CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, OHIO סידור הלל וזימרה תפילת שחרית לשבת SIDDUR HALLEL V’ZIMRAH PRAISE AND SONG SHABBAT MORNING SERVICE Translation & Commentary by Rabbi Moshe Adler CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, OHIO סידור הלל וזימרה תפילת שחרית לשבת SIDDUR HALLEL V’ZIMRAH PRAISE AND SONG SHABBAT MORNING SERVICE Translation & Commentary by Rabbi Moshe Adler © Copyright 2012 Beth El–The Heights Synagogue This book is a joint project of Beth El–The Heights Synagogue, Rabbi Moshe Adler, and Haggadahs-R-Us. Prayer translations are by Rabbi Adler; biblical translations are based on JPS Tanach and used by permission. Story “The Curse of Blessings” by Mitchell Chefitz, used by permission. Transliterations by Joe Buchwald Gelles and Nili Adler. Layout by Joe Buchwald Gelles. Commentaries by Rabbi Moshe Adler. This book is customizable, and available for any congregation or minyan that would like to produce their own version. Contact Haggadahs-R-Us at 877-308-4175 for more information. INTRODUCTION ii Contents Rabbi’s Introduction . iv Story: The Curse of Blessings . xiii Birchot HaShachar • Morning Blessings. 1 P’seukei d’Zimra • Verses of Song. 17 Shacharit • Morning Service. 61 The Sh’ma. 74 The Amidah . 84 Torah Service . 104 Mi Shebeirach for the Sick. 110 Prayers for Congregation, U.S.A., Israel. 116 Ashrei . 122 Musaf • Additional Service. 128 Concluding Prayers. 150 Ein Keiloheinuu. 150 Aleinu . 152 Mourner’s Kaddish. 154 Adon Olam. 162 Hallel . 164 iii INTRODUCTION Introduction The prayer of a people “Every individual Jew, even if he is all by himself with his Maker, prays with all other Jews” (ELIEZER BERKOVITS, “PRAYER,” IN STUDIES IN TORAH JUDAISM). The traditional liturgy is the voice of K’nesset Yisrael — the timeless community of the people Israel — at prayer. It is vital that every Jew be able to join his or her own unique spiritual voice to that of the community, thereby enriching him/herself while enriching K’nesset Yisrael. Why a new edition of the Siddur for Beth El –The Heights Synagogue? From time to time, a Jewish faith-community may seek a new “frequency” for tuning in to the traditional liturgy, one on which the liturgy speaks that community’s own conceptual language. The community can thus more readily access the ideas and ideals that the liturgy embodies. Speaking in a contemporary voice, our edition of the Siddur attempts to introduce (or reintroduce) wor- shippers to the traditional liturgy, its nature and function. Kavanah — focus of mind and heart Just as the score of a symphony becomes music only when an orchestra performs it, the liturgy becomes prayer only when Jews pray it. Kavanah — the worshipper’s intention, his or her focus of mind and heart — is what turns recitation into prayer. The basic kavanah is, of course, the worshipper’s intention to offer the prayer to God. Certain prayers, such as the three sections of the Sh’ma, call for special kavanot in addition to the basic one. We have indicated such kavanot in the Siddur’s “stage directions.” INTRODUCTION iv The worshipper is encouraged to add personal kavanot of his or her own, bringing something new to his or her prayer every day (Y’RUSHALMI B’RACHOT 8B). The idea is to offer up the liturgy to God as one’s personal gift. Kavanah lifts the individual’s prayer directly to its Destination along with the collective prayer of the Jewish people. If you are new to the liturgy, or have wished you understood it better, be patient. The more you pray it, the more familiar it becomes. The translation and commentary will illuminate the meaning, the transliteration will aid in pronouncing the Hebrew words, and your fellow worshippers will gladly help you. Heart- felt prayer, like life itself, is always a work in progress. Perhaps this is why the Hebrew word for worship is avodah, which means “service” but also means “work.” Form and function: What we say, when we say it, and why The Shabbat morning service comprises a series of stages, each of which leads to the next stage. The Siddur itself provides “stage directions” and commentary. The stages of the service are as follows: • Birchot ha-shachar, the morning blessings, thanking the Creator for renewing and sustaining life each day • P’sukey d’zimra, verses of song in pure praise of God, drawn largely from the biblical book of Psalms • Shacharit, the core of the service, comprising: 4 Bar’chu, the call to bless God in unison (said only when a minyan is present) 4 The first pre-Sh’ma blessing, praising God as the Creator of light 4 The second pre-Sh’ma blessing, praising God as the Teacher of Torah 4 The full Sh’ma, comprising three sections drawn from the Torah: n Sh’ma, in which we accept God’s sovereignty v INTRODUCTION n V’hayah im shamoa, in which we pledge to fulfill God’s mitzvot n Va-yomer, in which we recognize God as our Liberator 