to the next. Who heals the sick. God is our Lord, God is One! Hegyon Lev was the basis for Avodat Yisrael, which was revised and then translated into English by Marcus Jastrow in Who crownest Israel with the diadem of their priestly mission.
Like Avodat Yisrael, many American prayer books were directly based on German models; in other cases, rabbis who began their careers in Germany emigrated to America. The two instances of inclusion of the Menahot blessings in English—language non-Orthodox prayer books abridge parts and freely expand the translation to emphasize the mission and election of Israel. During the last quarter of the century, a wide variety of alternative liturgies were created and published for use by individual congregations and groups or for the smaller movements.
Similar challenges as those that had faced earlier generations of editors needed to be resolved in the context of evolving Jewish self-understanding and relationships to the wider culture. The standard modern Orthodox prayer book for most of the latter half of the twentieth century was the Authorized Daily Prayer Book edited by Joseph Hertz — , for many years the Orthodox Chief Rabbi of Great Britain. First published in England during the early s, it was published in the United States in It is still so worded to-day in the Italian Rite, as well as in many of the old Ashkenazi Prayer Books.
But however expressed, grateful consciousness of the privilege of having been born in the Faith of Israel is essential. Hertz declines to make more than the single, small change in the Hebrew, with the result that neither the translation nor the commentary is entirely comfortable with the Hebrew text. Within Israel, for example, the Davidic family, Kohanim, and Levites are set apart by virtue of their particular callings, in addition to their shared mission as Jews.
All such missions carry extra responsibilities. Furthermore, women have often been the protectors of Judaism when the impetuosity of and aggressiveness of the male nature led the men astray. Sheasani ben-chorin. She-asani Yisrael. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the negative form. The authorities he cites are modern Orthodox commentators from the nineteenth century, including Jacob Tzvi Meklenburg, Israel Abrahams and Abraham Berliner. Gordis does not justify the emendation on its own grounds, but insists on its prior historical authority.
Although he is correct that there is a history of using this form of the blessing, the sources he cites as the textual basis for his change are themselves the product of censorship. We do not know what the editors of these prayer books would have chosen had they been free to publish without constraint. While this situation is now crying out for redress, it in turn creates new problems that need to be faced.
It appears, however, that the concern is about changing the outward form of the liturgy. What the committee clearly did not want to do was to delete the traditional blessings without replacing them with three satisfactory alternatives. Less traditionally concerned editors, such as Abraham Geiger, had done just that; but for the Conservative rabbis, maintaining the forms and structure of the liturgy was critical. Freedom is the inalienable right of every human being, deriving from his estate as a creature fashioned in the image of God.
Although in origin there is a one-to-one correspondence with the blessings they have replaced, in their new arrangement the newly created blessings resonate with each other far more than they resonate with their predecessors. The rewording of the blessings—and the new meanings their new language invokes—became the customary usage for non-Orthodox liturgy during the latter half of the twentieth century.
The most recent Conservative prayer book, Sim Shalom , follows this usage. Its successor, Gates of Prayer, was a radical break with earlier American Reform liturgy. Major new features of Gates of Prayer were the inclusion of Hebrew throughout, longer services, and the restoration of many traditional rubrics that had been either deleted or reduced to a single sentence in the Union Prayer Book.
The compilers of the new prayer book, however, did not assume that Reform congregations would restore the traditional service. Rather, they designed the book so that the rabbi or service leaders could not only pick and choose from different services, but also making a selection of which elements to include within a service.
In the synagogue, all or part may be read or sung. Poems of Praise. Although Gates of Prayer is presented as a series of options, the usage guidelines recommend the blessings as private, rather than public, prayers. When a radical interpretation of the Menahot blessing was promulgated by the sixteenth-century kabbalists, the liturgical text was untouched, but the new meanings were explained in the commentary and, presumably, known and taught. Non-halakhic modern Jews are more comfortable with reclaiming—and reimagining—the historical liturgy.
