Addir Addirenu on Shabbat & Beyond

Jonah Rank

Question:
On what days is it proper to include addir addirenu1 in the Kedushah2?

Answer:
Over the course of Jewish liturgical history, different parameters have
determined different limitations on and reasons for reciting addir addirenu.
Those who have concluded different answers to the above question have
considered several myths embedded in midrashim (‫ִמְדָרִשׁים‬,
“interpretations”) that render addir addirenu appropriate or inappropriate to
recite at different times of the year. Before exploring the practical answers
given by different posekim (‫פּוְֹֿסִקים‬, “decisors” of Jewish law), it is important
to seek an understanding of the midrashim that underly the rationales
justifying the omission or recitation of addir addirenu.3

The First Addir Addirenu

Prior to the 16th century, the recitation of addir addirenu was, when
explained, always connected with a midrash (‫ִמְדָרשׁ‬, the singular of
midrashim) that has been transmitted in a few different versions. In each
telling of this midrash, God concludes that the Torah will be gifted to Beney
Yisra’el (‫ְֿבֵּני ִיְשָׂרֵאל‬, “the children of Israel”) and not to the angels (who beg
otherwise), whose transcendental and incorporeal lives are irrelevant to the
mundane concerns of the Torah’s laws guiding social living.
The earliest rabbinic writer to bring a midrash-based rationale to the
recitation of addir addirenu, Rabbi El’azar of Worms (of Germany; b.4 c.5
1165, d.6 c. 1240), includes reference not only to the aforementioned
midrash but also offers some additional insight into the meaning of addir
addirenu. He writes:

‫בראש השנה וביום כפורים אומרים אני ה' אלהיכם אדיר אדירינו ה' אדונינו על‬
.‫שם שהוא אדיר בקודש ואדיר במשפט‬
On Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur, we say [in the Kedushah] “I
am Adonai, your God” (Numbers 15:41) [followed by] “The glory
of our glory [‫ַאִדּיר ַאִדּיֵֽרנוּ‬, addir addirenu], Adonai, our Lord [ ‫ְיָי‬
‫ֲאֹדֵֽנינוּ‬, Adonai adonenu] (Psalm 8:2)7” on account of God being
glorious in holiness and glorious in justice.

.‫״ ה' שם הנכבד והנורא הוא‬,‫״ה' אדונינו תנה הודך על השמים‬

“Adonai, our Lord,” “give Your glory over the Heavens [ ‫ְֿתָּנה הוְֹֿדָך‬
‫ַעל־ַהָשָּֽׁמִים‬, tenah hodekha al hashamayim]:” Adonai is the
honored name, and awe-inspiring is God.

.‫״אדונינו״ ובו אנו בוטחים‬

“Our Lord [‫ֲאֹדֵֽנינוּ‬, adonenu],” for in God we trust.

‫״מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ״ (כמו) [כמה] חזק ומאודר שמך הקדוש בכל יושבי‬
.‫ וגם לעתיד ולעובדו שכם אחד‬,‫הארץ‬
“How glorious is Your name throughout all the earth:” how
mighty and glorified is Your holy name among all those who
dwell on the earth, and for eternity--that they may serve that
[name] as one.

‫״ ויראה כבוד מלכותו בנקמת אדום וקיום מלכותו‬,‫״והיה ה' למלך על כל הארץ‬
.‫ ״ביום ההוא יהיה ה' אחד״ הוא בורא כל‬.‫על כל עם הארץ‬
“Adonai will be sovereign over all the earth,” and the honor of
God’s sovereignty will be seen in the vengeance against Edom 8
and the establishment of God’s sovereignty upon every nation of
the earth. “On that day Adonai will be One:” that is, the Creator
of all.

‫ ויקראו כולם שמו המיוחד‬,‫״ כבודו לאחר לא יתן‬,‫ ״ושמו אחד‬.‫״ה'״ שם העצם‬
.‫הקדוש‬
“Adonai” is the personal noun. “And God’s name will be One:”
God’s honor shall be given to no other, 9 and all will call upon
God’s unified holy name.

.‫״ כ"ב אותיות התורה‬:‫״אדיר״ עד ״אחד״ כ"ב תיבות; זהו ״נגילה ונשמחה ב"ך‬
From addir (‫ַאִדּיר‬, “the glory”) until ehad (‫ֶאָחד‬, “One”), there are
twenty-two words [in the Hebrew]10. This [number 22, which in
gimatriyyah (‫ִגּיַמְטִרָיּה‬, the rabbinic assigning of numerical values
to Hebrew letters and words11), is equal to kaf-beyt (‫כ״ב‬, which is
22 in gimatriyyah) is an allusion to bakh [‫ָבּך‬ ְ , “in You,” which is
equal to 22 in gimatriyyah] in nagilah venismehah bakh [ ‫ָנִֽגיָלה‬
ְ‫ְֿוִנְשְֿׂמָחה ָבּך‬, “let us be glad and rejoice in You”] (Song of Songs
1:4), [a reference to] the twenty-two letters of the [language of
the] Torah [i.e. Hebrew].
 ‫״ אמרו המלאכים בהר סיני כדאמרינן‬:‫ועוד ״ה' אדונינו תנה הודך על השמים‬
‫ ״תנה הודך על‬,‫במסכת שבת שלא רצו שיוריד משה הוד התורה למטה ואמרו‬
‫״‬.‫ ״מה אדיר שמך כל הארץ‬,‫״ לכך‬.‫השמים‬
And another [interpretation of] “Adonai our Lord, give Your glory
over the Heavens” (Psalm 8:2): The angels said at Mount Sinai,
as we said in [the Babylonian Talmud,] Tractate Shabbat, that
they did not want God to let Moses bring down the glory of
Torah, and they said, “Give Your glory over the Heavens” (Psalm
8:2).

‫״ ותסיר ב' של‬,‫״ קח ש' של ״שמך‬.‫״ ותסיר א' של ״אדירות‬,‫תקח מ' של ״מה‬
‫ מש"ה ובין שמו א"ב; על שם כשהלך אחר‬:‫״ הרי‬.‫״ תקח ה' של ״הארץ‬.‫״בכל‬
.‫כ"ב אותיות א"ב‬
Take the letter mem (‫ )מ‬of mah (‫ַמה‬, “How”), and remove the
letter alef (‫ )א‬of addirut (‫ַאִדּירוּת‬, “gloriness”)12. Take the letter
shin of (‫ )ש‬shimkha (‫ִשְׁמך‬
ָ , “Your name”), and remove the letter
beyt (‫ )ב‬from bekhol (‫ְֿבׇּכל־‬, “in all of”). Take the letter heh (‫ )ה‬of
ha’aretz (‫ָהָֽאֶרץ‬, “the earth”). Behold: Mosheh (‫ֹמֶשׁה‬, “Moses”) is
spelled, and between his name is alef-beyt (‫א״ב‬, the first two
letters of, and the name of, the Hebrew alphabet), for he went
after the twenty-two letters of the alef-beyt.

.‫ ״מה אנוש״ בגימ' ב"ן עמר"ם‬.‫״ אנוש בגימ' ז"ה מש"ה‬:‫״מה אנוש כי תזכרנו‬
“What is a human--that You should recall one!?” (Psalm 8:5):
Enosh (‫ֱאנוֹשׁ‬, “human”) in gimatriyyah is equal to zeh Mosheh ( ‫ֶזה‬
‫ֹמֶשׂה‬, “this is Moses”). Mah enosh (‫ָמה־ֱאנוֹשׁ‬, “what is a human”) in
gimatriyyah is equal to ben Amram (‫ֶבּן ַעְמָרם‬, “[Moses, the] son of
Amram”)13.

‫שמעתי שאין אומרים ״אדיר אדירנו״ כי אם בראש השנה וביום הכפורים‬

.‫ אבל במגנצא אומרים אותו בכל יום טוב בקול רם בכוונה בניגון טוב‬,‫בקדושה‬
I heard that we do not recite addir addirenu, except on Rosh
HaShanah during the Kedushah; however, in Mainz (in Germany),
we say it on every Yom Tov14 in a loud voice, with intention, and
with good melody.15

