Tefillah 052

22:
When modern Conservative Jews come to discuss the content of the first benediction of the Amidah a salient issue is the inclusion or exclusion of the matriarchs. It is convenient to our discussion to relate to this issue as an integral part of the discussion on the content of the first b^erakhah of the Amidah.

23:
The four matriarchs are, of course, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah.

As regards the two handmaids, Bilhah and Zilpah: the Gemara [Berakhot 16b] states that

When we come, therefore, to discuss the inclusion of the matriarchs in the text of the first benediction, alongside their husbands, we should ask ourselves two basic halakhic questions: 'may we?' and 'should we?' (though, of course, the second question is only relevant if the first question is answered positively). So this must be the first question that we must address: is it permissible to alter the text of the benedictions of our liturgy?

24:
Rambam [Hilkhot Berakhot 1:5] writes:

While, at first glance, Rambam seems to be saying that we are not permitted to make any changes to the liturgical benedictions, we would be wrong to draw such a conclusion. What the sages formulated was not the wording of each benediction but its general content, and it is this general content that must remain unchanged. We have already discussed this in connection with the benedictions surrounding the Shema [Tefillah 034]. However, the issue is so germane to our present discussion that it would be wise to repeat some of the more salient points raised in that earlier shiur.

25:
It was the sages who determined the general content of each b^erakhah. This determination is what is called in Hebrew matbe'a shel b^erakhah, the 'content' of the benediction. (Unfortunately, this same term is often used by some to indicate the 'wording' of a benediction, but this is not its meaning.) The sages never dictated the wording of a benediction, even when a certain wording had already become almost universal in their own time (see Shabbat 046, #5). They only stipulated what the general content or theme of a benediction should be. In his commentary on the Gemara [Berakhot 11a], Rabbi Shelomo ben-Aderet, Rashba (Spain, 1235-1310), states this quite categorically:

26:
The "general content" of the first benediction of the Amidah concerns the relationship between the 'Founding Fathers' of our faith and our God, and God's relationship to them. If the inclusion of the matriarchs vitiates this theme it would be forbidden; if the inclusion does not – and even more so if it enhances it – it would be permitted. It could be argued that at the root of the Avot benediction (as its name implies) is the personal relationship of each "father" with God. These relationships are well documented in the Torah. Is there, however, anywhere in the Torah where we see the "mothers'" relationships with God? By way of response to this question one could quite simply to refer to Biblical references to the "mothers" that indicate their special status. One could quote the phrase [Genesis 21:12] in which God tells Abraham "Everything that Sarah tells you to do – just obey her". But this is too facile and misses the point of the argument, which is at a much deeper level. The "First Fathers" were prophets; by that I mean that they were in direct communion with the Deity. Were the "First Mothers" prophets? The "First Fathers" were religious innovators, the progenitors not only of the Jewish People biologically but of the Jewish religion spiritually. While it is obvious that the "First Fathers" could not have been the biological progenitors of the Jewish people without the absolutely essential contribution of the "First Mothers", were the "First Mothers" also spiritually involved in the propagation of the new faith? These, I think, are the true questions that lie beneath the surface of the argument we are addressing.

27:
I believe that the answer of traditional Judaism must be in the affirmative. Here are just a few references.

The Gemara [Megillah 14a] points out that Sarah was a prophet. In Genesis 11:29 her name is given as Yiskah and

Genesis 27:42 describes how Rivkah 'was told' of the threats her son Esau was making against the life of his twin brother. The Midrash [Bereshit Rabba 67] asks

In Genesis 30:24 Rachel, having finally given birth (to Joseph) says that God will give her another son. The Midrash [Bereshit Rabba 92] quotes Rabbi Ĥanina ben-Pazzi also as saying that

The midrash adds that the fact that she says that God will give her another son – and not 'sons' – shows that she knew this through her prophetic gift.

I could bring many more examples, but now let us address the question as to whether the "First Mothers" were full partners in the innovatory process of creating Judaism. I think many people are aware of the following Midrash, but few recognize it in its original terms. Genesis 12:5 describes the departure of Abraham and his family for the Promised Land together with "the souls they had made in Ĥaran". The Midrash [Bereshit Rabba 84] interprets the making of souls as converting people to the new faith. The Midrash then adds:

Genesis 25:21 describes the anguish of Yitzĥak and Rivkah at the childlessness of their marriage, and how Yitzĥak prayed "opposite his wife" to remove her barrenness (another midrash, by the way, in defiance of the Biblical text, ascribes the barrenness of their union to Yitzĥak). The Midrash [Bereshit Rabba 63] asks why the peculiar description of Yitzĥak praying "opposite" Rivkah.

Is there greater equality of devotion and partnership than this?

I think that these quotations do indicate that there is ample justification for the claim that the "First Mothers" were the spiritual partners of the "First Fathers" in every sense.

28:
Thus, it seems to me, that we have answered our first question positively: it is permitted to alter the content of the Avot benediction by including the matriarchs who were the spiritual equals of the patriarchs and who also played a major part in the founding stage of our religion. In the next shiur we shall, therefore, address the second question: since we may include the matriarchs – should we do so?

To be continued.

Michael (Moshe) Epstein writes:

There are so many excellent interlinear or line by line translations of the siddur. It would be so helpful to have the Hebrew/English next to each other so that we could see exactly where you are in your explanations. Is this possible?

I respond:

Yes, it is possible, but I fear that it is not desirable. A few years ago I tried sending out shiurim that included Hebrew text and was inundated with emails from people who complained that their computer could not read Hebrew. Many of them tried to remedy the situation but failed. I don't know why they failed since most modern browsers will simply do the job for them. However, in deference to those computers which are not (yet) Hebrew literate I have ever since kept the Hebrew texts separate from the main shiur. If it would be helpful to people to have the text of the siddur under discussion in any given shiur available separately (as the Hebrew texts of the sources are) I will gladly add it – though, of course, these texts are readily available in any prayerbook. Perhaps people would let me know if this would be, for them, a useful addition.