Although the congregation joined the Reform movement in , it did not have any particularly loyalty to, or history of, praying with authorized Reform texts. Because the members of the Ritual Committee were not formally trained, they brought with them the private and shared meanings of the liturgy with which they had grown up.
Piyyutim rhymed poetic hymns were included or discarded on the basis of whether anyone on the Ritual Committee knew an appropriate melody. Although the congregation generally followed Reform standards for the number of services, the mahzor includes a Musaf additional service for the High Holidays, in part because Ritual Committee members knew how to lead important sections of the service. Beautiful words. Blessed be You God, who has given the rooster intelligence to distinguish between day and night. Blessed be You God, who has made each of us unique, and all of us according to Your will.
But it was easier to believe then.
Download The Three Blessings Boundaries Censorship And Identity In Jewish Liturgy 2010
Only saints and sages challenged You, questioned You, doubted You. Blessed be You God who gives strength to the weary. Maybe there is no harmony in the universe. And yet there are times when it all begins to make sense. The members of the congregation had all experienced discrimination and rejection, and the membership and leadership was determined to make sure that no one was now left out. These most unusual insertions come a scant page after the congregation has sung the mystical, anthropomorphic hymn Anim Zemirot.
The hymn, by its very obscurity, is not heard as a literal statement. The blessings, because they are accessible in English, are taken seriously and questioned. In Gates of Prayer, one of the eleven Shabbat evening services was designed to be equivocal. By making the theological questioning explicit, this text gives permission to the questioning or doubting individual to participate in the service.
How good it is to gather, in a rainbow of affections and sexualities, in the house of a God who loves each of us as we are created.
This theme is continued in the silent prayer that immediately follows the blessings: My God, I thank you for my life and my soul and my body; for my name, for my sexual and affectional [sic] nature, for my way of thinking and talking. Help me become perfect in my own ways of loving and caring, that by becoming perfect in my own way, I can honor Your name, and bring about the coming of the Messiah. Here, they close the Morning Blessings section of the liturgy. In this setting, the Menahot blessings are once again being used polemically to assert Jewish faith statements.
Because the halakhic tradition is unequivocal in its opposition to homosexuality, the liturgy appeals to God through creative emendations and glosses of the historical prayers. Although these new formulations of the blessings might, for the traditionally aware, resonate with the prayers from which they were adapted, they do not have prior associations for most users of this prayer book. In a free translation of one of the closing prayers of Yom Kippur, the motif reappears: As we see the light fade into darkness, at the precise time You ordain, so let us see how we are ordained as part of Your plan.
Strengthen our faith that You created us for good, and not for evil;. At this moment, we reject the lie that a portion of Your handiwork is degenerate or cast out from Your love. During the mid s, leaders of the Jewish renewal movement began work on a new prayer book. Jewish renewal, both an approach to Judaism and a loosely organized network, seeks to add personal meaning and spiritual depth to Jewish practice through the inclusion and integration of Jewish and nonJewish resources.
Renewal liturgy and worship during the last quarter of the twentieth century was characterized by its readiness to include traditional and neo-Hasidic Jewish texts and customs, along with freely embracing new and alternative rites and practices, often inspired by New Age and eastern teachings. Personal meaningfulness, rather than revealed authority, historical practice, or theological unity, is the prime criterion for Renewal practice.
The Hebrew parallels the version included in the Conservative Sabbath and Festival Prayer Book, but both divinity and humanity are referred to by using feminine gender.
The blessings are translated:. You make my form in Your image. You encourage me to wrestle with my faith. You birth me in freedom. Women say:. You created me a woman. However, the formal structure of the blessings is radically altered. Although some of the early Reformers kept the external structure of the prayers while changing the internal language, here the traditional language is made acceptable by changing the theological and formulaic structures that contain it.
As is now customary, the third-person Hebrew is translated in the second person to resolve the problem of gendered pronouns in English. For the reader who is not familiar with this classic biblical story, the blessing has no links at all to its historical roots. In the Conservative prayer book, these three blessings were arranged to replace the separate blessings for women and men. In this liturgy, the relationship does not extend beyond the private connection. For Being a free person. For being a Jew.