We have quoted at length Rabbi El’azar’s commentary here because

his is perhaps the most comprehensive in offering a religious meaning
behind the practice of ever reciting addir addirenu. Moreover, while many
rabbinic commentaries prior to and contemporary with Rabbi El’azar
comment on the Biblical words that comprise all but the first two words of
addir addirenu, Rabbi El’azar is the earliest to expound the meaning of the
included Biblical phrases with reference to addir addirenu itself. Rabbi El’azar
in fact references the appearance in the Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 88b-
89a of a specific midrash where angels express their envy when God gifts
the Torah to humans and not to the angels. Though his commentary is
largely rooted in rabbinic traditions that precede him, 16 those earlier
teachings do not reference addir addirenu specifically.
In fact, addir addirenu was likely unknown to the majority, if not all, of the
rabbis who preceded the 11th century C.E.. Rabbinic writings first mention
addir addirenu either in the above commentary of Rabbi El’azar or in Siddur
Rashi 216 (‫)ִסדּוּר ַרִשׁ"י רטז‬, where just the two incipient words are referenced
in passing as an addition to the Kedushah of the Amidah during Ne’ilah (
‫)ְֿנִעיָלה‬, the final service of Yom Kippur. It is unclear which anthology came
first; it can indeed be argued that Siddur Rashi is not a product of Rashi (
‫ַרִשׁ"י‬--the acronym of Rabbi Shelomoh Yitzchaki [‫ ]ַרִבּי ְֿשֹׁלֹמה ִיְצֲחִקי‬of France, b.
102817, d. 1120) himself, but this prayer anthology was likely aggregated by
students of this sage well after his death.18 Moreover, the particular section
of Siddur Rashi that includes this reference to addir addirenu might not be
original to the earliest versions of Siddur Rashi--despite Rashi’s own
signature at the end of 216.19 Most likely, Rabbi El’azar was the first to
publicize in writing the existence of addir addirenu.
Historians recall Rabbi El’azar of Worms as a German pietist, a teacher
and student of the mystical school of hasidey Ashkenaz (‫ֲחִסיֵדי ַאְשְֿׁכָּנז‬, the
“pietists of Ashkenaz20”). In the philosophy of these theosophists:

The letters have profound significance, for there is not a single

unnecessary letter in the prayers, nor is a letter lacking; their
number and order have mystical meaning. Therefore, the
Ashkenazic pietists used to count the words and letters in each
of the benedictions of the `Amida; they asserted repeatedly that
one may not add or drop a single one… for the whole structure
was erected for a particular purpose, and whoever changes a
word in the “most holy” prayers will have to render account to
God.21

One can better appreciate this mystic’s valuing specifically the carefully-
crafted 22 words of addir addirenu as an allusion to the word bakh (equaling
22 in gimatriyyah) in Song of Songs 1:4. Rabbi El’azar rendered the loud and
musical recitation of these 22 words as akin to uttering a magical formula
that transports the reader through the gateway of bakh, the door of which
opens into the expanse of Song of Songs 1:4. Indeed, Rabbi El’azar’s
commentary on Song of Songs reveals greater insight into Rabbi El’azar’s
connecting addir addirenu to the days of Yom Tov. He writes:

:‫ ד׳ [פעמים שמופיעה המילה ״ונשמחה״ במקרא‬,‫ ונשמחה‬:‫נגילה ונשמחה בך‬

‫ שלוש רגלים בשנה ושמיני‬,]‫ כד‬:‫ קיח‬,‫ יד ושם‬:‫ ס; ותהלים צ‬:‫ וכן ישעיה כה‬,‫כאן‬
…‫של חג‬
Nagilah venishmehah bakh: Venishmehah (‫ְֿוִנְשְֿׂמָחה‬, “and let us
rejoice”) appears 4 times [in the Hebrew Bible: here; Isaiah
25:60; and Psalms 90:14 and 118:24]: [paralleling] the 3
pilgrimage-festivals [Sukkot, Passover and Shavu’ot], plus the
eighth [day] of the festival [of Sukkot; i.e., Shemini Atzeret].

.]‫ י‬:‫ גי׳ ״יום שמחה״ וכתיב ״ביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם״ [במדבר י‬:‫ונשמחה‬
Venishmehah: is equal in gimatriyyah to yom simhah (‫יוֹם ִשְׂמָחה‬,
“a day of joy”), and [along a similar theme of joy], it is written,
“on the day of your joy and on your sacred gatherings” (Numbers
10:10).

.‫ כ״ב אותיות‬,‫ ובתורתך‬:‫ונשמחה בך‬

Venishmehah bakh (“And we will rejoice in You”): and in Your
Torah--of [the] 22 [Hebrew] letters.22

Through the lens of mystical hermeneutics, Song of Songs 1:4, in

including the term venismehah, which appears only 4 times in the Hebrew
Bible, alludes intentionally to the quadrennial days of Yom Tov (paired in the
Diaspora) that are not the High Holidays of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur.
Read through this lens, the two words venishmechah bakh themselves prove
as a supportive prooftext for the chanting of the 22-word-long addir addirenu
on any day of Yom Tov.
Rabbi El’azar insisted that the worshiper accurately conserve the
intentionally ordered 22 words of addir addirenu. The incipient letter of the
third through seventh words of the prayer spell an allusion to Moses seeking
the holy Hebrew alphabet of the Torah, hidden in the crevices between the
letters of his own name. And Rabbi El’azar utilized the words of Psalm 8:2
specifically to remind the cognoscenti of a particularly disparaging scene
from the midrash of angels envying humans for receiving the Torah.
Recalling the moment when the angels stooped so low as to ask, in the
words of Psalm 8:5, “What is a human--that you should recall one!?”--the
worshipper is reminded further of the genealogy of that Divine-truth-chaser
Moses, son of Amram: son of a human, son of the earth 23, far beneath the
heavenly hosts above. But to recall this midrash fully is to recall, most
importantly, its upshot: that, holy as the angels are, the Torah is a gift given
in order to sanctify humans. To sing addir addirenu, Rabbi El’azar thereby
intimated, is to bring harmony to the Divine cosmos amidst a moment of
dissonance in Heaven.24
Rabbi El’azar’s commentary turns from the theoretical to the practical
as we reach its end. Rabbi El’azar states his familiarity with the practice of
reciting addir addirenu on only the High Holidays (though he does not specify
during which services), but he notes that, in Mainz, the custom is to recite it
every Yom Tov. Although his commentary--when read through the lens of
Rabbi El’azar’s commentary on Song of Songs 1:4 can rationalize the singing
of addir addirenu on the days of Yom Tov that are not High Holidays, Rabbi
El’azar provides no explanation for the connection between addir addirenu
and the High Holidays.

Explaining Addir Addirenu, Condensed and Different

Rabbi Natan ben Rabbi Yehudah (c. 13th-14th century) 25 wrote in Sefer
Mahkim:

‫ויש אומרים אדיר אדירנו בכל שבת ושבת מפני שאותו מזמור נאמר על מתן‬
.‫תורה (על) לישראל ואמרו המלאכים תנה הודך על השמים‬
And there are those who say addir addirenu on each and every
Shabbat because that song was said regarding the granting of
the Torah to Israel, and the angels said, “Give your glory over
the Heavens.”26

Clearly, Rabbi Natan, who is, historically speaking, the second rabbi
whose words regarding the theory and practice of reciting addir addirenu
have been preserved, understood addir addirenu as connected to the exact
same (evolving) midrash that Rabbi El’azar mentioned. What is less clear is
how addir addirenu, which was once recited only once a year (during Ne’ilah
of Yom Kippur), came to be recited on every single Shabbat just a few
centuries after it first appeared as part of Jewish liturgy. Leaving more of this
enigma unsolvable, Rabbi Natan recorded neither whose practice it was to
recite addir addirenu every Shabbat nor if addir addirenu was ever recited by
its Shabbat-sayers on Yom Tov. Rabbi Natan, distancing himself from addir
addirenu, remained mum on what his own practice was, if he even ever
recited addir addirenu or only knew about it.
Beyond the praxis, another curiosity etched by Rabbi Natan riddles the
reader: If the granting of the Torah to Israel is indeed the reason for reciting
addir addirenu on Shabbat--and, if, presumably, the reader is reminded on
Shabbat of the granting of the Torah to Israel since the Torah is read on
Shabbat--why would addir addirenu not also be recited on Mondays and
Thursdays, when the Torah is also read? Sadly, several centuries have
passed since Rabbi Natan would be found to be in any condition to offer us
any clarifications to help resolve these lingering queries.

