Part Nine: Zemirot Shabbat as Musical Divrei Tora

R. Yaakov Bieler

Kol Mevaser; Fall 5769

In the last essay on Jewish prayer appearing in Kol Mevaser, the practice of engaging in Zemirot during Shabbat and Yom Tov meals was approached from the general perspective of raising an otherwise essentially physical, carnal, hedonistic experience to one of holiness and spirituality by means of singing God’s Praises. However, it is important to note that the primary Talmudic source upon which the practice of singing Zemirot is based, mentions an additional modality by which a meal can be sanctified:

Megilla 12b

Said Rava: The seventh day was Shabbat, when Israel eat and drink. They begin (their festive meals) with words of Tora, and words of praise (for God…)

The requirement that Tora thoughts should be exchanged by those sharing a meal is not something relegated only to partaking of food during Shabbat and Yom Tov. A well-known Mishna states as much with respect to all situations where a number of people are consuming food together:

Avot 3:4

Rabbi Shimon said: If three[1] have eaten at the same table and have not spoken words of Tora there, it is as if they have eaten of the offerings to dead idols…

But if three have eaten at the same table, and have spoken words of Tora there, it is as if they have eaten at the table of the Omnipresent…

Such an assumption simply makes the requirement for words of Tora during a Shabbat meal more acute, i.e., if during the week, one is expected to sanctify his eating with words of Tora, how much more so is the case on Shabbat which is set aside for spiritual renewal and contemplation?

Nevertheless, the statement in tractate Megilla to the effect that there should be words of Tora and words of praise for God, could easily be viewed as dealing with two separate components of the ideal Shabbat repast. While many Niggunim (Jewish religious songs) feature Biblical verses put to music, ordinarily, the concept of a Dvar Tora is associated with questioning, discussion and explanation rather than collective singing. It is therefore curious to note that some very well-known Shabbat Zemirot contain fairly straight-forward Halachic material having to do with the laws of Shabbat observance, that could easily pass not only as part of a Zemer, for these passages are seamlessly incorporated into the particular liturgical poem’s rhyme and meter, but as Divrai Tora in their own right as well. Two typical examples of Halacha, as opposed to descriptive praise of God, serving as the basis for portions of Zemirot are:

“Ma Yedidut…” paragraph 4[2].

Your business interests are forbidden	חפציך בו אסורים
Also considering money matters.	וגם לחשוב חשבונות
But thinking is permitted,[3]	הרהורים מותרים
And making matches for one’s daughters.	ולשדך הבנות.
Making arrangements, so little children will be instructed in books,	ותינוק ללמדו ספר
Such as Psalms and songs,	למנצח בנגינות
And meditating on the goodly word (of Tora)	ולהגות באמרי שפר
In every camp and corner.[4]	בכל פנות ומחנות.

Shabbat “HaYom LaShem…” Paragraph 5[5]

Arrange the table with choice loaves of bread	לערוך בשלחן לחם חמודות
Serve today three festive meals.	לעשות היום שלש סעודות
Bless God’s Honored Name and give thanks.	את ה' הנכבד לברך ולהודות
Observe it diligently, my sons; Do all (I have Said)	שקדו ושמרו ועשו בני
It is Shabbat today, given over to God.[6]	שבת היום לה'.

The poetic passage from Ma Yedidut is clearly based upon the following legal statements in Shulchan Aruch, Orech Chayim 306:6, 8.

Matters concerning “Heaven” are permitted to be discussed (on Shabbat), like monetary calculations regarding Mitzvot and pledging to give charity and to oversee matters regarding the general public welfare, and to make commitments regarding children, i.e., to arrange engagements, educational situations or apprenticeships. And this is only with respect to speak about whether the individual (the perspective parent of the mate, the teacher, the craftsman) is willing to enter into an arrangement, but to actually complete the arrangement or discuss a specific sum is prohibited.

Thinking about one’s business matters is permitted, but because of the consideration of Oneg Shabbat (the enjoyment of Shabbat) it is a Mitzva not to think about them at all, and it should be in the individual’s mind as if all of his work has already been completed.

And while the passage from “HaYom LaShem” is of a more general nature than that from “Ma Yedidut”, nevertheless, the references to having Lechem Mishneh (two loaves) at Shabbat meals in contrast to weekday meals where even one whole loaf is not required; three meals over the course of Shabbat, in contrast to weekdays when the Talmud describes that only two meals would be consumed; the implication that since on Shabbat one would not be pursuing his livelihood, he would have more time to pray, i.e., Bless God’s Name (Pesukei D’Zimra is longer, there is a longer Tora reading together with a Haftora, Musaf is recited, etc.) and offer more extensive thanks than normal (e.g., an extra paragraph is added to Birkat HaMazon in recognition of Shabbat) are references to specific Halachic practices that take place on Shabbat.

