A Little Change Here, a Little Change There (1)

You favor man with perception and teach mankind understanding. Grant us knowledge, understanding and intellect from You. Blessed are You, Adonoy, Grantor of perception.  Amidah  (Ashkenazi version)

Man/ mankind – Before we begin to explore the subtle changes in the Sephardic and Ashkenazi versions of the Amidah, let’s look at translation consistency.  Robert Alter makes the point that many translations of the Bible employ the English penchant for using synonyms rather than repeating the same word over and over (as is typically the case in Hebrew).  What this means is that the connections between the words is often lost to the English reader.  Where we might read “joy,” “delight,” “pleasure,” or “favor,” the Hebrew often uses the same word.  The nuances in our English rendering are all packed into one word, not many different words.  Usually this doesn’t matter too much because usually we get the idea, but sometimes it matters a great deal when an English word disguises the connection found in Hebrew.  For example, the connection between “crafty” (the serpent in Genesis 3:1) and “naked” (the description of the man and woman in Genesis 2:25).  This prevents English readers from seeing the deliberate ties.

A similar issue occurs in the Jewish liturgy of the Amidah.  In the translation, we read “favor man” and “teach mankind.”  The English makes us think that the Hebrew word is the same.  But it isn’t.  Look at the Hebrew text.  I’ve highlighted the two words.

אַתָּה חוֹנֵן לְאָדָם דַּֽעַת וּמְלַמֵּד לֶאֱנוֹשׁ בִּינָה: חָנֵּֽנוּ מֵאִתְּ֒ךָ דֵּעָה בִּינָה וְהַשְׂכֵּל: בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְהֹוָה חוֹנֵן הַדָּֽעַת

Even if you can’t read Hebrew, you can see immediately that these are not the same.  In fact, the first word (reading right to left, remember) is ‘adam (“to adam” לְאָדָם) and the second word is ‘enosh (“to enosh” לֶאֱנוֹשׁ).  They can both mean “man” or “mankind,” but if this is the case, why use two different words?  Something more is happening than simple synonym choice.

Let’s try a different translation.  “You gift to adam da’at and teach to enosh bina.”  Don’t worry, we’ll look at da’at and bina before we finish this.  What we see now is that adam receives something as a gift (the first step) and then enosh is taught (not gifted) something else.  What does this mean?

Let’s look at ‘enosh first.  There are some unusual facts about this word.  It appears only one time in the books of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:26), and that text is probably an addition to the original.  It never appears in Joshua, Judges, Samuel, or Kings.  The plural is there, but not the singular.  It is most often found in poetic texts.  ‘enosh is parallel with ‘adam, but it seems to emphasize the distance between God and man (e.g. Psalm 9:20f.) while ‘adam certainly does not, at least not in the early Genesis account.  But “In Biblical Hebrew, ‘enosh nowhere functions as an indefinite pronoun, as ‘adham does.”[1]  ‘adam, on the other hand, typically occurs in prose, sometimes with the article, and is usually considered a “collective singular,” i.e., “mankind” or “men.”  However, it never appears in the plural (remember?).  Maass comments:

“The use of the word ‘adham in the OT presents one of the strongest evidences for ancient Israelite universalism.  In most passages using ‘adham, including the earliest texts, it is clear that this word is not intended to refer particularly to Israelites, but to all men.”[2]

Maass’ comment is true for most of the occurrences after the creation story, but ‘adam is clearly not a universal term in Genesis 2 and 3.  It is the designation of a particular man, the first man, the direct handiwork of God.  This helps us understand the use of the term in the Amidah.  In typical Hebrew fashion, ‘adam in our prayer can refer to all men, and at the same time, recall the Genesis story of the first man.  It’s not one as opposed to the other, but rather both together.  ‘enosh, on the other hand, cannot mean a single individual.  When the prayer moves from ‘adam to ‘enosh, it moves from a word with a double meaning to a word with a single, but collective, meaning.  If we read the text as a reference to the Genesis account, we hear the undertones of God’s direct involvement with Adam’s knowledge, later taught to all men.  If we read the text as a universal statement, we still discover that God’s creative activity stands behind knowledge even if it is passed on from one man to another.

I am inclined to consider the prayer as a subtle reference to the initial Genesis account with the use of ‘adam.  I think this explains why the text uses both words rather than one of the two.  But this isn’t the only reason.  There is also a difference between da’at and bina, a difference that had quite an impact if ‘adam is viewed as a Genesis reference and ‘enosh as a collective singular.    Adam receives da’at but ‘enosh is taught bina.  What does this imply?  Let’s see.

Oh, wait a minute.  By this time, you may be ready to complain.  “Why are we meticulously examining an Ashkenazi prayer?  This is not in the Bible.  Does it really matter what the men who wrote this prayer thought?  They weren’t prophets.  They weren’t like Moses or Joshua.  Why are we spending so much time on this?”

Let me offer this answer: the Amidah represents quintessential Jewish thinking.  It comes directly from centuries of biblical reflection.  If we can understand and appreciate what is happening in the Amidah, we will have a much deeper experience of the Jewish perspective on the Tanakh.  We will, hopefully, start to think Jewishly.  And that will help us read the Tanakh with different eyes.  Besides, I’m curious.  Okay?

More tomorrow.

Topical Index:  Amidah, ‘adam, ‘enosh

[1] Fritz Maass, TDOT, Vol. 1, p. 347

[2] Fritz Maass, TDOT, Vol. 1, pp. 83-84.