Addir Addirenu and the Messianic Exemption

Whereas the entire history of addir addirenu until the 16th century had
been a history of increased presence of the prayer throughout the course of
the year, Rabbi Mordechai Jaffe (b. c. 1530, d. 1612) posed and penned a
particular problem for the prayer:

‫ וכן בכל יו"ט מתפללים שיבא‬,‫ ומוסיף אדיר אדירינו‬...‫ושליח ציבור חוזר התפלה‬
‫ ובשבת אין אומרים אותו דגמירי שלא יבא‬,'‫בן דוד והיה יי' מלך על כל הארץ וכו‬
.)‫משיח בשבת (ובפוזנא וגלילותיה אומרים אדיר אדירנו אף בשבת‬
Then the sheli’ah tzibbur (‫ְֿשִׁליַח ִצבּוּר‬, “emissary of the
community” for leading prayer) repeats the Tefillah [of the
Amidah]... and adds addir addirenu. And so one does every Yom
Tov, praying that the son of [King] David will come, “and Adonai
will be sovereign over all the earth, etc.” But on Shabbat we do
not say this, for our sages teach that the messiah will not come
on Shabbat (but in Posen and its surroundings, they say addir
addirenu, even on Shabbat).27

Despite whatever they did in Posen and its outskirts, Rabbi Jaffe suggested
that reciting addir addirenu is an utterance that could nearly command a
violation of Shabbat should its recitation hasten the coming of the Messiah.
Rabbi Jaffe referred indirectly back to a commonly drawn conclusion in
reading the Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 43a-b.
This stretch of the Talmud poses a question that, in the days of its
authors, must have sounded utterly hypothetical to all except those who
foresaw the possibility of God’s more cherished characters descending from
the sky: “‫“( ”אין תחומין למעלה מעשרה‬Are the laws prohibiting traveling beyond
a certain distance on Shabbat operative at and above the altitude of ten
handbreadths above the ground?”). Indeed, this question had some
grounding in mythic truth (and seemingly not historic realia), for rabbinic
tradition knew of no death suffered by Elijah the prophet, but Elijah’s fiery
ascent to Heaven was well-remembered from II Kings 2:11. The question
many Talmudic sages therefore asked was: Would it be a violation of
Shabbat or Yom Tov for Elijah to come back to earth to tell us the news of
the Messiah’s impending arrival? Or is airborne travel above 10
handbreadths not subject to the strictures of Shabbat as earthlings have
known them?
In an attempt to answer this question, the Talmud brings a baraita (
‫ ָבַּֽרְיָתא‬an outside teaching previously excluded from the compilation of the
Mishnah), where it is taught that one who declares that they will begin to
refrain from strong drink on the day that the Messiah has arrived is
permitted wine on Shabbat and Yom Tov. The presumption of the baraita is
that the Messiah in fact would observe Shabbat and Yom Tov like any other
person and would refrain from traveling to Earth on Shabbat or Yom Tov. In
accordance with this logic, if a person knows at the start of Shabbat that the
Messiah has not yet come, this oath-taker can drink wine with the knowledge
that the Messiah will not come on Shabbat itself.
However, the Talmud previously dared to ask if the strictures on
Shabbat and Yom Tov travel apply at and over ten handbreadths above the
ground--and this is not answered. As this passage of the Talmud progresses,
the rabbinic collective begins to distinguish with greater nuance the
difference between the arrival of Elijah (who is expected to arrive at least
one day ahead of the Messiah to announce the Messiah’s coming) and the
arrival of the Messiah. The Talmud reassures: “‫כבר מובטח להן לישראל שאין אליהו‬
‫“( ”בא לא בערבי שבתות ולא בערבי ימים טובים מפני הטורח‬It has already been
promised to Israel that Elijah will not come on the eve preceding a Shabbat
or Yom Tov because of the disturbance [his arrival would cause]”). Rejecting
this notion, the Talmud suggests that, were Elijah to come to announce the
arrival of the Messiah, all of the nations of the world would serve the Jewish
people, and there would be no disturbance in the Jews’ preparation for
Shabbat or Yom Tov (for those who are not Jewish would attend to whatever
preparations for Shabbat or Yom Tov were unfinished at the time by the
Jews). Despite the presupposition one can extrapolate from the baraita, the
Talmud steers away from the question of whether or not high-altitude travel
would be a violation of Shabbat, and this question remains unanswered.
Moreover, the greater question of whether or not the Messiah would arrive
on Shabbat or Yom Tov itself awaits its own answer. Though many rabbis
through the ages recognized that the Talmud here does not determine that
the Messiah definitely could not come on Shabbat or Yom Tov, few ever had
the gall to assert this. Most straightforward in his assertion, Rabbi Yitzhak
Minkowsky (b. c. 1788, d. 1851) of Belarus wrote in his commentary Keren
Orah on Sanhedrin 66a: “‫“( ”ספק אם יבא בשבת וי"ט‬It is unclear whether the
Messiah would come on Shabbat or Yom Tov”).
 Rabbi Isaiah Berlin (b. c. 1725, d. 1799) of Germany noted that, in
accordance with the interpretation of the aforementioned baraita that the
Messiah would not come on Shabbat, the Messiah would in fact also not
come on Yom Tov. According to Rabbi Berlin, Rabbi Jaffe would therefore be
incorrect to teach that the Messiah might arrive on Yom Tov but not on
Shabbat and that this particular logic should prevent us from reciting addir
addirenu on Shabbat. Rabbi Berlin, conceding mostly to the authority of his
predecessor, still took pride in his own post-Jaffe liturgical idiosyncrasy:

‫(ויפה מנהגנו שנוהגי׳ שאנו אומרים פה אדיר אדירינו בכל יו״ט אפי׳ כשחל‬
.)‫בשבת הואיל דבביאת בן דוד יו״ט ושבת דין אחד לשניהם‬
(But our custom is appropriate as we practice: that we say addir
addirenu here even when Yom Tov falls on Shabbat since, when
it comes to the coming of the son of David, the law treats both
Yom Tov and Shabbat the same as one another.) 28

Rabbi Yisra’el Hayyim Friedman (b. c. 1852-d. 1922) of Poland, perhaps

hoping to put in a few good words in support of reciting addir addirenu on
Shabbat before he accepted the ruling of Rabbi Jaffe’s Levush, wrote:

‫ והובא במנהגים ובלבוש והטעם‬.‫ ״אדיר אדירנו״ וכו׳‬,‫והנה ביו״ט מוסיפין כאן‬
‫ ועיין במחזור ויטרי שם איתא לאמרו רק בשבת אבל ביו״ט יש שם‬...‫עיין בלבוש‬
‫ וביו״ט שחל בשבת יש ג״כ‬,‫ ״אלקיכם אני ואתם עמי״ וכו׳‬:‫נוסחא אחרת‬
,‫ ובמדינותינו אין נוהגין כן רק במנהג הלבוש והמנהגים‬.‫נוסחא אחרת; ע״ש‬
.‫והיכי דנהוג נהוג‬
Behold, on Yom Tov, we add here [in the Kedushah], addir
addirenu, etc.. And this is brought in Sefer HaMinhagim and
Levush; for the reason, see Levush… and see Mahzor Vitry,
where it is appropriate to recite it on Shabbat, but on Yom Tov
there is a different formula: “I am your God, and you are My
nation,” etc., and on Yom Tov that falls on Shabbat, there is yet
another version; see there. And in our countries, we do not
practice as such, but [we follow] the custom of Levush and Sefer
HaMinhagim, and however it is practiced it is practiced. 29

Rabbi Friedman in an act of educative defiance (surrounded by

submission to Rabbi Jaffe’s influence) highlighted the peculiar case of Mahzor
Vitry (composed by a circle of Rashi’s disciples and recognized by others by
the 13th century). Mahzor Vitry 192 (especially from the context of 191
preceding it) indeed stipulates that addir addirenu be sung every Shabbat.
And indeed, the case is that Sefer HaMinhagim of Rabbi Avraham Hildik (c.
2nd half of the 13th century)30 includes addir addirenu for only Yom Tov, as
indicated in the section Minhagey Hag HaSukkot.
Rabbi Yehiel Mikhl HaLevi Epstein (b. 1829, d. 1908) of Belarus
honored the prevalence of addir addirenu as Yom Tov liturgy (as made
evident in his Arukh HaShulhan, Orah Hayyim 659:1), but codified a practice
reported by none of his predecessors who refrained from addir addirenu on
Shabbat:

‫ ואומרים אדיר אדירינו‬...‫ ובמוסף מתפלל של יו"ט‬...‫שבת של חולו של מועד‬

.‫בקדושה‬
Regarding Shabbat during Hol HaMo’ed [‫חוֹל ַהמּוֵֹעד‬, the
intermediary days between the days of Yom Tov at the
beginnings and ends of Sukkot and Passover]... then during
Musaf, one prays the liturgy of Yom Tov… and we recite addir
addirenu during the Kedushah.31

Despite those who made their exceptions known as indicated above,

Rabbi Jaffe’s position still dominated Jewish law and became the norm. 32

Addir Addirenu on Hoshana Rabbah

For all of the debating of whether Addir Addirenu may be recited on
Shabbat, curiously no source ever forbade reciting Addir Addirenu on
Hoshana Rabbah. All sources that mention Hoshana Rabbah--Minhageh
Zalman Yent (whose author lived in the Rhineland and moved to Italy near
the beginning of the 15th century)33, Sefer HaMinhagim of Rabbi Avraham
Hildik34, Rabbi Ya’akov HaLevi ben Mosheh Mullin (b. c. 1360, d. 1427) of
Germany35, Mahzor Vitry 383, Rabbi Yitzhak Aizik of Tirna (15th century) of
Eastern Europe36, Rabbi Yitzhak ben Rabbi Me’ir HaLevi of Düren, Germany
(c. 13th-14th century)37, Sefer HaMinhagim of Rabbi Avraham Kloyzner (c.
13th-14th century in Vienna) 58, Seder Troyes 10 by Rabbi Menahem ben
HaRav Yosef HaLevi Hazan (c. end of 13th century), Rabbi El’azar of Worms’
Sefer HaRoke’ah38, Rabbi Mordekhai Benet (b. c. 1753, d. 1829) of Moravia in
MaHaRaM39, and the Arukh HaShulhan on Orah Hayyim 684:12. As soon as
Hoshana Rabbah is offered as a possibility--though it is not a day of Yom
Tov--it is accepted as yet another day on which to recite addir addirenu.