4 A single post-Sh’ma blessing, praising God as our Redeemer past and future 4 The Amidah, recited as a personal prayer by the individual, and repeated aloud by the prayer leader on behalf of the com- munity • The reading of the weekly Torah portion or the special Torah por- tion for a holiday • Musaf, an Amidah commemorating the Temple service and pray- ing for its restoration As we progress through these stages, we become increasingly more aware of God’s presence in our lives. We move from thanking God for a new day, to praising God simply because He is God, to making ourselves willing subjects of God’s kingdom, to hearing God’s word being read from a Torah scroll, to praying for the return of God’s presence to Jerusalem amid universal peace. In the process, we be- come the Jews we wish to be: firmly rooted in our past, living open- eyed in the present, and looking in faith toward our future — living in time, yet viewing time, as it were, from God’s perspective. Style At Beth El–The Heights Synagogue, we have been using Philip Birnbaum’s edition of the Siddur, which for a long time was standard in traditional congregations. Birnbaum brought the liturgy within reach of many who had been put off by the stilted attempts of earlier translators to write “Bible English.” He retranslated the liturgy into modern English, retaining only the archaic pronouns “thee” and “thou” when addressing God because people felt that they conveyed greater reverence, though not capitalizing them because he felt that capitalizing pronouns tended to confuse people. To avoid turning his translation into a rewrite, Birnbaum was as literal as English idiom would tolerate, relegating explanatory remarks to footnotes. While continuing Birnbaum’s wise approach to making the INTRODUCTION vi traditional liturgy accessible to more people, we have found that even minimal traces of “Bible English” tend to distance worship- pers from the liturgy. We have therefore eliminated those traces and used “You” or “He” when speaking to or about God. Seeing that modern pronouns do not instantly convey the feeling of reverence that the archaic pronouns once conveyed, we have capitalized all pronouns that address or refer to God, in order to set them off from the ordinary. We have hewn closely to the original Hebrew. However, to avoid literalism and the need for constant referral to footnotes for clarifica- tion, we have translated certain terms not literally but conceptually. Hence, for example, in the talmudic selection “Elu d’varim” (“These are the things . ”), it is of little help to render terms like “ha-peah” literally as “the corner of the field,” or “beit ha-midrash” as “the schoolhouse.” We have therefore rendered those terms as “the cor- ner of the field left for the poor to harvest” and “the house of Torah study,” which is what they actually denote in the sources. Translations of biblical passages are taken directly from The JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh (JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 1999), with adaptations as necessitated by context or by the liturgist’s special use of certain passages. Gendered God-language “If we do not mean that God is male when we use masculine pronouns and imagery, then why should there be any objections to using female imagery and pronouns as well?” (RITA M. GROSS,“FEMALE GOD LANGUAge IN A JEWISH CONTEXT,” IN WOMANSPIRIT RISING, EDS. CAROL P. CHRIST AND JUDITH PLASKOW). We heartily agree. Since all language about God is necessar- ily figurative, male and female imagery are equally valid representa- tions. Labeling either kind blasphemous is not piety but sexism. Here, however, we are dealing with God-language that is specific to the traditional liturgy. As an egalitarian traditional congregation, we are committed to maintaining both gender equality and “the coin minted by the Sages” (TALMUD, B’RACHOT 40B, INTER ALIA) — that is, the language in which our Sages cast the liturgy — without sacrificing vii INTRODUCTION one for the other. There were three alternatives before us: de-gender God-language so that the name “God” is used any time a pronoun would ordinarily be used; parse the liturgy into two parallel versions, one using male God-language and the other using female God-language; or retain the traditional imagery, keeping in mind that it is, in fact, imagery and does not purport to represent God’s true nature. De-gendering the liturgy’s God-language is hardly possible. First, Hebrew makes all nouns and all conjugated verbs either mascu- line or feminine. De-gendering the language in translation merely evades the essential problem. Second, endlessly repeating the name “God” instead of using pronouns can sound something like “John got up, put on John’s clothes, ate John’s breakfast, kissed John’s mother good-bye, and went off to catch John’s bus” — correct but robotic.