[Avodah] conservatism in davening

[Akiva Miller via Avodah]

R' Eli Turkel wrote:

> In the RH davening there seem to be several (ashkenazi)
> minhagim which are clearly wrong nevertheless they are
> tradition and not changed.
> Some examples
>
> In several piyutim the beginning of each phrase has been
> transferred to the end of the phrase. One example is ...

and then he gave several examples.

I once read an article by Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, where he discussed this
exact phenomenon. I believe it was titled, "Chazan v'Kahal, o Kahal
v'Chazan?" (or maybe the reverse) His main goal was to explain why the
instructions go one way for some piyutim, and the other way for others.

Originally, a great many (all?) of the piyutim were designed to be said
primarily by the chazan, and the tzibur would respond with a response.
Sometimes this response was just a word or two, and sometimes it was a
whole line. Often the tzibur gave the same response through the entire
piyut, and occasionally it would vary.

For the piyutim which have maintained this sequence, the instruction in the
machzor is "Chazan v'Kahal" - the chazan leads and the congregation
responds. (In a quick search to find examples, most of what I find is
individual pesukim which the leader says and the others repeat, such as the
pesukim immediately before Tekias Shofar on RH, or the Shema when taking
out the Sefer Torah.)

But in many cases, this has changed. For some reason, the people wanted to
say the stanzas too, and not merely hear them from the chazan. Perhaps this
happened when siddurim became cheap and easy-to-obtain; I don't remember if
Rav Henkin gave any cause for it. But in any case, people ended up saying
the paragraph prior to the chazan, and these are labeled "Kahal v'Chazan" -
the people say it and then the chazan repeats. (The easiest-to-find
examples might be any of the Pizmonim in selichos. My guess is that L'cha
Dodi is in this category too.)

The problem with this setup only arises when people confuse the Recital
with the Response. When we all knew our roles in shul, this was a simple
matter, but when everyone wants to say everything, it gets all messed up.
My favorite example is V'Chol Maaminim. Rav Henkin cited it too, but I
don't remember which line he chose as his example. I'll use the line that
appears in the popular song: "V'chol maaminim sheHu chai v'kayam, haTov
uMaytiv lara'im v'latovim."

Now consider, please, which makes more sense:

"Everyone believes that He lives and endures; He is good and does good to
the evil and to the good."

or

"He portions life to all the living, and everyone believes that He lives
and endures.
"He is good and does good to the evil and to the good, and everyone
believes that He is good to all."

And beside making less sense than the original way, there's another problem
with the modern arrangement (and I think Rav Henkin mentioned this too):
The modern arrangement has a half-stanza at the beginning, and a
half-stanza at the end, and most chazanim don't know how to fit them into
the tune.

R' Eli Turkel labelled these developments as "clearly wrong" and "errors",
and I don't know whether Rav Henkin was less harsh, or perhaps even more
disapproving. But in any case, I will surely agree that these things are
difficult to change. (My pet peeve is a closely-related phenomenon, that in
Kedusha on Shabbos morning, most people seem to mumble Kadosh and Baruch,
while they enthusiastically sing the chazan's parts.)

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161010/0353eb11/attachment-0008.html>