Special Occasions for Addir Addirenu

Rabbi Menahem ben HaRav Yosef HaLevi Hazan’s Seder Troyes 10
includes a few occasions that no author before or after him similarly specifies
for the recitation of addir addirenu:
 ‫ גם בשבת ר"ח‬,‫אזכיר תחילה כי מנהגנו לומר אדיר אדירנו בכל ימים טובים‬
‫ וגם‬,‫ אבל לא בשבת בשלח והאזינו‬,‫ ואתחנן‬,‫ יתרו‬:‫ושבת נישואין ושבת דברות‬
‫ ואין אנו רגילים לומ' אלהיכם אני‬.‫לא בשבת שמסיימין כל אחד מה' חומשי תורה‬
…‫פצתי לפי שאין בו לשון צח כמו באדיר אדירנו‬
I will first mention that our practice is to recite addir addirenu on
all days of Yom Tov, and also on Shabbat of Rosh Hodesh ( ‫ֹראשׁ‬
‫ֹֽחֶדשׁ‬, “the beginning of the [new] month”), and the Shabbat
[preceding] a wedding, and a Shabbat when reading the [ten]
utterances--Yitro and Ve’ethannan-- but not on the Shabbat of
Beshallah and Ha’azinu, and not on a Shabbat when we complete
any of the five books of the Torah, and we are not accustomed to
reciting [the piyyut] “Eloheykhem Ani Patzti” (“ ‫ֹלֵהיֶכם ֲאִני‬-‫ֱא‬
‫)”ַֽפְּצִתּי‬40 for the language in it is not as clear as that in addir
addirenu.

From this passage it would seem that there were communities that also
recited addir addirenu on the days of Shabbat during which the readings of
Beshallah and Ha’azinu or any final pericope of the five books of the Torah
were read. Moreover, it seems plausible that addir addirenu replaced a more
impenetrable (and now forgotten) piyyut sung on special occasions, the two
incipient words of which, like addir addirenu, both began with alef.41

The Mystical Letters of Addir Addirenu

Just a few centuries after Rabbi Jaffe limited the frequency of addir
addirenu in the calendrical cycle, Rabbi Avraham Yehoshu’a Heschel (b. c.
1748, d. 1825) of Opatów (in Poland) attached (or perhaps uncovered) yet
another new mythical, mystical meaning to the prayer. The Apter Rebbe, as
Rabbi Heschel was known after the namesake of his town, connected addir
addirenu to a midrash found in Midrash Tanhuma (Warsaw), Bemidbar 2:2,
s.v. “ish al diglo be’otot” (“42‫איש על דגלו באתת‬,” “each person, according to
their flag, with signs”). The midrash imagines 22,000 angelic chariots
descending upon Mount Sinai at the moment of God’s revelation. So great
were the flags that each chariot held that the Israelites desired for each tribe
to have their own flag, each symbolizing God’s love. The eisegetical author
of this midrash taught that all of this accords with the words of the female
heterosexual lover in Song of Songs 2:4: “for his banner upon me is love,”--“
‫ְֿוִדְגלוֹ ָעַלי ַאֲהָבה‬.” The rabbinic collective understood, as much of Shir HaShirim
Rabbah well attests, that Song of Songs’ female lover represents the
congregation of Israel seeking the revelation of her male lover, God. Upon
God’s revelation at Sinai, Midrash Tanhuma here reports, God commanded
Moses to create flags for Israel like the flags of the angelic hosts just as they
wanted.
The first mention of the desire for such flags is described in the word
shennit’avvu (‫ֶשִׁנְּתַאוּוּ‬, “that they desired”). The root of this verb tends to be
associated with a seduced longing for food or sexual intimacy. Aside from
referencing the Song of Songs, the author of this midrash selected the word
shennit’avvu likely purposefully, recognizing that shennit’avvu contains the
letters of ot (‫אוֹת‬, “a sign”) rearranged. The Apter read into this midrash his
own familiarity of the word ot (which is the singular noun at the root of
be’otot: ‫באתת‬, “with signs”) not meaning just any kind of sign but an
expanse covering a wide range of the signification of that which could be
signified. In its most commonplace definition, an ot refers to “a letter” of an
alphabet, but at its most transcendental, an ot takes the form of “a Divine
act.” Both the latter and, as previously demonstrated, the former meanings
yield theologically significant symbols.43
Though Hebrew conventions proclaim “a letter” and “a Divine act” as
homophonous equals--both being ot--the plurals of these two signifiers differ:
otiyyot (‫ )אוִֹתיּוֹת‬and otot (‫ )אוֹתוֹת‬respectively (and the latter is the plural for
nearly all possible meanings of ot other than “a letter”). Reading the above
excerpt of Midrash Tanhuma, the Apter sought meaning in it by equating
otot with otiyyot themselves because of their shared singular form. This
interpretive strand of thought in Jewish tradition dates back to at least the
author of Avot DeRabbi Natan (Nus’ha A)44 13, presumably a native of the
Land of Israel living at some point either during or later than the end of the
2nd century C.E. and either during or prior to the 9th century. 45 Avot DeRabbi
Natan Nus’ha A is not alone in finding parallel and synonymous meaning
between otot and otiyyot; many exegetical and eisegetical Jewish texts
preceding and following it offer some teaching that depends on the
connection between these words.46
Among the texts fascinated by otot as otiyyot lies Midrash Aggadah,
which emerged somewhere around the 12th or 13th century in Provence 47
and remains seemingly the earliest transmitter of a tradition critical to the
Apter’s reading of Midrash Tanhuma. Midrash Aggadah at Bereshit 2, s.v.
“ish al diglo be’otot” details not only the pictorial representations that each
tribe’s banner displayed but also the permutations of letters derived from
the names of the three forefathers as etched onto the four flags representing
the four encampments of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim and Dan. According to
Midrash Aggadah, divided among each flag were the first, second, third and
fourth letters respectively of each forefather’s four-lettered name (such that
Judah’s encampment waved alef-yod-yod [‫י‬-‫י‬-‫]א‬, for the incipient letters of
Avram [‫]אברם‬, Yitzhak [‫ ]יצחק‬and Ya’akov [‫ ]יעקב‬and so forth). For
unknowable reasons, not all future variants of this eisegetical kernel
replicate the exact imagery presented here in Midrash Aggadah, and the
Apter himself envisioned a different ordering of otiyyot as those otot upon
the banners of the encampments.
In Ohev Yisra’el, the most prominent anthology of the Apter’s
teachings on the Torah, Rabbi Heschel is recorded having taught regarding
BeMidbar:

‫״ אל תקרי‬.‫ביאור על מדרש פליאה בפסוק ״איש על דגלו באותות לבית אבותם‬

‫ בשעת מתן תורה ראו ישראל שנתגלה‬...‫באותות אלא באותיות… ויבואר דהנה‬
‫עליהם הקדוש ברוך הוא בצבאות ומחמת דגלים של מלאכי השרת נתאוו ישראל‬
‫ ובזה יבואר‬.‫ והנה הדגלים היו דגל מחנה ראוב"ן יהוד"ה אפרי"ם ד"ן‬.‫לדגלים‬
‫ ומפני מה דווקא ביום טוב? אך‬.‫מה שאנו אומרים אדיר אדירנו בכל יום טוב‬
‫ ובעולם‬.‫ ויום טוב נגד עולם הבריאה‬,‫דהנה דשבת מרמז נגד העולם האצילות‬
'‫ נוטריקון א' פרים ד' ן י‬.‫ לזה אומרים אדי"ר‬.‫הבריאה הוא המרכבה עם הדגלים‬
.‫הודה ר' אובן שהן המה הדגלים‬
An elucidation of this amazing midrash on the Scriptural excerpt
“each person, according to their flag, be’otot (‫ְֿבֹּאֹתת‬, ‘with signs’)
in accord with the house of their ancestors:” Do not read be’otot
but rather be’otiyyot (‫ְֿבֹּאִתיּוֹת‬, “with letters”)... and it will be
elucidated as, behold... at the moment of the giving of the Torah,
Israel saw that the Holy Blessed One was revealed to them with
heavenly hosts. And on account of the flags of the hosting
angels, Israel desired flags. And behold, the flags were the flags
of each camp: Re’uven (‫ראובן‬, “Reuben”), Yehudah (‫יהודה‬,
“Judah”) Efrayim (‫אפרים‬, “Ephraim”), [and] Dan (‫דן‬, “Dan”).
Regarding this, it will be elucidated why we recite addir addirenu
on every Yom Tov. And why specifically on Yom Tov? Alas,
behold, Shabbat [mystically] alludes to olam ha’atzilut ( ‫עולם‬
‫האצילות‬, “the world of emanation”), and Yom Tov to olam
habberi’ah (‫עולם הבריאה‬, “the world of creation”). And in olam
habberi’ah there are those chariots with those flags--and for this
we proclaim addir (‫)אדיר‬: a notarikon [‫נוטריקון‬, “notary’s
shorthand”48 of the incipient letters of] Efrayim, Dan, Yehudah,
and Re’uven--who are the flags.

