Introduction
Rav Saadia Gaon
(882-942) was a philosopher and biblical exegete born in Egypt and died in
Baghdad during the time of the Abbasid Caliphate. He had some rather
interesting views about the origins of the psalms in that he adopted a
fundamentalist approach claiming that the five books of psalms served as a ‘second
Torah’ revealed to David.
This article is based extensively on the research by Professor Uriel Simon[1].
Psalms as a
parallel or ‘second’ Torah
Simon (1990:1)
states that this extreme view of Rav Saadia that the psalms were a ‘second
Torah’ was “not based on any rabbinic sources”. However, there is a reference to a similar
concept found in Midrash Tehillim (on Psalm 78), although this work was
only written sometime after Rav Saadia, in Narbonne between c.1050 - c.1450 CE:
שלא יאמר אדם
שאין המזמורות תורה אלא תורה הם ואף הנביאים תורה.
One should not say that the psalms are not Torah, for they are
Torah, and so are the [books of the] prophets Torah.
It is possible
that this later Midrash was based on Rav Saadia’s conception of the
psalms. Rav Saadia writes in his (short[2])
introduction to the psalms that the reader should not discriminate between the
various sections of biblical literature (particularly the psalms) and wrongly conclude
that some were said and narrated by human characters while other sections were
‘purer’ having been spoken by God. Instead:
[w]e must realize that all of these were phrased by the Lord in the
various forms of speech employed by his creatures.[3]
In other words,
in Rav Saadia’s view, all the words expressed throughout the psalms, even when
they appear to have originated from human speakers, are indeed the work of the
“Master and not the servant”.
Rav Saadia takes his model from Moses’ song (Haazinu) in Deuteronomy 32:1-43, where it seems that Moses is writing but it also incorporates God’s speech such as in verse 39 where it states “See then that I am He”. The smooth interchange between the speech of the ‘servant’ and the ‘Master’ (in the Torah and the psalms) indicate for Rav Saadia that:
all is the word of the Lord and nothing is human discourse, as the
faithful transmitters of our tradition have attested.[4]
Again, Rav Saadia
does not specify which rabbinic tradition he is basing himself upon. On the
contrary, earlier Talmudic sources (such as b. Pesachim 117a)
suggest that according to the rabbis, David himself, and not God spoke the
words of the psalms:
The sages taught: all the songs and praises which David said in the
Book of Psalms…
Rav Saadia’s argument
against the Karaites
Rav Saadia, in
his (long) introduction to the psalms goes on to criticise:
a few of our nation who imagine…that this book was uttered by David
the prophet on his own… It seems to me that the cause of this delusion…is that
they find many prayers in it [and thus conclude that the words must have
emanated from a human rather than a divine source].[5]
Simon (1990:5)
questions just whom Rav Saadia is referring to by “a few of our nation”
who believe the psalms was an independent work of David and not revealed from
Above? While it may refer to the rabbis (as we saw above
in b. Pesachim 117a), Simon maintains that these words were directed
specifically against the Karaites.
The Karaites
were a sect of Jews who disregarded the rabbinic or oral tradition,
particularly the Talmud. Some historians trace them to the Sadducees from the
end of the second Temple era, but most consider their origins later at around
the time of Anan ben David (c. 715 – 795 or 811). While there is some
uncertainty as to the actual numbers of Karaites, at one stage the Karaites may
have comprised almost half of the total Jewish population and they were
regarded as a significant threat to Rabbanite Judaism. Rav Saadiah was known
for his fierce anti-Karaite views. “The dispute of the rabbanite Gaon
Saadiah and the Karaites helped to consolidate the split between them”[6].
The Karaites
used the psalms as their official prayer book
The point is
that the Karaites used the psalms as their prayer book as they rejected
the Rabbanite (rabbinical) prayer book known as the Siddur, whose
foundations were laid by Ezra at the time of the Great Assembly.
Simon (1990:8)
explains that Rav Saadia felt that the Karaites had erred in using the “words
of the Master” (i.e., the psalms) for their prayers. Rav Saadia wrote in
his introduction to the Siddur:
the speech of
servant to his Master must be different from the speech of the Master to his
servant.[7]
Simon explains
that only once we understand the Karaite and Rabbanite polemics on prayer, can
we comprehend Rav Saadia’s radical position on the divine origins of the Book
of Psalms. The Karaites were just as willing to enter into the polemical fray
as they accused the Rabbanites, particularly on the Day of Atonement, of having
[p]laced in their mouths many words, liturgies in which there is no
delight, instead of songs from Psalms.[8]
The Karaite
writer, Yakov al-Kirkisani, was Rav Saadia’s polemical contemporary and he puts
the Karaite position on the psalms and his criticism of the Rabbanites quite
bluntly:
One [of the rabbis’ mistakes] is that they stopped praying from the
Book of Psalms and made [their prayers] from what they themselves composed.