For purpose. For harmony. As we have seen, neither set of blessings was ever given a name before Gates of Prayer. In recent years, the desire to present an authentic text has resulted in the reintroduction of language long abandoned. For many, the extent to which these historical sources were marginal or not widely known in their own day only adds to their appeal.
Conclusion The Jewish religious tradition, like many others, has always sought to legitimate its practices through teachings that validate their authenticity and historical authority. Traditional sources almost never explicitly acknowledge how Jewish texts or practices have been shaped by—or in competition with— alternative teaching, practice, or text from the surrounding culture. This language imagines not just a marketplace of competing systems between pagan, early Christian, and Jewish religions, but a spectrum of Jewish religious systems as well.
The original was not subtle; we do not need to probe deeply to discern the cultural values that it asserts. The Hellenistic expression was effectively transformed into a slogan that articulated key ideas of the rabbinic Jewish master narrative. The privileges enjoyed by men over women and by free people over slaves in Hellenistic and rabbinic Jewish culture were not entirely congruent, but the values statement carried over effortlessly nonetheless.
The apostle Paul, in turn, restates the Jewish and Hellenistic slogans in a new arrangement in support of a master narrative that informed the life of the early Church. Once ascribed to a leading early rabbinic teacher, the blessings concept took on a Jewish life of its own, and developed organically as part of the Jewish spiritual tradition.
What began as a private, spontaneous statement became regularized, shared, and public. This transformation occurred, in part, by virtue of the physical proximity in the Talmud of the baraita about these three blessings and the instruction to recite blessings daily. Thus, these blessings became closely associated with the goal of reciting the daily quota of blessings. In all three situations, local variation and creativity was possible in the absence of strong centralized leadership with the ability to impose an authorized text.
The institutionalization of personal prayer was a central aspect of the Geonic period. As a minority community dependent on the goodwill of rulers and ecclesiastical authorities, Jews had strong motivation to present themselves and their religious teachings as not being hostile or critical of Christianity. Yet the truth claims of the historical Jewish religious tradition are inimical to Christianity, and, on a popular level, Jews and Christians took deep pleasure in making fun of the religious and social practices of the other. Although certainly central, beyond the fact of the erasures and emendations themselves, the regime of control and supervision also served to reinforce and remind the Jews of their dependent and inferior status.
In response, Jews used a variety of strategies to undermine or respond to the censorship. The private Jewish meaning was not so esoteric as to be known only to a small circle; it was shared widely enough to be reported by Jewish apostates to the authorities. However, written explanations of this meaning were edited out of manuscripts of Hebrew books. As Jews integrated into the modern world, they have been as embarrassed as their medieval and Renaissance predecessors about public discussion of the depth of anti-Christian polemic in Jewish religious works, and sometimes have expressed gratitude that problematic texts were revised long ago.
A wide variety of attitudes—and their linguistic expression— can be carried by different members of a community, and often within the same individual. When the Jewish master narrative was reconceptualized during the nineteenth century—along the lines that Raz-Krakotzkin ascribes to the sixteenth century—the meanings of Jewish rites also had to be adjusted.
Three Blessings: Boundaries, Censorship, and Identity in Jewish Liturgy - Oxford Scholarship
In German Reform prayer books, the themes of the three blessings were freely reinterpreted to conform to the overarching motifs of early liberal Judaism. Protomodern Orthodox and Conservative editors, for whom continuity between historical and current practice was a core value, made simpler emendations in the text, but generated a new hermeneutic, reconciling the new language with the historical text.
Although the Hebrew text was almost universally emended, the meaning of the text was recast, whether in the form of rabbinic commentary or in the translation itself. Using the tools of modernity—grammar, morphology, and historical analysis—the troublesome language was removed in favor of new language that served the political and religious needs of the current community and could be defended as historically and linguistically authentic.