The Apter evidently imagined the initiated disciple traversing the

Jewish calendar and ascending the widespread Jewish mystical notion of the
four worlds (from bottom to top: olam ha’asiyyah [‫עולם העשיה‬, “the world of
doing”], olam haytzirah [‫עולם היצירה‬, “the world of making”] olam habberi’ah
and olam ha’atzilut). The adept reached the uppermost echelons of olam
ha’atzilut on Shabbat, but, on Yom Tov, the Apter’s students reached just
one stratosphere below in olam habberi’ah, where the chariot-angels with
their proud, lovely banners are revealed. Undoubtedly more rigid
understandings of the four worlds would be an invention of medieval and
early modern mysticism, especially under Lurianic influence, with which
Rabbi Heschel was familiar. It is unclear how far back such conceptions date.
Yet, Rabbi Heschel’s presumption of olam habberi’ah as a step above olam
haytzirah and the linking of the words of Psalm 8:2 with Yom Tov
corresponds well with a much earlier fragment of a midrash uncovered by
Jacob Mann:

,‫ ב) ייי אדונינו למה נאמ[ר‬:‫כת' ייי אדונינו מה אדיר שמך ב' הא' וגו' (תהילים ח‬
,‫ אחר יצירתו שלעולם‬,‫אדונינו‬, ‫ שלא היה שם ברייה‬,‫ קודם] יצירתו שלעולם‬,‫ייי‬
.‫שנקרא אדון לכל הבריות‬
It is written: “Adonai, our lord, how glorious is Your name
throughout the earth!” (Psalm 8:2). “Adonai, our Lord:” Why is
this said [in the order of “Adonai” preceding “our Lord” and not
vice versa]? Adonai [the name] existed before yetzirato [‫יצירתו‬,
“God’s creation”--etymologically related to haytzirah] of the
world, where there was not yet any beriyyah [‫ברייה‬, “creature”--
etymologically related to habberi’ah]. “Our Lord” [was stated]
after yetzirato of the world, when God was called “lord” to all
beriyyot [‫בריות‬, “creatures”--etymologically related to
habberi’ah].49

The reader may safely hypothesize that this little-known lost fragment
remained probably unknown to Rabbi Heschel himself but served as part of a
larger and evolving exegetical tradition that eventually came to support the
mystical schema that upheld the pillars of the Apter’s cosmology.
Perhaps of greater urgency for our extrapolation of a hasidic
understanding of addir addirenu, Ohev Yisra’el, in contrast to all previously
cited midrashim surrounding the circumstances of the recitation of addir
addirenu, imagined not the angels envying Israel, but Israel envying the
angels. The angels who hover above the Apter’s recitation of addir addirenu
are not the angels whom Rabbi El’azar of Worms saw humiliated by God’s
bequeathing the Torah to humans. The Apter’s angels proudly wave their
sacred banners of love above us and entice us to imitate their lofty ways.
The Apter expressed no regret that our chanting of addir addirenu would
make us swallow the pride felt by Rabbi Natan every Shabbat as the
predecessor weekly relived the revelation at Mount Sinai. As his mouth filled
with the words of addir addirenu, Rabbi Heschel too felt the heavens open up
but not quite as high as they did for Rabbi Natan and only on Yom Tov. The
Apter looked to the sky and saw the fiery chariots as role models for
humans. Rabbi Heschel knew that the Torah rendered us no greater than
angels; we needed the Torah in order to attain anything resembling their
level of holiness, and we could only sneak such a peek of that good life on
the most sacred of occasions. And, as for God’s wonders, all we could ever
paint on our own flags was our human history. We had not otot of our own,
but otiyyot. Rabbi El’azar recalled the midrash of the angels asking
arrogantly, “What is a human--that you should recall one!?” Rabbi El’azar’s
angels said that humans cannot achieve angelic holiness, only the earthly
qualities of Moses, son of Amram, the utterly human; but those angels were
not rewarded. For the Apter, we are not even noticed by the angels; we use
otiyyot to imitate their otot, and we merely dream to live like them.

Conclusion
To argue for a single universal praxis regarding addir addirenu based
solely on the aforementioned theological underpinnings of addir addirenu
would be to impose a single mythical-liturgical-spiritual experience of the
prayer on all Jews. Given the variety of myths that speak to the spiritual
needs and doctrinal beliefs of Jews and Jewish communities, this teshuvah
cannot adequately articulate a singular practice for the recitations and
omissions of addir addirenu.
This teshuvah encourages those considering the Jewish legal
ramifications breaking from or following familial or communal customs
regarding the practices surrounding addir addirenu to remember the weight
of minhag avoteynu beyadeynu (‫מנהג אבותינו בידינו‬, “the custom of our
ancestors is in our hands”)50 and, at the opposite end of the spectrum of
traditionalism, a whole litany of sources opposed to upholding customs
without meaning collected by Rabbi David Golinkin. 51 (Notably, Reform Jews
reading this teshuvah might note the peculiarity of the weekly appearance of
addir addirenu with neither the words from Zechariah 14:9 [which comprise
the remnant of the prayer after the words from Psalm 8:2] nor any
explanation for this practice in much of 20th and 21st century American
Reform liturgy.)52
For those considering changing their inherited practice of reciting addir
addirenu and thereby breaking from minhag, the most prominent halakhic
concern remaining surrounds the interpretation of the passage cited above
from the Babylonian Talmud. Should addir addirenu--most especially the
verse of Zechariah 14:9 that concludes its twenty-two words--be interpreted
as calling for the quick coming of the Messiah, then it would be important
that a worshiper consider the possibility of the Messiah violating Shabbat by
traveling too far if indeed the laws surrounding travel should be upheld over
ten handbreadths above the ground. Should that question be resolved as not
worrisome to the worshiper, then the recitation of addir addirenu on Shabbat
becomes not problematic from a purely halakhic standpoint. (Moreover, it
could be argued that perhaps Reform liturgy, in its omission of Zechariah
14:9 from addir addirenu, resolved any conflict of the liturgy with Shabbat;
however, whatever theurgical powers German pietists associated with the
prayer’s specificity of its twenty-two words inevitably vanish with the
omission of Zechariah 14:9.)
Finally, past the halakhic concerns, the worshiper might want to
consider the pragmatic and spiritual considerations of what adding or
subtracting the recitation of addir addirenu from one’s practice entails in
various communities. It is recommended that a study of the myths
surrounding the recitation of the prayer (as, for instance, included in this
teshuvah) be studied by a community considering changing its practice of
recitation or omission of addir addirenu.
Precedent supports the recitation of addir addirenu on any day of Yom
Tov and on any Shabbat. The implementation of such recitations must be
accompanied by the theological, spiritual, halakhic and pragmatic
considerations that render the prayer meaningful to the worshipper and
worship community.
1
For the purposes of this teshuvah (‫ְֿתּשׁוָּבה‬, “responsum”), “addir addirenu” refers
to the following short prayer:

‫ ַבּיּוֹם‬,‫ ְֿוָהָיה ְיָי ְֿלֶֽמֶלְך ַעל ׇכּל־ָהָֽאֶרץ‬.‫ ָמה ַאִדּיר ִשְׁמָך ְֿבׇּכל־ָהָֽאֶרץ‬,‫ ְיָי ֲאֹדֵֽנינוּ‬,‫ַאִדּיר ַאִדּיֵֽרנוּ‬
.‫ַההוּא ִיְהֶיה ְיָי ֶאָחד וְּשׁמוֹ ֶאָחד‬
The glory of our glory, Adonai our Lord, how glorious is Your name
throughout the earth! Adonai will be sovereign over all the earth; on
that day, Adonai will be One, and Adonai’s name One.

All translations in this teshuvah by the author unless noted otherwise.