This contradicts Scripture: “To give praise to the Lord as David had ordained”
(Ezra 3:10).[9]
Rav Saadia’s
notion that psalms are not prayers
Rav Saadia’s
response to the Karaite attack was swift and forthright. He defended the
Rabbanite position by claiming, rather radically, that the psalms were never
originally intended to serve as a prayer book, and that the Rabbinic prayer
book is of ancient provenance ordained so by the prophets themselves. The
function of the psalms was not for prayer, but for moral and theological
edification instead, just like the Torah! (Simon 1990:11).
The idea of
‘perfect numbers’
Rav Saadia had
to develop a complicated theory of the psalms in order to explain away their
obvious sensus literalis or plain meaning. To this end, Rav Saadia tried
to explain that the Five Books of the Psalms paralleled the Five Books
of the Torah. The psalms were revealed at the precise moment in history
when the nation of Israel had attained its ‘perfect number’ with
its sustainable expanse of knowledge, prosperity and heroes.[10]
This, he claimed, precisely paralleled the revelation of the Torah during the
time of Moses, when mankind had also attained its ‘perfect number’,
in term of population growth, stability and sustainability. (This fascinating
idea of a “perfect number” of population growth, developed as early as the
ninth century, is worthy of further study.)
The psalms
parallel the Torah
As to the
problem of biographical and geographical details found dispersed throughout the
psalms and their apparent connection to specific events in the lifetime of the
writer, Rav Saadia claimed they simply resembled the journeys of the Children
of Israel which were also recoded (by God) in the Pentateuch and served to
unite and equate the two texts (Simon 1990:12-13).
Rav Saadia was
even able to explain away anachronisms (which seem to refer to another time and
place) like Psalm 90 which begins with “A Prayer of Moses”. This too, he
claims, was written by David because (just like 1 Chronicles 6:34 refers to
priests in David’s time as “Aaron and his sons”) the later generations
are sometimes referred to by their important ancestors’ names. This way, the
entire Book of Psalms was a revelation to David equating and paralleling the
revelation of the Torah to Moses!
The difference
between ‘ritual’ and ‘liturgy’
Both the Five Books
of Psalms and the Five Books of the Torah were the “Master’s” word to
the “servant” and not the other way round. The psalms, therefore could
not be used as liturgy, but they could be used as part of ritual.
This is why, on Rav Saadia’s view, the psalms contained headings, superscriptions
and instructions to guide the practitioner through the process of the ritual which could only take place in the Temple (Simon
1990:15).
Complicating
the ritual
Rav Saadia,
however, goes so far as to restrict and complicate that ritual, so that:
every psalm that is designated to [specific] Levites, they are
obligated to recite it; all others are forbidden to recite it except for
reading.[11]
Rav Saadia, a
page later, further restricts one Levite familial group from reciting a psalm
which was the proclivity of another group. He found support for this notion
from 2 Chronicles 35:15 where it states that “The Asaphite singers were at
their stations”.
Additionally, Rav
Saadia specifies that certain Tehillim may only be recited at certain
places within the Temple and they “should be said in that place and no other”[12]
(Simon 1990:22).
Melodies and
music
Furthermore, Rav
Saadia insists that the melodies (he used the Arabic term “lahn”[13]) may
not be changed or substituted either, unless the psalm used the expression “bineginot”
(with melodies) in the plural (Simon 1990:16).
Rav Saadia also is of the view that any musical
performance of the psalms outside of the Temple precincts, is strictly
forbidden (Simon 1990:21). His proof text for this is Isaiah 38:20 where it sates
“we will offer up music all the days of our lives at the House of the Lord”.
Even singing the (entire) psalms outside the Temple (without musical
accompaniment) is forbidden as the psalms may only be read not sung
outside the Temple (Simon 1990:23).
The difference between ‘praying’
and ‘reading’
Rav Saadia, in his commentary on the Siddur (128),
similarly makes the distinction between praying the regular standing
prayer in the Siddur known as the “Amidah”, and reading
the “Hallel” (a collection of psalms inserted into the prayers during
the festivals).
Rav Saadia’s double
argument
All these
details coalesce around Rav Saadia’s understanding of the use of psalms only
for ritual as opposed to liturgical purposes, and the highest
wall had to be erected between these two forms of worship. Tehillim was
a “book of guidance” to be studied like the Torah, and was only used as
a “book of praise” within the Temple (or whilst encouraging the builders
of the Temple).
Thus, one must
conclude that Rav Saadia’s unusual interpretation of the purpose for the psalms
was directed both against the Karaites who used it as their official liturgy,
and also was in keeping with the custom of not replicating Temple practices
during post-Temple times. Nevertheless, Simon (1990:39) concludes that Rav Saadia
took a “maximalist” approach when it came to his polemics with the
Karaites over the use of the Book of Psalms as liturgy.
