Search

In their article, the authors announce the discovery of a new fragment of the Hebrew Book of Ben Sira in the Cairo Genizah, in the Taylor-Schechter collection of the Cambridge University Library: T-S AS 118.78. The fragment is a part of ms. D. After a brief introduction, a critical edition of the text of the fragment is presented, including variant readings from parallel sources and notes to the text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the slightly revised English translation of the first edition, originally published in 2007 in Hebrew, of two new leaves of the Geniza manuscript C of the Hebrew version of Ben Sira. With those two new leaves, from a nonconsecutive bifolio, we now have eight leaves from four continuous bifolios of the manuscript. The second new leaf contains the first Hebrew evidence for verses ranging between Sir 20:30 and 25:7. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The genre o f selihot, current amongst Jewish congregations for a thousand years now, is not attested at all in Classical piyyut in Eretz-Israel. The present article investigates the liturgical locus in which the selihot first appeared, and the reasons for their appearance. The liturgical framework within which the selihot are embedded in the various Jewish communities manifests a basic nucleus, which is always present: the formula at the head o f the recitation o f the Thirteen Attributes, n n x D ” s x i n x [ V x ] , the Thirteen Attributes themselves, which are repeated after each seliha, and the fixed presence o f verses from the Prayer o f Moses, ntnaynfiyVxjnVo... (Num 14:19-20), as well as Daniel's prayer (Dan 9:18-19). All o f these elements evidently stem from the early, alphabetic, unrhymed inm ing-piyyut ~ p x D'am n b y i / n n x □” s x , which appears in Seadya’s Siddur and serves as a frame for selihot in numerous Genizah fragments. The structure o f the piyyut, which consists o f short pieces of poetry, each one followed by Scriptural verses (in one case, a confessional formula appears instead o f verses), is an exact parallel o f one o f the components o f the early qedushta for Yom Kippur: the s e d e r p e s u q im that comes at the end o f the ‘benediction o f the (special) sanctity o f the day'. There is also a similarity in the choice o f verses: specifically the verses from the Thirteen Attributes, the Prayer o f Moses, and Daniel's Prayer are found with almost complete consistency in the early sid r e i p e s u q im . And just as the framing-p iy y u l is cut off by the s e lih o t close to the verses o f the Thirteen Attributes, the s e lih o t also cut o ff the sid r e i p e s u q im at the same point. Thus I suggest that the s e d e r p e s u q im , in particular the verses o f the Thirteen Attributes that are found in it, is the locus o f origin o f the se lih o t. The congregation, which joined the h a zz a n in the recitation o f the Thirteen Attributes, did not find a single recitation sufficient, and the function o f the se lih o t was to make it possible to recite them several times. This process is not attested in Eretz-Israel in the period o f the Classical p iy y u t, and it is likely that it emerged in Babylon; in the generation o f Seadya Gaon it is already an established custom. The framing-p;){yw/ nnx D” SX "px does not appear originally to have been a s e d e r p e s u q im , but rather a text that was already composed as a frame for the se lih o t, the confessional formula, and the fixed verses that are recited alongside them. The tendency to repeat central elements embedded within the framing -p iy y u t for the se lih o t did not stop at the Thirteen Attributes: there were those who also sought to repeat the verses o f the Prayer o f Moses and o f Daniel's Prayer over and over again, and especially to repeat the confessional formula many times. For this puipose the c o n fe ssio n a U p iy y u tim were created. These are also embedded in the framing-p/yyjrf and serve as an introduction either to other verses found in it or to the confessional formula itself. However, these customs remained marginal, unlike the recitation o f se lih o t and the repetition o f the Thirteen Attributes, which were developed and expanded. Seadya’s S id d u r describes an additional development: the framing -p iy y u t was transferred from the Yom Kippur liturgy to that o f the other fast days, where it was incorporated in the 1* nVo benediction, and s e lih o t were also embedded in it in the ia m id o t o f the fast days. This custom survived even when the framing -p iy y u t was no longer employed and all that remained o f it were embedded fragments (such as the opening strophe o f nnx D” DX -px Vx). With the passage o f time, se lih o t also came to be recited on those liturgical occasions when people gathered for nightly vigils to recite ra h a m in , around the High Holy Days. This transfer frequently resulted in the obscuring o f the original framework and the intermixing o f se lih o t and ra h a m in -texts. However, in the s e lih o t liturgy for fast days the close relationship to the early framing -p iy y u t and the point o f origin o f the s e lih o t is still evident in most Jewish communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]