2
The Kedushah (‫ְֿקֻדָשּׁה‬, “holiness”) is the traditional title of the part of the core
tefillah (‫ְֿתִּפָלּה‬, “prayer”) during which those praying recite words reflecting on
God’s transcendental and holy nature on earth and in the heavens. Throughout
every service of the entire year, the Kedushah is recited as the third blessing of
the Amidah (‫ֲעִמיָדה‬, the “standing” prayer recited traditionally at least thrice daily
and constituting one of the earliest strata of rabbinically authored prayers
designed specifically to replace the daily offerings of the sacrificial cult at the
ancient Temple in Jerusalem) as well as this third blessing’s extended prelude. For
a critical yet lay-accessible introduction to the Amidah, see Lawrence Hoffman
(ed.), My People’s Prayer Book Vol. 2: The Amidah (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights
Publishing 1998).
3
This author is writing a forthcoming study on the evolution of the multiple
branches of the midrashim that connect the words of addir addirenu with the
underlying and intertextual considerations that inform the decisions of posekim in
determining when to recite addir addirenu. This teshuvah will deal with the values
and narratives jointly expressed by the treatment of the words of addir addirenu
in the multiple agreeing (and often divergent) schools of midrash.
4
Henceforth, “b.” Is an abbreviation for “born.”
5
Henceforth, “c.” is an abbreviation for “circa.”
6
Henceforth, “d.” Is an abbreviation for “died.”
7
Note that the words addir addirenu are not a Biblical quote, but Adonai adonenu
is a quote from Psalm 8:2.
8
This messianic vision of God meting out the evil of the world is articulated in
Isaiah 63.
9
In light of the midrash surrounding the angels complaining about God giving the
Torah to the Israelites and to the heavenly hosts, our reading here suggests that
God granting “God’s honor” (“‫ְֿכּבוֹדוֹ‬,” kevodo) is in fact God’s granting God’s
Torah. The literary juxtaposition here of God’s honor as embodied in the Torah
alongside God’s unified name hints at the mystical tradition that the Torah’s
letters comprise a mystical name of God. This tradition is most fully articulated for
the first time by Rabbi El’azar’s younger distant colleague and mystic of another
bend--Nachmanides, Rabbi Mosheh ben Nahman (‫)ַרִבּי ֹמֶשׁה ֶבּן ַנְחָמן‬, also
abbreviated as RaMBaN (‫ )ַרְמַבּ"ן‬of Spain (b. c. 1194, d. 1270) in his introduction to
Genesis: “‫ כי כל התורה כולה שמותיו של הקב"ה‬,‫“( ”יש בידינו קבלה של אמת‬We have in our
hands a tradition of truth: that the entire Torah itself is the names of the Holy
Blessed One”). For another medieval (albeit later) and popular parallel expression
of this concept, see Zohar II: 90b: “ ‫“( ”״דהא אורייתא שמא דקודשא בריך הוא הוי‬for this
Torah is the name of the Holy Blessed One”). Read through this lens, one may
note that “and all will call” (“‫)”ויקראו‬, as in “and all will call upon God’s holy
unified name” (“‫ )”ויקראו כולם שמו המיוחד הקדוש‬may better be translated “and all
will read,” for Rabbi El’azar seemingly prophesied a messianic vision of all the
nations of the world studying the Torah that constitutes God’s very name.
10
Rabbi El’azar of Worms evidently did not count words conjoined by a makkef (
‫ַמֵקּף‬, Hebrew’s connective upper-dash between two words: ‫ )־‬as one word, which
was the Masoretic method of counting words. Had he counted conjoined word-
pairs as one word each, he would have counted only twenty words in addir
addirenu. A less likely alternative is that Rabbi El’azar followed a system of
vocalizing the Hebrew words of addir addirenu that disagreed with the Masoretic
vocalization of the text of Psalm 8:2. His punctiliousness in preserving Hebrew
traditions would lead us to the former conclusion instead--that he counted
contrary to convention but vocalized as commonly practiced.
11
On the Greek origins and etymology of gimatriyyah, see Samuel Sambursky,
“The Term Gematria: Source and Meaning” in Tarbiz 25:3/4 (spring-fall 1976), pp.
268-271 (Hebrew), i.e.:
)‫אלול תשל"ו‬-‫ד (ניסן‬/‫ ג‬:‫'” תרביץ מה‬,‫ “מקורו ומשמעותו של המונח 'גימטריה‬,‫שמואל סמבורסקי‬
.268-271 ‫עמ׳‬
12
Using the word addirut here instead of addir appears to be an error from Rabbi
El’azar or a copyist of his. It seems that a scribe mistakenly wrote “‫אדירות קח‬
(addirut kah, ‘...“gloriness.” Take...’),” and, in so doing, shifted the placement of
the vav (‫ )ו‬and tav (‫ )ת‬from “‫( אדיר ותקח‬addir vetikkah, ‘...“gloriness,” and
take...’).”
13
The genealogy of Moses as a son of Amram appears in Exodus 6:20.
14
Yom Tov, (‫יוֹם טוֹב‬, a “good day” of a Jewish festival) is specifically a Jewish
festival day on which the tradition, for instance, prohibits nearly all of the same
actions as prohibited on Shabbat. Days of Yom Tov fall during Rosh HaShanah,
Yom Kippur, the first day of Sukkot (as well as the second day in the Diaspora
outside the Land of Israel), Shemini Atzeret and Simhat Torah, Passover’s first day
and last day (and on the second and penultimate days in the Diaspora), and the
entirety of Shavu’ot.
15
This commentary is as presented (and reproduced from previously unpublished
manuscripts) in Moshe Hershler and Yehudah Alter Hershler (ed.), Peyrushey
Siddur HaTefillah LaRoke’ah: Peyrush HaTefillah VeSodoteha LeKhol Yemot
HaShanah (Jerusalem, Israel: Mekhon HaRav Hershler 5752 A.M.), Vol. II, pp. 572-
573 (Hebrew); i.e.:
‫ פירוש‬:‫ פירושי סידור התפילה לרוקח‬,)‫הרב משה הרשלר והרב יהודה אלתר הרשלר (עורכים‬
‫ מכון הרב‬:‫ ישראל‬,‫התפילה וסודותיה לכל ימות השנה לרבנו אלעזר ב״ר יהודה מגרמייזא (ירושלים‬
.‫תקעג‬-‫ עמ׳ תקעב‬:‫ ה׳תשנ״ב) חלק ב‬,‫הרשלר‬
16
This narrative tradition surrounding the Biblical words as referenced by Rabbi
El’azar can be found in the following rabbinic works: Tosefta (Lieberman), Sotah
6:5; Mekhil’ta DeRabbi Yisha’el, BeShallah, Massekhta DeShira (‫ )מסכתא דשירה‬at
the end of Parashah I; Mekhil’ta DeRabbi Shim’on Bar Yohai 15:1, s.v. sus
verokhevo (“‫ ;)”סוס ורכבו‬Bereshit Rabbah (Vilna) 8:6; Bereshit Rabbah (Theodor-
Albeck) 8:1:1; Midrash Tehillim 8:2; Shir HaShirim Zuta at the end of I:1; Pesik’ta
Rabbati (Friedman), second half of XX, Mattan Torah (‫ )מתן תורה‬and XXV, Asser
Te’asser (‫ ;)עשר תעשר‬Midrash Tanhuma (Warsaw), BeShallah XI on Exodus 15:1
and Terumah X (middle) on Exodus 26:7; Midrash Tanhumah (Buber), Korah 11;
and nearly the entirety of Sefer Me’eyn HaHokhmah (Eisenstein). As
aforementioned, an analysis of the development of the rabbinic narratives
surrounding these words will be published in a future study. Suffice it to say for
the meantime, one branch of rabbinic myth surrounding the words of Psalm 8:2
associate these words with angels praising God at the Israelites’ crossing of the
Sea of Reeds but not necessarily competitively. A later stratum of this aggadah
introduces the contention over who is most deserving of the Torah.
Also of note is that in the first-cited selection from Pesik’ta Rabbati (as well
as Sefer Me’eyn HaHokhmah [Eisenstein], which seems to be largely based on the
Pesik’ta Rabbati passage under discussion), the Biblical quotations in question
appear in the context of angelic conversation that follows and includes the words
of the Kedushah. This ascent narrative that describes the visual experience of the
Heavenly abode nearly complies with the practice of reciting mythical narrative
surrounding the traditional core of Jewish liturgy (as often occurs in piyyutim [
‫ִפּיּוִּטים‬, liturgical “poetry”]), suggesting that the midrashic text here may have
once (or more than once) been utilized as a poetic expansion of the liturgy. A
similar theory regarding large portions of the mystical text Shi`ur Komah has
been previously suggested. (See Marvin A. Sweeney, “Dimensions of the
Shekhinah: The Meaning of the Shiur Qomah in Jewish Mysticism, Liturgy, and
Rabbinic Thought” in Hebrew Studies, Vol. 54 [2013], pp. 107-120. Sweeney there
condenses Martin S. Cohen’s hypothesis regarding liturgical usage of Shi’ur
Komah.) Pesik’ta Rabbati, like any other text whose origins precede the 10th
century C.E. and attempts similarly a mythic depiction of the recitation of the
Kedushah in the heavenly abode, preserves a Kedushah that precedes the
inclusion of the two words addir addirenu but not the Biblical words that these two
words eventually introduced.
17
For this dating (despite a popular dating of 1040 as Rashi’s birth), see Victor
Apowitzer (‫ )אביגדור אפטוביצר‬Sefer Ra’avayah (‫)ספר ראבי"ה‬, (Jerusalem c. 1938), p.
395. Kirsten Fudeman follows his dating methodology. See, for example,
Fudeman, Kirsten. “The Old French Glosses In Joseph Kara's Isaiah Commentary”
in Revue des Études juives, 165 (1-2), janvier-juin 2006 pp. 147-177, esp. p. 149.
18
Salomon Buber does not directly attribute authorship of Siddur Rashi to Rashi
himself. In his foreward ( ‫)״פתח דבר״‬, Buber refers to this collection as “ ‫המיוחס‬
‫“( ”לרש״י‬that which is attributed to Rashi”). See Salomon Buber (ed.), Siddur
Raschi (Berlin, Germany: Jakob Freimann 1911), p. VIII, i.e.
.VIII ‫ עמ׳‬,)‫ יעקב פריימאנן ה׳תרע״ב‬:‫ גרמניה‬,‫ סדור רש״י (ברלין‬,)‫ר׳ שלמה באבער (עורך‬
Note also that in Buber's introduction ("‫)"מבוא‬, he remarks that two out of the
three manuscripts the editor consulted for Siddur Rashi indicate at various points
