[Avodah] Psukim tacked on to Shir ha-Ma'alot

[Avram Sacks]

Hello R. Sero,

Thank you very much for your response. 

All of the sources you cite, appear to be Kabbalistic sources.  The Ari wrote Pri Etz Chayim, and Mishnat Chasidim is Kabbalistic, written by a contemporary of the Baal Shem Tov, although I don't know if they were aware of one another. Chassidut was heavily influenced by Kabbalah.  So, while chassidism may not have originated the custom of reciting the verses T'hillat, etc., if it originated in kabbalah, then it makes sense that chassidim would have adopted it, although this doesn't explain why.  Given how far back this goes, I would agree that it cannot be a reaction to Zionism.  Your answer begs the question, "So when did Mi yemalel and Hodu get added and why?"

And, if the set "T'hillat, Va'anachnu, Hodu, and Mi Yimalel" is decidedly Ashkenazic, why do we not see it in more Ashkenazic bentschers?


Kol tuv,

//Avi

Avram Sacks


Sunday, March 22, 2009, 8:34:53 AM, R. Zev Sero wrote in response to my question about the origins of the p'sukim at the end of Shir Ha-ma'alot (T'hillat, Va'anachnu, Hodu, Mi Yimalel):

ZS> The set of pesukim {Avarcha, Sof davar, Tehilat Hashem, Vaanachnu}
ZS> appear in all versions of Siddur HaAriZal, Pri Etz Chayim, and 
ZS> Mishnat Chasidim.  Therefore they are older than chassidus, and ZS> certainly cannot be a reaction to Zionism.

ZS> I don't know the origin of the set  {Tehilat, Vaanachnu, Mi yemalel, Hodu} which is used in Nusach Ashkenaz, but surely neither of these suggestions
ZS> can apply to it, since it's not used by chasidim and it surely predates
ZS> Zionism too.