The creation of special blessings for women to recite demonstrates the use of the liturgy both to maintain and to subvert the dominant worldview. A new blessing, previously unknown, was created because women were rendered invisible by the received liturgy. We cannot determine whether the impetus for the new blessing came from women or from men; the limited textual record suggests that, initially at least, the recitation of the new blessing encountered some rabbinic resistance. Soon enough, the new blessing became the authorized blessing that women were expected to recite.
The dissonance that the authorized blessing created, and the resolutions—interpretation, emendation, or omission—foreshadow the history of this blessing in the modern period. Whenever there is a perceived break between the received narrative and the contemporary one, this tear in the fabric of continuity must be accounted for. For modern prayer book editors, no less than for their medieval predecessors, the claims of historical continuity are strong.
Although the content of the identity statements that these blessings assert is fundamentally different today than it was years ago, the three blessings continue to function as conveyers of meaning, both in their manifest content and in the historical continuity they represent. The continuous thread that links the diverse history of this liturgical text is the ongoing desire to establish authenticity.
Over time, the continual debate turned on the authentic use of the blessings, in terms of both proper context and authenticity of language. The censored manuscripts often preserve signs of effort to mark the absence of what the copyist knew was the once-authentic language. Later, when the language was deliberately changed, claims for authenticity were made based on the historical record created by the very texts that were themselves the product of censorship. The multivocal meaning of the text for almost every generation included the acknowledgment of historical continuity.
Even moderns, who are explicit in their rejection of many of the core values of the master narratives that generated these texts, nonetheless seek, whenever possible, to maintain the structural integrity and manifest language of the received tradition. Praised [are You Eternal. Aha bar Jacob heard his son not make me a gentile. Avot ]. Manuscript and printed editions of two other rabbinic-era sources preserve variant readings of the passage presented in the table.
Meir, whereas the Palestinian Talmud Berakhot has the name of R. There is no question that the original authority was Rabbi Judah; many manuscripts and early sources quote the passage in the name of Rabbi Judah, and modern translations emend the text accordingly.
The interdependence of the three parallel texts, as evidenced by the variations within the manuscript history, does not permit privileging any of the three sources as being earlier or more authentic than the others. The printed text has Rabbi Meir, but the Palestinian Talmud, along with most manuscripts and early sources, quote this in the name of Rabbi Judah see p. Wieder is primarily concerned with the textual history of the blessings and cataloging of variant readings. I include a variety of manuscripts not considered by Wieder and examine how the blessings were used and what they disclose of the religious outlook of the Jews who recited these prayers.
The entirety of the early morning liturgy is the topic of a recent dissertation by Marx, Early Morning Ritual. The halakhic sources are summarized thoroughly by Anau, Pri Yeshuran, 86— See p. A comprehensive inventory of the appearance of these blessings in Genizah sources was kindly provided by Prof. Every known appearance of these blessings in Genizah sources is cited in the text or notes. Despite the effort to catalog the Genizah texts, it is impossible to identify the fragmentary passages from the Genizah as originating in one type of synagogue or another; the claim and the evidence are inherently circular.
Oxford Heb. Daniel Goldschmidt found only three extant manuscripts. The Romanian versions of the Menahot blessings are discussed on p. See Hoffman, Beyond the Text, 46— Hadas, Hellenistic Culture, Others pointed out that it could have as easily been directly taken from the Greeks. The original prayer is found in manuscript i British Library Add , f.
The Three Blessings: Boundaries, Censorship, and Identity in Jewish Liturgy
The original teacher was Rabbi Judah. For the textual history of the Talmudic passage, see p. Luther relied for his knowledge of Judaism on the apostate Anton Margaritha born ca. They did not learn such tomfoolery from Israel, but from the Goyim [sic]. For history records that the Greek Plato daily accorded God such praise and thanksgiving, if such arrogance and blasphemy may be termed praise of God.
This man, too, praised his gods for these three items: that he was a human being and not an animal; a male and not female; a Greek and not a non-Greek or barbarian. Ibid, ; cf. Luther, Werke, vol. In this passage, he quotes from another biographer, Hermippus, who attributes this well-known story to Thales. For comparison, the various elements of the aphorism can be labeled as follows: Introduction Species person vs.
