1964 Proceedings - Cantors Assembly

mate aspirations. In this special and additional sense
Judaism is a “liturgical religion.” The Siddur reflects
a love of life in the “here and now” rather than a
postponement of all our hopes to the hereafter. At
the same time, it reflects belief in the precious worth
of the individual by its reference to God as the Author
of our life on earth and as the Guarantor of our life
in the hereafter. The Prayer Book speaks of tse Kingship
of God as a present reality in the life of the
people of Israel and frequently expresses the hope for
the extension of His kingship among all mankind. This
is quite different from the notion of the “Kingdom of
God” which the early Christians believed would be
established in heaven. That otherworldly notion may
have found its confirmation if not its origin, in the
Rabbinic phrase malkhut shamayim which, if one
overlooks the fact that shamayim is a metronym for
God, could be rendered: “Kingdom of Heaven.” When
we recite the Shema, we accept now and here the
Kingship of God and indeed the Mishnah designates
the act of reciting the Shema as Kabalat 01 Malkhut
Shamayim - the willing acceptance of the obligation
of living under the “government” of God. That
“government” calls for life under the regime and
regimen of the mitzvot. Hence the Prayer Book is
replete with a joyful acceptance of the mitzvot which
includes ritual deeds as well as deeds of righteousness.
In expressing hope for the Messianic days the prayers
do not envision a heavenly adventure but rather a
rebuilding of Eretz Israel as a spiritual center to which
all peoples will look for Torah guidance in the moral
dilemmas confronted by the individual and by society.
Nor does the Prayer Book reflect belief in “original”
sin. It rather mirrors belief in “original forgiveness”
in that it affirms that when on Rosh Hashanah, Adam
sinned, he was forgiven (by the way, this makes Rosh
Hashanah “the birthday of mankind” rather than
the birthday of the world) and was thus assured that
when on future New Years Days his descendants appear
before God for judgment, they, too, would be offered
forgiveness. For an elaboration of this idea I refer
you to comment on the Rosh Hashanah Kiddush in
my book, Justice and Mercy.
I would like to call your attention to the followiug
questions with which I deal in my above mentioned
commentary on the High Holyday liturgy:
1. How our liturgy blends the universal emphasis
with the particularity of Israel’s history and
hopes? (p. 13)
2. Why the Barukh Shem is recited in an undertone
all during the year except on Yom Kippur. (p. 71)
3. Why the Ten Commandments are no longer recited
as part of the daily liturgy. (p. 67-68)
4. What is the
(P. 104)
“idea of the holy” in Judaism?
5. Why the Palestinian poet Kalir composed Kerovot
only for one day of Rosh Hashanah.
6. Why the recital of sheheheyanu on the second
night of Rosh Hashanah posed a halakhic dilemma.
(ibid.)
7. How Kol Nidre survived the halakhic objections
leveled against it? (p. 203-205)
8. Why Shema Yisrael is recited only once in the
24
9.
10.
congregational affirmations at the end of the
Neilah service. (p. 285)
Why the popular association of the sounding of
the shofar with the Year of Jubilee is not correct.
(P- 273)
Why are the Thirteen Attributes of God so frequently
invoked in the Selihot sections of the
liturgy? (p. 126)
(Pages refer to JUSTICE AND MERCY:
Commentary on the Liturgy of the New Year
and the Day of Atonement (Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., New York) 1963)
WORKSHOP IN MUSIC
Chairman:
HAZZAN AARON I. EDGAR
Beth E l Synagogue
Omaha, Nebraska
“UNDERSTANDING THE MODES”
HAZZAN M AX WOHLBERG
Malverne Jewish Center
Malveme, New York
ldelsohn in his Thesaurus of Hebrew-Oriental
Melodies, Abraham Friedman in Der Synagogale Gesang
and Baruch Cohon in The Structure of the Synagogue
Prayer-Chant (an article in the 1950 Spring
issue of the Journal of the American Musicological
Society) have made the first attempts at a classification
of the motifs in the Synagogue Modes. In this paper,
limited to the minor modes, I wish to deepen and expand
this effort and point to inherent inner relations,
as well as to the influences of cantillation in evidence.
Of the 24 accompanying musical examples, reflecting
in the main, the East European Nusah, the first is the
benediction of the Torah. Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are from the
weekday liturgy. No. 3 is used by Hassidim of Ger and
others for the weekday Amidah. (I have omitted here
the accepted mode of the weekday Amidah because its
construction requires special consideration.) No. 4 is
intended for Tisha B’av No. 5, 6, 7 and 8 belong to the
Sabbath Liturgy, the last is for the Mincha Service.
Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12 are for the Festivals. No. 13 is
the benediction for the Halleil. Nos. 14, 15, 16, 17 and
18 are High Holiday melodies. No. 19 is utilized in
Selichot. Nos. 20 and 21 are examples of the minor
Lern Steiger - study mode. No. 22, while essentially of
the Selicha mode, is characteristic for passages from
the Kabbalah. Nos. 23 and 24 represent the Ukrainian-
Dorian or Gypsy scale. This scale was traditionally
also applied to parts of Av Horachamim, Kevakoras,
Moh Oshiv and Adonoy Moloch.
Careful analysis of this material will reveal a
number of motifs or melodic patterns which appear
with some degree of frequency. While at times a
minute part of the pattern may be absent, other notes
may intervene or some slight alteration may occur, the
general, essential outline will remain clear and conspicuous.
The constituent elements of example I are obviously
the Cantillatino tropes for the Haftarah ; I - Pashto,