On a technical note
The Tehillim
were sometimes known as Tefilot, as it says in Psalm 72:20:
כָּלּ֥וּ
תְפִלּ֑וֹת דָּ֝וִ֗ד בֶּן־יִשָֽׁי׃
End of the prayers (tefilot) of David son of Jesse.
However, Hakham
(2003:vi)[14]
mentions that it was the Masoretes who preferred the title Tehillim over
Tefillot perhaps so that it not be confused with the official ‘prayer
book’. Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles refer to the Levites who would “sing
and praise (מהללים) with the praises
(הלל) of David in their
hand”[15].
These may indeed be supports for Rav Saadia’s position.
Hakham also
points out that some early commentators used the term “Tehillot” instead
of “Tehillim” and that even where the title “Tehillim” was
originally used, it was referred to as “Tillim” (since in rabbinic
Hebrew the letter ה is elided). “Tillim”
is not a corruption of later generations (or a lazy pronunciation as is common
today) but is an accurate and ancient pronunciation dating back to the rabbinic
period. In rabbinic Aramaic the Book of Psalms is referred to as “Tillin”
(תִּילִּין) and “Tillei” (תִּילֵּי).
The Midrash Tehillim (as we saw) uses the term Mizmorim.
So, technically,
we can refer to psalms as Tehillim, Tefilot, Tehillot, Mizmorim,
Tillim, Tillin, or Tillei.
Analysis
Today we live
in an era where “there is a psalm for everything” and the simple
recitation of Tehillim is widely practiced and encouraged. Regarding Rav
Saadia’s restriction on singing Tehillim outside of the Temple, this is
all the more interesting considering how we today certainly do put the Tehillim
to music and consider it meritorious to sing them wherever we are. And we
certainly do regard the Tehillim as a form of prayer or divine communion
(notwithstanding the possible Karaite connection).
I even noticed
someone reciting Tehillim from a book while driving, obviously of the
view that the psalms would protect him on the way.
These practices
are good (bar the last one) and should perhaps even be encouraged. However, in
so doing one should not lose sight of the broader framework and background such
as the one presented by Rav Saadia Gaon. One could also add the view of the
Kotzker Rebbe who referred to the “fools who spend their time at the back of
the synagogues mindlessly reciting Tehillim.”
One should, of
course, feel free to practice the Judaism one chooses, but we are poorer if we
remain locked within a vacuum, without a wider halachic, hashkafic
and historical perspective.
[1] Simon, U.,
1990, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms: From Saadiah Gaon to Abraham
Ibn Ezra, State University of New York Press, Albany.
[2]
Rav Saadia has two
introductions to the psalms, a short one and a long one. In the 1966 Kafih
edition the short introduction is pp. 51-53, and the eleven times longer
introduction is pp. 17-50.
[3]
Kafih, J.,
1966, ed. and tr. into Hebrew, Saadiah Gaon, The Book of Psalms: Tafsir and
Arabic Commentary, Jerusalem 1966, 53.
[4] Kafih, J.,
1966, 53.
[5] Kafih, J.,
1966, 24. Parenthesis mine.
[6]
(New World
Encyclopedia, online source: Karaite Judaism
- New World Encyclopedia. Accessed 05 October 2021).”
[7]
Davidson, I.,
Asaf, S., and Joel B.I., 1970, ed. and tr. into Hebrew, Saadja Gaon, The
Siddur, The Obligations of Prayer, Introduction, 9-10.
[8]
Mann, I., 1921,
"Early Karaite Bible Commentaries," JQR (N.S.) 12 (1921/2), 474.
[9]
Scheiber, A.,
1948, ‘A Rabbinic Siddur Quoted by Kirkisani,’ in Ignace Goldziher Memorial,
vol. I, Budapest, 27-40 (Heb.), 27.
[10] Rav Saadia’s
proof text for this is 1 Chronicles 21:5; “All Israel comprised 1,100,000
ready to draw the sword.” Although in 2 Samuel 24:9 the number is given as
800,000.
[11] Kafih, J.,
1966, 30.
[12] Kafih, J.,
1966, 33.
[13]
Thus, for Rav Saadia,
Shir haMa’alot (a song of ascents), becomes “a high-pitched lahn”
(Simon 1990:17). Also, Al haSheminit (Psalm 6), indicates “that the
Levites in the Temple had eight alhan, one assigned to each group of them”
(Simon 1990:18). This explanation differs substantially from the usual
interpretation of Sheminit as some form of eight stringed instrument.
[14] Hakham, A.,
2003, The Bible: Psalms; with the Jerusalem Commentary, vol. 1, The Koschitzky
ed., 1st ed., Mosad Harav Kook, Jerusalem.
[15]
See 1
Chronicles 23:5; 2 Chronicles 7:6, 20:21, 29:30, 30:21 and Ezra 3:10;
Nehemiah12:24.
No comments:
Post a Comment