Thebian [only in Greek sources] Generation generation of Socrates [only in Greek sources ] 7. Plutarch lived ca. Dio, Discourses, Dio lived 40—ca. Lactantius, Divine Institutes, , sec. Taylor, Pirkei Avot, Weiss, Dor dor ve-dorshav, vol. II, Emphasis added. Weiss, Dor dor, vol. He had no tradition or source in the teachings of his masters, but that he knew that this was the custom of Socrates the Greek to bless daily, and the matter made sense to him and he planted it in the soil of Judaism.
XXX and his Tosefta ki-feshuta, , n. Weiss celebrates Rabbi Meir as worldly; his contemporary, Manuel Joel, uses the same attribution to defend Judaism against the charge of misogyny see p. The origin of the Morning Blessings as a group is usually credited in pious Jewish literature to King David, and, according to a single source, Moses see p. Most unusual in Jewish sources—from any period—is the explicit attribution of a Jewish prayer to a non-Jewish source. A genizah is the storeroom or depository in the synagogue where worn-out books and papers were stored.
The Cairo Genizah, discovered by Europeans at the end of the nineteenth century, contained tens of thousands of manuscripts dating back to as early as Although the majority of the documents in the Genizah were written in the eleventh to thirteenth centuries, they often record practices and customs going back several centuries. Although some are complete works, most of the tens of thousands of documents from the Cairo Genizah are individual leaves or several sheets from larger works.
The individual leaves are now held in many different libraries around the world. The largest collection is at Cambridge University, in the Taylor—Schechter collection. It can also be found in the later medieval manuscript HUC , but with the mem vocalized with a patach instead of kamatz. All of these texts use the form asher barah oti who created me. The verb b-r-a is used exclusively for divine creation. T-S NS This elaborate formulation was preserved in later texts, too; see, for example, manuscript HUC , p.
Ibid, Paul was likely to be familiar with both the Greek and Jewish versions and could have written this passage on his own without relying on an obscure and strained putative source. For the history of interpretation of this passage, see Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, —, and references therein. Attridge, Tripartite Tractate, One modern interpreter complains: Paul seems to have produced a discourse which is so contradictory as to be almost incoherent. In Galatians, Paul seems indeed to be wiping out social differences and hierarchies between the genders, in addition to those that obtain between ethnic groups and socioeconomic classes, while in Corinthians he seems to be reifying and reemphasizing precisely those gendered hierarchical differences.
Boyarin, Galatians and Gender Trouble, Schopenhauer, World as Will, Nineteenth-century Jewish defenders are equally quick to blame Greek civilization for what they consider to be objectionable ideas that have entered Judaism. Talmudic liturgical texts may have also been changed to bring them into conformity with later practice.
That is clearly not the case here, where the geonic confusion centers on why later practice differs from the apparent talmudic model. Translation based on Neusner, Babylonian Talmud, Menahot, See Lieberman, Tosefta ki-feshuta, vol. I, , 1. Hibbur Berakhot, Lieberman, Tosefta ki-feshuta, This is consistent with the hypothesis of this book: What eventually became a rabbinic prayer had its origin as an early Jewish adaptation of a Greek proverb or slogan.
Deviations from the text of the Talmud that was in front of the writer had to be resolved; however, the uniform text of the Talmud was not effectively established until the invention of printing. For a detailed exposition of the talmudic passage, see Marx, Early Morning Ritual, 65— The pun is found in TB Rosh Hashana 26a at the end.
In most but not all prayer books and manuscripts, the sequence of blessings is: washing of the hands, Asher yatzar for relieving oneself , Elohai neshama, and then the sekvi. The blessing for shoes is the sole exception. BT Berakhot 57b. New York Review of Books February 15, , 42— The medieval commentators struggle to explain the basis for this blessing.