that Rashi had passed away by the time each manuscript’s copyist had put these
words into writing. (Buber also notes here that Mahzor Vitry, often attributed
traditionally to being a liturgical collection meeting Rashi’s approval, similarly
contains references to Rashi as a sage who had died.) See ibid., pp. IX-X.
19
See Buber’s footnotes at ibid., pp. 100-101.
20
For a brief history of the geographic identity of Ashkenaz and its synonymity
with Germany, see Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik (ed.), “Ashkenaz” in
Encyclopaedia Judaica, 2nd ed., vol. 2 (Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), pp. 579-
571, esp. pp. 579-570.
21
Ismar Elbogen, Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History (trans. Raymond P.
Scheindlin) (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society 1993), p. 290.
22
This commentary is as presented (and reproduced from previously unpublished
manuscripts) in Moshe Hershler (ed.), Haggadah Shel Pesah VeShir haShirim Im
Peyrush HaRoke’ah UVi’urey Halakhot UMinhagey Leyl HaSeder LeRabbeynu
El’azar MiGermaiza ZLH”H Ba’al HaRoke’ah (Jerusalem, Israel: Mekhon Shalem -
Tzefunot Kadmonim 5744 A.M.), p. 203 (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ הגדה של פסח ושיר השירים עם פירוש הרוקח וביאורי הלכות ומנהגי ליל‬,)‫משה הרשלר (עורך‬
‫ צפונות‬- ‫ הוצאת מכון שלם‬:‫ ישראל‬,‫הסדר לרבנו אלעזר מגרמייזא זלה״ה בעל הרקח (ירושלים‬
.‫ ה׳שדמ״ת) עמ׳ רג‬,‫קדמונים‬
Note that the equation of bakh here with the 22 letters of the language in which
the Torah is written is a theme that appears elsewhere in midrashic literature. See
Devarim Rabbah (Lieberman), Devarim 27; Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:1:3; Pesik’ta
DeRav Kahana (Mandelbaum), 28 (BaYom HaShemini Atzeret): 9; Pesik’ta Rabbati
(Friedman), Hosafah 1: 4 (BaYom HaShemini) at end; Midrash Tehillim (Shoher
Tov) (Buber) 7:4 on Psalm 7:2, 9:6 on 9:3, and 25:5 on 25:2; and Pesik’ta Zutrata
(Lekah Tov) on Song of Songs 1:4.
23
In all tellings of the midrash where Moses is present, Moses is presented as
being in the upper echelons, in the Heavens, eye-to-eye with the angels. Moses,
though human, acquires the status literarily of a demigod. He is at the very least
an intermediary: the medium whereby earth and God connect. Tellingly the
midrash does not seek to praise Moses himself but to praise the humans he
represents, for Jewish theology, especially in contrast to theology developing
among Christians living in the 1st millennium C.E., tends to minimize the
possibility of any single person being a vehicle for the Divine. Despite the
potential for Moses’ heavenly elevation to gain him Godly powers, the rabbinic
imagination understood Moses here more as a liaison between heaven and earth
and not a unique instrument of the Divine beyond the role of any other human.
24
Rabbi El’azar’s writings make clear that the exact recitation and transmission of
the letters and words as he knows them must be followed precisely, for the proper
utterances reflect cosmogonic, angelic and Divine truths. Note that his caution
against subtracting or adding words or letters for traditional prayer formulae is
consistently preceded or followed by references to creation, God as creator, the
angels or revelation (which, as previously demonstrated in this responsum, was a
moment of great tension for the angels in the rabbinic imagination). See Hershler
and Hershler (ed.), Peyrushey Siddur HaTefillah LaRoke’ah, vol. I, pp. 229, 256,
259, 268 and 275; and vol. II, p. 421.
25
Jakob Freimann (ed.), Sefer Mahkim LeRabbi Natan Ben Rabbi Yehudah (Krakow,
Poland: c. 1889), p. V (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ או‬1888 ‫ ה׳תרמ״ט [בערך‬:‫ ספר מחכים לר׳ נתן ב״ר יהודה (קראקא‬,)‫יעקב פריימאנן (עורך‬
.V ‫ עמ׳‬,)]‫ לספה״נ‬1889
26
Note that, due to the brevity of the small book Sefer Mahkim, no citation has
been included here.
27
Levush (‫ )ְֿלבוּשׁ‬on Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 488:3.
28
That this part of the Talmud veers out of the realm of the legally practicable and
resides more deeply in the confines of the mythic imagination may be expressed
by the act of this passage’s omission from Rabbi Yitzhak Al-Fasi (b. c. 1012, d. c.
1102) of North Africa in his abbreviated version of Eruvin. Note the omission at
11b. However, other adjudicators still saw reason to base Jewish law on this part
of the Talmud. For instance, Rabbi Mosheh ben Maimon (‫)ַרִבּי ֹמֶשׁה ֶבּן ַמְימוֹן‬,
abbreviated as RaMBaM (‫)ַרְמַבּ"ם‬, also known as Maimonides (b. c. 1135, d. c.
1204) of Spain and North Africa saw otherwise. See his Mishneh Torah, Sefer
Hafla’ah, Hilkhot Nezirut 4:11.
29
Isaiah Berlin, “Peyrushim Venimmukim Al Pi Ketav Yad MiMahzor Shello Im Defus
Altona Shnat TKL’G” in Leon Schlossberg, Sefer Halakhot Pesukot O Hilkhot Re’u
HaMyuhasot LeTalmidey Rav Yehudai Ga’on (Versailles, France: 1886), pp. 49-67,
esp. p. 67 (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ ״פירושים ונימוקים על פי כ״י ממחזור שלו עם פירוש דפוס אלטונא שנת‬,‫ר׳ ישעיה ברלין ז״ל‬
‫ ספר הלכות פסוקות או הלכות ראו המיוחסות לתלמידי‬,‫תקל״ג״ בספרו של אריה ליב שלאסבערג‬
‫רב יהודאי גאון‬
.60 ‫ עד עמ׳‬59 ‫ ובמיוחד מעמ׳‬,67 ‫ עד עמ׳‬49 ‫ מעמ׳‬,)1886 :‫ צרפת‬,‫(ווירסייליס‬
Rabbi Berlin had precedent for including addir addirenu on days of Yom Tov falling
on Shabbat. Rabbi Yitzhak Aizik of Tirna’s Sefer HaMinhagim records in Minhag
Shel Shabbat that addir addirenu would be recited when Yom Tov fell on Shabbat.
30
Yisra’el Hayyim ben Yehudah Friedman, Likkutey Mahari’ah (Ya’akov Tzevi
Kaufman, ed.) (Romania: Me’ir Leib Hirsch Satmar, c. 1931), Seder Tefillat Musaf,
II: 66a-b (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ לקוטי מהרי״ח (מהדורת יעקב צבי קויפמאן) (רומעניען‬,‫ר׳ ישראל חיים בן יהודה פרידמאן‬
‫ סדר‬,‫ ח״ב‬,)]‫ לספה״נ‬1932 ‫ עד שנת‬1931 ‫ ה׳תרצ״ב [משנת‬,‫ מאיר ליב הירש סאטמאר‬:]‫[רומניה‬
.‫ע״ב‬-‫ סו ע״א‬,‫תפלת מוסף ח״ב‬
31
On the authorial context of this work, see Rachel Zohn Mincer, “Liturgical
Minhagim Books: The Increasing Reliance on Written Texts in Late Medieval
Ashkenaz” (dissertation; Jewish Theological Seminary 2012), pp. 193-195, esp. p.
194.
32
Arukh HaShulhan, Orah Hayyim 663:4.
33
Most authorities in fact never mention addir addirenu by name. The unspoken
acceptance of Rabbi Jaffe’s ruling penetrate this silence. Among the few who
mention their complete concession to Rabbi Jaffe’s position is Rabbi Yeshayah
Wiener (b. c. 1726, d. c. 1798) in Isaiah Wiener, Bigdey Yesha (Prague, Poland:
Defus Mosheh Katz, c. 1774), vol. II on Orah Hayyim 488:3, p. 227 (Hebrew), i.e.:
:‫ ח״ב על א״ח תפח‬,)‫ה׳תקל״ד‬, ‫ דפוס משה כ״ץ‬:‫ פולין‬,‫ בגדי ישע (פראג‬,‫הר׳ ישעיה בן שמחה וינר‬
.‫ עמ׳ רכז‬,‫ג‬
34
See the middle of his short book.
35
See the section Minhagey Hag HaSukkot.
36
Sefer MaHaRYL (Minhagim): Seder Tefillot Hag HaSukkot V (Hebrew), i.e.:
.‫ סדר תפילות חג הסוכות ה‬:)‫ספר מהרי״ל (מנהגים‬
37
See the section Hag HaSukkot.
38
Yitzhak ben Me’ir HaLevi, ’ir HaLevi, Minhagim Yeshanim MiDura (Israel
Elfenbein, ed.) (New York, NY: 1948), p. 157 (Hebrew), i.e.:
:‫ ישראל אלפנביין (עורך) (ניו יורק‬,‫ מנהגים ישנים מדורא‬,‫רבי יצחק בן רבי מאיר הלוי מדורא‬
157 ‫ עמ׳‬,)‫ה׳תש״ח‬
‫ בניו יורק‬,Israel Elfenbein ‫ בלעז ארה״ב‬,‫מנהגים ישנים מדורא (אשר ערכו הר׳ ישראל אלפנביין‬
157 ‫ בעמ׳‬,)‫ לספה״נ‬1948 ‫בשנת ה׳תש״ח בשנת‬
39
Hilkhot Sukkot, 223.
40
On Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 684.
41
A piyyut with this exact incipient text is unknown. See Israel Davidson,
Thesaurus of Mediaeval Hebrew Poetry (New York, NY: Jewish Theological
Seminary of America 1924), vol. I, p. 209 (Hebrew), i.e.:
,)‫ ה׳תרפ״ה‬,‫ בית המדרש לרבנים באמריקה‬:‫ ארה״ב‬,‫ (נוי יורק‬,‫ אוצר השירה והפיוט‬,‫ישראל דוידזון‬
.209 ‫ עמ׳‬:‫כרך א‬
42
Given the poetic proclivity towards alphabetical acrostics among even the
earliest authors of Jewish liturgical poetry, it is perhaps worth noting, not
necessarily mystically, but literarily and structurally, the potential import of addir
addirenu containing 22 words according to Rabbi El’azar’s aforementioned count.
If both addir addirenu and the piyyut it replaced both began with two words each
that began with alef, it is possible that addir addirenu and possibly the piyyut it
replaced were significantly longer alphabetical acrostics the remnants of which
are unknown today. It is possible that addir addirenu in particular followed a
pattern of the first two words of each strophe being composed of a repetitive
superlative reference to God (just as the two words addir addirenu themselves
comprise), each word-pairing beginning with the subsequent letter of the alef bet
(and possibly each strophe being composed of 22 words, just like the lone strophe
known today). That addir addirenu was once a significantly longer piyyut would
moreover corroborate with the theory heretofore suggested that at least one long
liturgical narrative formula surrounding various verses recited in Kedushah has
been preserved in Pesik’ta Rabbati as aforementioned.
43
Note though that the Tanhuma text spells be’otot differently from and with more
letters than the Masoretic text: ‫באותות‬.
44
It can further be argued that this broad spectral understanding of ot and even
the English “sign” likely has theological import to traditions beyond Judaism.
Examining the plural of the Arabic cognate of ot, Elliot Wolfson has written:

