The American Jewish Archives Journal, Volume LXI 2009, Number 1

48For more on the 1QSb text, see James Charlesworth and Frank Moore Cross, The Dead Sea
Scrolls 1: Rule of the Community and Related Documents (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr, 1994),
119ff. Thanks to Jason Kalman, who shared this from his correspondence with Rabbi Mordechai
Rotem, who pointed out these additions.
49The source given there is the Jacob Licht edition of The Rule Scroll (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute,
1965), 2, lines 2–4. This text also appears in Mishkan T’filah (99) as a creative alternative to
Sim Shalom.
50Kavanat Halev, 169 has Hodayot, page x, lines 14–17, which are cited from the translation
of the G. Vermes edition (London: Penguin Books, 1995) for the opening readings. Kavanat
Halev, 195 has the meditations after the Amidah, cited from Vermes, 220 Hodayot, page xi,
lines 26–31.
51Kavanat Halev, 227, Hodayot, page vii, lines 26–31 (Vermes, 212).
52The most comprehensive volume is Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead
Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study
of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23 January, 2000 (Orion Center for the
Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature International Symposium), ed. Esther
G. Chazon, Ruth Clements, Avital Pinnick (Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2000), especially
Stephan C. Reif’s insights on the interpretation of the Birkat ha-Mazon, 140ff.
53See Louis Finkelstein, “The Birkat Ha-Mazon,” JQR 19 (1928–1929): 211–262.
54TMC, 31. A much shorter insight is found in the Etz Hayim (EH) of the Conservative movement
on 32. Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary, ed. David I. Lieber and Jules Harlow (Philadelphia:
Jewish Publication Society and New York: Rabbinical Assembly, 2001). Many of the editors
of the EH were well-known biblical scholars and were using the Jewish Publication Society
translation of the text that many had worked on earlier. My comparison is based upon the fact
that the TMC, written in a time when very few scrolls were available to the public, seems to
place more importance upon the scrolls materials than does the EH, which was written in a
time when the Dead Sea Scrolls texts were available to its editors.
55In Gleanings, 101, the text is cited in full:
“Of all the virgins and brides
That walk beneath the canopy
None can compare with Sarah.”
56The Festival Calendar, 922. “Some time during the Second Commonwealth, a sectarian group
tried to introduce an entirely new—apparently solar—calendar; this attempt is recorded in two
apocryphal books, Jubilees and I Enoch. These proposals seem to have influenced the group
that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls.” In TMC, a note on 922 directs the reader to a footnote
on 1740, regarding Millar Burrows’s book Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Viking Press, 1955) and
his follow-up, More Light from the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Viking Press, 1958). The same
TMC article specifically states: “In the Land of Israel, the only occasion observed for two days
is the Festival of the New Year. Reform Judaism follows the one-day biblical rule.”
57See Mark Washofsky, Jewish Living: A Guide to Contemporary Reform Practice (New York:
UAHC Press, 2001), 93ff.
58David Golinkin, Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Conservative
Movement 1927–1970, Vol. III (New York: Rabbinical Assembly, 1997), 1228–1272.
59Adolfo Roitman, A Day at Qumran. The Dead Sea Sect and Its Scrolls (Jerusalem: The Israel
Museum, 1997). Op Cit., VanderKam, Dead Sea Scrolls Today, 176.
60TMC, 9 and 1149. None of this is found in EH.
61The Dead Sea Scriptures (New York: Doubleday, 1956), 40. This as opposed to the other major
translation of the time, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, published by Geza Vermes in 1962, which
barely acknowledges in his translation of the same section that it is a version of the Numbers 6
priestly benediction (Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1962), 73. None of this is found in EH.
142 • American Jewish Archives Journal