PT Menahot 14d. There is no evidence of either set of blessings being used there. The passage from Galatians suggests that the Menahot sequence was known in the Land of Israel at this time. The Babylonian Geonim may have tolerated more variation than is customarily ascribed to them. According to Robert Brody, Saadya Gaon, 42—43, Saadia tolerated non-talmudic benedictions, as long as they were blessings of praise, not petition, and did not stray from or alter the essential meaning of a prayer.
Except for the suggestion that they be reserved for occasions when a person encounters a representative of the respective group see p. This can be said with some assurance about Palestinian—informed practice. Genizah prayer book manuscripts typically begin with the place where the public worship began; however, we would expect that if the Berakhot blessings were part of the private worship, they would appear in the same texts that include the Menahot set.
Halakhot gedolot, 9; c. Encyclopedia Judaica, s. The place and importance of the Geonim in Jewish history is the subject of Brody, Geonim of Babylonia. Lewin, Otzar ha-geonim , no. On washing the feet in addition to the hands and face, see Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai, vol. I, , n. And one begins and recites them in order. Others are more substantial; see the discussion of the cantor on p.
It means that each one should be said at its appropriate time and place but because of uncleanness. Since when a person stands up from sleeping he turns and prepares himself and washes his hands, face and feet and blesses according to the order and since he has no permission to bless until he washes his hands, he should prepare himself for blessings and prayer with that washing. Accordingly, one is obligated to bless:. This is the order of blessing after washing of the hands:. Elohai neshamah. Blessed who did not make me a gentile Blessed who did not make me a slave Blessed who did not make me a woman Blessed who lifts the fall en Blessed who opens the eyes of the blind.
See Hedegard, Seder Rav Amram, 3. Although it is no longer clear whether Amram ever actually was the legitimate Gaon of Sura, he was known as Amram Gaon for many centuries. This legend was retold widely. See, for example, Numbers Rabbah, Korach For a detailed list of citations, see Anau, Shibbolei ha-leket, , n. In a later version, the institution of the blessings is assigned to Moses, but then they are forgotten before being reinstituted by David; Al-Nakawa, Menorat ha-meor, II, According to Hedegard, Amram, 6, Rav Amram uses chazzan cantor and shaliah tzibur prayer leader interchangeably.
Epstein, Seder Rav Amram siduro u-mesadrav, In Palestinian practice, the preliminary service was recited silently at the synagogue; see the description of T-S 6 H 6. The sequence in Saadia is not identical to the order found in the printed editions of Babylonian Talmud Berakhot 60a. Rabbinovicz,Dikdukei Sofrim, Berakhot, , n. Davidson, Siddur Rav Saedyah, The Babylonian Talmud version was by this time also known in North Africa, based on the title of a responsum preserved in the index to Sefer megilat setarim of Nissim ben Jacob of Kairouan ca.
The blessing upon going to sleep is also from the Babylonian Talmud Berakhot 60b. The various blessings are listed here consistently with the sequence in Berakhot 60b. The manuscript simply says Zimrah Song. This is, of course, what happened to the three blessings tradition itself. The original passages are next to each other in the text of the Talmud.
This text is discussed in detail by Fleischer, Prayer, Compare the history of the piyyut as described in Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform in Europe, 24— In the texts Mann cites, the Menahot blessings appear alone; there is not yet a linkage to the Berakhot 60b blessings. Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud, Although not of Palestinian origin, the Persian prayer book discussed earlier manuscript JTSA demonstrates the fallacy of positing uniform or linear development to nonstatutory liturgical customs.
The book quotes from the Shulhan Arukh yet preserves liturgical practices that may have predated Saadia Gaon by years. When these can be clearly distinguished, they are so noted. This text can therefore be dated between and Even the most complete Genizah prayer book manuscript, Oxford Heb. On the composition of these prayer books for the exclusive use of the service leader in the synagogue, see Fleischer, Prayer, — The phrase is found in both Genizah and European prayer book manuscripts e.
In contrast, T-S Manuscript Antonin B, 1b. Manuscripts T-S NS Heinemann, Prayer, , n. Manuscript Halper The same formulation appears to be used in the T-S NS T-S 10 H 2.