...a precise analogue… is found in Islamic mysticism… As with so

much of Islamic occultism, the starting point is an expression in the
Qur’ān in a section that delineates various signs (āyāt) of the divine in
the world, which serve as part of the liturgical glorification of Allah in
the evening and morning (30:17-27). The signs consist of the creation
of man from dust and the creation of his spouse, the helpmate, with
whom man can settle down and live harmoniously (20-22), the
creation of the heavens and earth, and the diversity of ethnic and
racial identities (22), the creation of patterns of human behavior and
natural phenomena (23-24), and… the fact that all... in the heavens
and earth arise by the command, or will, of Allah (25). Everything that
is in the cosmos, therefore, may be viewed as a sign marking the way
to one that is both within and outside the cosmos.

See Elliot R. Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics &

Poetic Imagination (New York, NY: Fordham University Press 2005), p. 205.
Wolfson’s refers to ‫( آيات‬aayaat), the plural of ‫( آية‬aayah), which, in Arabic,
can mean “a verse from the Quran,” “a word,” “an utterance,” “a mark,” “a
miracle,” “a miracle,” “a wonder,” or “a marvel.” See Hans Wehr, A
Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic (Arabic-English), ed. J Milton Cowan
(Urbana, IL: Spoken Language Services, 1960), p. 36,, s. v. “‫اية‬.” Though
our study here cannot determine whether such a parallel can extend to all
other religious traditions, it seems that this expansive understanding of
signage likely presents subtle statements of deeper theological import in
contemporary religious traditions with bases in the ancient Near East.
45
Scholars since Solomon Schechter have long divided Avot DeRabbi Natan into
two major trends of recension: Nus’ha A and Nus’ha B. Of the former, at least
three different versions are known. See Menahem Kister, “Avot DeRabbi Natan
Mahadurat Sh”Z Schechter: Akdamut Milin” in Menahem Kister, Avot DeRabbi
Natan: Mahadurat Shechter (New York, NY: Jewish Theological Seminary c. 1997),
pp.7-40, esp. p. 40 (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ אבות‬,‫ אקדמות מילין״ בתוך מנחם קיסטר‬:‫ ״אבות דרבי נתן מהדורת ש״ז שכטר‬,‫מנחם קיסטר‬
‫ מהדורת ש״ז שכטר עם ציונים למקבילות בין הנסחים ולתוספות שבמהדורת שכטר‬:‫דרבי נתן‬
,7-40 ‫ בית המדרש לרבנים באמריקה ה׳תשנ״ז) עמ׳‬:‫ ארה״ב‬,‫בתוספת ״אדקמות מילין״ (ניו יורק‬
.9 ‫ובמיוחד עמ׳‬
Kister writes that it seems that hundreds of years separate the earlier compilation
of Nus’ha B from the later compilation of Nus’ha A. See ibid., p. 10.
46
See ibid., p. 13.
47
See Shir HaShirim Zuta 1:1, s.v. “shir hashirim” (“‫ ;)”ִשׁיר ַהִשּׁיִרים‬Midrash Aggadah,
Bemidbar 2:2; Rabbi Hizkeyah ben Mano’ah’s Hizkuni (13th century France) on
Numbers 2:2; the Portuguese, Aragonese and Italian Rabbi Yitzhak ben Yehudah
Abraban’el (b. c. 1437, d. 1508) on Isaiah 7; Tzeror HaMor by the Portuguese,
Spanish and Italian Rabbi Avraham ben Ya’akov Sava (b. c. 1440, d. 1508) on
Bemidbar; Berit Shalom by Rabbi Pin’has ben Pilta (b. c. 1620, d. c. 1663) of
Włodawa in Poland on Va’era; Me’or Eynayim by Rabbi Menahem Nahum (b. c.
1730; d. 1797) of Chernobyl in Russia on Bemidbar; Menahem Tziyyon of
Menahem Mendil (b. c. 1745, d. c. 1815) of Pristik and Rimanov on Vayyikra and
the Haggadah of Passover; and Ma’or VaShemesh by Rabbi Kalonymos Kalman
Epstein (b. c. 1751, d. 1823) of Poland on Bemidbar.
48
See Ziva Kosofsky, “Hahibbur HaMkhunneh ‘Midrash Aggadah’: Mavo
VeHatza’ah LeMahadurah Birkor’tit Helkit LeHummash Shemot ULFarshot
Bereshit, Vayyikra, BeMidbar UDvarim” (dissertation) (Jerusalem, Israel: Hebrew
University, 2015), p. 3 (Hebrew), i.e.:
‫ מבוא והצעה למהדורה ביקורתית חלקית לחומש‬:‫ ״החיבור המכונה ׳מדרש אגדה׳‬,‫זיוה קוסופסקי‬
‫ האוניברסיטה‬:‫ ישראל‬,‫ במדבר ודברים״ (דיסרטציה) (ירושלים‬,‫ ויקרא‬,‫שמות ולפרשות בראשית‬
.3 ‫ עמ׳‬,)‫ ה׳תשע״ה‬,‫העברית‬
49
Jastrow understands notarikon as derived from the Greek νοταριχόν. See
Marcus Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi,
and the Midrashic Literature (Philadelphia, PA: 1903), pp. 886-887, s.v. ‫נוטריקון‬.
50
Jacob Mann, “Peyrush Aggadati Al HaHaftarah Ve’Al HaMizmor LeShabbat
Va’era” in The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue (Cincinnati, OH:
1940), vol. 1, Hebrew section, p. 146 (Kit’ey Midrashim, Genizah: XVIII: 6a).
51
This dictum appears in many sources. One earlier such source is Sekhel Tov
(Buber), Vayyiggash 46:34.
52
See David Golinkin, "Rice, beans and kitniyot on Pesah - are they really
forbidden" pp. 14-18, accessed at
https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/
2011-2020/Golinkin-Kitniyot.pdf on April 23, 2017.