Many of the leading redactors of Liturgy [Siddurim and Machzorim] during the 17th-19th centuries favored l'shon Mikra over l'shon Hazzal.
Is there any basis for promoting this preference?
See EG SA 53:4 and Kitzur SA 16:12 [copied below] that advises the Shatz to regularly read Tanach. Yet there is no corresponding mention of reading EG Mishnah and Midrash.
Sh'ma Minah that reading Tanach is a priority and prerequisite for proper diction for the Sha"tz, which in turn implies that the L'shon Tefilah is closer to L'shon Mikra. Of course it's not proof positive. One might say that Tanachi Hebrew requires more attention. However, imho the more likely implication is to take this at face value.
---
Shloymie: But RRW, what about L'shon Mikra L'chood L'shon Hazzal L'chood?
RRW: Good Question. Quickly and Simply - I see that as a dechiya b'alma to answer questions such as "why not say "Loshevet Bassukkah" instead of "Leisheiv Bassukah"? But it was not originally meant as a global, normative statement. That imho came later and is imho a questionable application of the statement.
Shloymie: How so?
RRW: as noted above - there is no recommendation for a Shatz to master L'shon Hazal
-----------------------------------------
סימן יד – דיני פסוקי דזמרה
סעיף יא
השליח צבור צריך שיהיה הגון, ... ואיזה הגון, זה שהוא ריקן מעבירות, ופרקו נאה, פירוש, שלא יצא עליו שם רע אפילו בילדותו, ושהוא עניו ומרוצה לקהל, שיסכימו לתפלתו, ויש לו נעימה וקול ערב שמושך הלב, ורגיל לקרות בתורה נביאים וכתובים, כדי שיהיו הפסוקים שבתפלה סדורים בפיו. .
Shalom and Best Regards,
RRW
No comments:
Post a Comment