Tefillah 004

2:
Initially there were several versions of the benediction which was to precede Torah study. Three of them are presented in the Gemara [Berakhot 11b]:

4:
Rav Hamnona says that the benediction to be recited before studying Torah is the "best of all benedictions" – because Torah study is Israel's greatest duty. But his suggestion to "say all of them" is simply in order not to have to choose between them. The sages (earlier and later) often adopted more than one version of a text so that everyone would feel that their custom had been honoured.

5:
The Gemara (quoted above) states quite clearly that the version attributed to Rabbi Yoĥanan was a continuation of the version attributed to Shemu'el. For this reason many later poskim [authorities] insist that the two of them form just one benediction. In order to reinforce this they insisted that the second part should begin with the conjunction 'and' – "and make pleasant" etc so that it would be clear that it was just a continuation of the other. Clearly, this was not originally the case because many poskim – and Rambam is not the least of them! – speak of three Torah benedictions (not two). It is not possible to know what the original text was because editors and printers of the Gemara throughout the generations seem to have substituted for whatever they found the text that was current in their own community. It is most likely, therefore, that the original version of the benediction atrributed to Rabbi Yoĥanan was more succinct:

6:
After these benedictions comes the actual study. Almost all rites have chosen the Aaronic blessing [Numbers 6:24-26] as the text from the Written Torah. (The Yemenite rite and others chose Numbers 28:1-8.) This is followed by a text from the Unwritten Torah, the first mishnah of Tractate Pe'ah, concerning the duty to perform acts of simple kindness for others. (In most rites there is a slight amplification of the text which is to be found in the Gemara [Shabbat 127a].)

7:
Of course, one can add to these text as much as one pleases. We shall follow some well-known additions in our next shiur.

Some siddurim include the "prayer" to love one's neighbor as oneself. Would it not be better to love one's neighbor as one's neighbor wants to be loved? Suppose love for me doesn't require outward signs of affection – like a hug but my neighbor needs the physical closeness. Have the rabbis dealt with this question? Do you have an opinion?

I respond:

The famous Kabbalist, Rabbi Yitzĥak Luria [the Ari, 1534-1572] used to preface his daily prayers with the command to love one's neighbour as oneself [Leviticus 19:18]. In answer to Michael's question please see explanation # 30 in Avot 059, where Hillel is quoted as framing the famous command of the Torah in the negative. Love of one's neighbour is to be expressed by refraining from doing anything that we would not like him or her to do to or for us.

Randall Konigsburg writes concerning the benediction Elohai Neshamah which we encountered in Tefillah 002:

My teacher, Rabbi Reuvan Kimmelman once taught our class that "Elohai Neshama" (G-d the soul that you gave me..) is ambiguous. It could refer to "soul" or it could refer to "breath" and that both meanings could be given to prayer. The reason for the ambiguity is that there was always controversy regarding the nature of a soul. He also noted that the opening words of this prayer, when read aloud, actually sounded like stylized breathing and could be an indication of the preference of the author. I would be interested in your comments on this.

I respond:

My friend and colleague Randy Konigsburg raises an interesting possibility. I must admit that I have never heard this suggestion before; but, having heard it, I am rather dubious about it. While it is true that sometimes – though rather rarely – the Hebrew word neshamah does (or can) bear the connotation of 'breath' this does not seem to me to be the intention of the sages in this prayer. For the sages, what will be restored to the righteous "in the future age" will be their spiritual soul, not their physical breathing. Furthermore, the sages knew just as we do that breathing does not stop with sleep, so it is not 'restored' when we awaken. However, I think that a good case could be made that the concept of the soul which our sages had did correspond somewhat to what we call consciousness; and consciousness is restored to us when we awaken.