Berakhot 108

5:
As already mentioned, neither of the two elements in our mishnah explained so far was overly difficult for the later sages of the Gemara to understand and interpret. What was problematic about the remaining phrase, "Your mercy extends even to a bird's nest" was difficult for them to understand, for what could be wrong if some cantor, improvising his Amidah, should choose to extol God's virtues as extending even to 'the little birdies in their nests'? The oblique reference here is to the command given in Deuteronomy 22:6-7 which requires us not to remove eggs from a nest in the presence of the mother-bird. By way of resolution of the question two suggestions are offered. The first suggestion is that the phrasing is untoward because it draws attention to an anomaly. The same God whose commandment requires us to have tender feelings even towards the emotional sensibilities of a bird, and not take from her nest the eggs upon which she is sitting so as not to cause her maternal distress – why does that same God not make similar requirements concerning other members of the animal kingdom? Singling out the command in Deuteronomy will ultimately serve an end opposite to that intended by the cantor: people will assume that it was only as regards birds sitting on eggs that we are required to evince tender feelings, and no such requirement is made as regards the rest of creation. The second suggestion is, in fact, a refinement of the first. That same God whose commandment requires us to have tender feelings even towards the emotional sensibilities of a bird, and not take from her nest the eggs upon which she is sitting so as not to cause her maternal distress – that same God permits the slaughter of animals and their young for human consumption. It is true that there is also a command not to slaughter an animal and its young on the same day [Leviticus 22:28], and there is another command not to slaughter a newborn animal [Exodus 22:29], but other commands do not of necessity prevent animal suffering for human benefit. Thus, according to this second suggestion, what is wrong with the use of the phrase "Your mercy extends even to a bird's nest" is that it ascribes an emotional motivation for the mitzvah, whereas it can only be understood as another example of an ultimately unfathomable Divine decree.

6:
This discussion in the Gemara inevitably leads to other examples of theological traps into which well-meaning cantors might fall when enthusiastically improvising – and incidentally displaying their knowledge and virtuosity! One example will suffice. It would seem that one established element in the content of the first berakhah was to extol the Deity by obliquely quoting Deuteronomy 10:17, "the great, mighty and awesome Deity". One cantor, who was officiating in the presence of Rabbi Ĥanina, chose to display his acumen by adding to these three epithets another seven (!) Rabbi Ĥanina waited until he had finished and then caustically asked him whether he had now exhausted all the Creator's virtues. The more epithets that we pile up the more we make people conscious of them; when the number of epithets becomes excessive people will begin to think that they have been exhaustive – which is the exact opposite of the impression we would wish to create. "We only use those three epithets," explained Rabbi ĥanina, "because Moses used them explicitly in the Torah." Otherwise, as regards description of God's nature and attributes – "silence is golden"; or, as the psalmist says [65:2], "silence is praising You".

7:
The seifa [last section] of our mishnah (given separately in the Talmud) is concerned with the replacement of a cantor who "comes unstuck" in mid-performance. We can well appreciate that when having to improvise prayer on the spot (as opposed to reading it from a prepared book as we do today) there may come times when a cantor is quite literally "lost for words" or loses the thread of the berakhah or misquotes a verse from the Bible and cannot now continue – the possibilities are almost endless. Such a cantor must be replaced, since worship must continue. Under normal circumstances, when someone is asked to officiate as Sheliaĥ Tzibbur [Representative of the Congregation, cantor] propriety requires that they evince hesitation, a feeling that they are not worthy of the honour of representing the community before the divine throne; only under pressure should they relent and consent to serve. However, when called upon to replace a "cantor in distress" one should show alacrity and no hesitation: the defaulting cantor must be saved any further embarrassment.