What might account for the insertion of Halachic passages into Zemirot such as these? In Ismar Elbogen’s magisterial work on Jewish liturgy, the author quotes R. Yehuda ben Barzilai who claims that Piyutim (liturgical poems), the category of literary works to which Zemirot belong, originally served as substitutes for sermons during times of religious persecution (in Babylonia) when formal prayer and spiritual teaching were outlawed for Jews. “The sages among them introduced as part of the prayer service the practice of reciting and teaching to the ignorant the laws of each festival and its time and the laws of the holy days and the Sabbaths and the details of the Commandments in the form of songs of praise and thanksgiving and rhymes and piyut.”[7] While currently the Jewish people for the most part do not suffer from such persecutions and we are free to worship and study in any manner that we please, it is historically significant to reflect upon how our traditions were and still can be preserved when the normal means for their transmission, i.e., public prayer and study, are under threat. R. Yehuda ben Barzilai suggests therefore that the authors of the Piyutim and Zemirot recognized that formal cultural traditions must be reinforced, and if need be, substituted for by additional informal and aesthetically pleasing reworkings of our heritage that will be easily remembered due to their succinctness and poetic format. According to this view, the creation of at least some Piyutim in general and Zemirot in particular paralleled R. Yehuda HaNasi’s transcribing of the Oral Tradition to produce the Mishna during a lull in the Roman persecutions. At times the law must be reduced to its essential elements and given a form that will hopefully allow for it to be eventually reconstituted when it can once again be studied in its fullness and complexity. Our continuing to recite and chant such liturgical works connects us to the difficulties faced by Jews of the past, and we vicariously experience a sense of what they went through in order to preserve the religious practices which we can today so freely practice.

However, Elbogen himself believes that while Piyutim might have served an important purpose during times of persecution in places like Babylonia in order to preserve parts of the service and tradition that had been outlawed, in fact these poems originated much earlier in Palestine, “out of a need to disseminate in a new form the religious outlook engendered by the Aggada, to adorn and enhance the festival prayers with the splendor of religious thought.”[8] Such an understanding of the beginnings of Piyutim calls to mind a different educational assumption, i.e., individuals by definition, due to their individual makeup and cultural upbringings, learn in different ways, reflecting what has become known due to Howard Gardner, as the theory of multiple intelligences. For some, a Zemer will be considerably more memorable, meaningful and accessible than a page of Talmud or a passage in the Shulchan Aruch, much in the way that some people are auditory learners while others tend more to cognitive acquisition of knowledge. Due to the great variety of needs and sensibilities to be found among the Jewish people, the tradition must per force be packaged in different formats. One size will simply not fit all. Of course one could also say that to insist on a strict differentiation of learning styles also does not parallel reality and that a single individual can learn and review utilizing multiple modalities. From such a perspective, Zemirot simply shine a different light on some Halachot of Shabbat, but hardly totally replace their study by means of accessing original primary sources like TaNaCh, Talmud and Poskim.

Discussing the nature of Halachic passages in Zemirot does raise at least one additional issue, i.e., the need to understand what one is saying when he sings these songs/poems. Whereas it is well-accepted that a person who is praying in Hebrew, even if he does not understand all that he is saying—there do seem to be some minimum requirements, e.g., the first line in the Shema, the first Beracha of the Amida, etc.—since the act in itself is a demonstration of subservience to God, he is considered to have fulfilled his obligation, the same cannot be said for the Commandment of Tora study. How can one get credit for studying Tora if he does not comprehend what he has read or heard? Consequently, it is very likely that the inclusion of passages of Halachic significance within Zemirot in effect raises the bar with respect to the expectation for our precise understanding of what we are reciting. Such a realization should not be discouraging and lead to singing Zemirot less; it should rather be accepted as a challenge for us to have our translations close at hand and contemplate that much more deeply what we are singing together at our Shabbat tables.

---

[1] It is curious that the number “three” is mentioned, suggesting that it is acceptable if two people eat together without exchanging Tora. However, when this Mishna is taken together with the previous one,

Avot 3:3

R. Chanina ben Tradyon said: If two sit together and there are no words of Tora between them, it is a session of scorners…

But if two sit together and there are words of Tora between them, the Divine Presence Rests between them…

it becomes clear that there is an expectation even when only two people eat together, that they will engage in a Tora discussion. Why the Mishna 4 keyed on the number three is probably due to the concept of a Zimun, when three eat together, the Grace after Meals takes on a special form. Perhaps it is considered that much more of an inconsistency that the three are aware of their obligation to recite Birkat HaMazon, the official religious conclusion of the meal, in a particular manner, and yet avoid engaging in enhancing the meal spiritually while it is actually taking place.

[2] The ArtScroll Simchon, Mesorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY, June 2005, p. 23.

[3] Although concern for the spirit of Shabbat would preclude not only speaking and actively engaging in business activities, but also thinking about business matters, only the former are actionable in the sense of having Halachic consequences attached to them. Nevertheless, the term "מותר" (permitted) when looked upon from a technical Halachic perspective, appears misleading since in fact ideally, even thinking about business matters disturbs one’s Shabbat observance.

[4] Translation from Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, The Miracle of the Seventh Day, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 2003, pp. 59-60.

[5] The ArtScroll Simchon, p. 37.

[6] R. Steinsaltz, p. 118.

[7] Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History, trans. Raymond Scheindlin, The Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1993, p. 222.

[8] Ibid. p. 224.