¹ Bibliography: E. Schuerer, Geschichte des juedischen Volkes 2 (1907), 538–544; F. C. Grant, Modern Study of the Jewish Liturgy, ZAW, 65 (1954), 59–77. Further bibliography in Hedegoard (below, n. 5), 190–196: S. Baron, Social and Religious History of the Jews, I (1952), 379, n. 25 and II, 376, n. 34. Two works are essential: I. Elbogen, Der juedische Gottesdienst, 3rd ed., 1931, pp. 27–60 and 582–587 and L. Finkelstein, The Development of the Amida, JQR, NS, 16 (1925–1926), 1–43 and 127–170. A. Z. Idelson, Jewish Liturgy (1932), 92–110 is based on Elbogen. See also I. Abraham's Commentary in S. Singer, The Authorized Daily Prayer Book (9th ed., 1912), pp. LV-LXXII. Rabbinical material is collected and translated in H. L. Strack, P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, 4, 1, pp. 189–249.

Abbreviations used in this paper:

ANET — Ancient Near Eastern Texts, ed. J. Pritchard.

Bonsirven — J. Bonsirven, Le Judaisme Palestinien (1936).

Elbogen, see above.

Finkelstein, see above.

JQR — Jewish Quarterly Review.

MGWJ — Monatsschrift fuer Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums.

Moore — F. G. Moore, Judaism (1927).

PAAJR — Proceedings American Academy of Jewish Research.

RQ — Revue de Qumran.

Syll. — G. Dittenberger, Sylloge inscript. graecarum (3rd ed.).

ZAW — Zeitschrift fuer die alttestamentl. Wissenschaft.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr. Gerson D. Cohen (Jewish Theological Seminary) who very kindly read a draft of this paper. He saved me from several mistakes, and supplied some additional information.

² Plato Eutyphr. 14 c: τὸ θὑειν δωρεῖσθαί ἐστι τοῖς θεοῖς τὸ δ’ εứχεσθαι αἰτεῖν τοὺς θεούς. Cf. Plato Leg. 7,801.

³ On the names of the Prayer cf. Elbogen, 27. The terms Tefillah and Shemone Esreh are already attested in the Mishna Ber. 4, 1 and 4, 3. For the name Amidah see e.g. Ber. 26 b. On the etymology of the term Tefillah cf. Elbogen, 511 and L. Kohler-W. Baumgartner, Lexicon, s.v., p. 765.

⁴ Berak. 28b. Simeon ha pakoli is mostly understood as meaning Simeon “the dealer in linen.” Cf. Elbogen, 515: S. Krauss, Talmudische Archaeologie, I (1913), 540, n. 138: 2, 623, n. 39. But S. Klein, MGWJ, 64 (1920), 195 derived the surname from the name of the village Phichola (Jos. A. 12, 4, 2, 160). Cf. B. Mazar, Israel Exploration Journal (1957), 137.

⁵ Cf. D. Hedegård, Seder R. Amram Gaon. I (Lund, 1953), 83–89.

⁶ S. Schechter, JQR, 10 (1898), 654–657. The recension is reprinted in Elbogen, 517 and in D. W. Staerk, Altjuedische Liturgische Gebete, 2nd ed., 1930, p. 11. English translations: Grant (above, n. 1), p. 76; C. W. Dugmore, The Influence of the Synagogue upon the Divine Office (1944), 114, French translation: Bonsirven, 2, 145. The Standard or Babylonian recension and its translation can be found in any Jewish prayer book.

⁷ Elbogen, 254.

⁸ Cf. G. Murray, The Rise of the Greek Epic (Galaxy Book, 1960), 93 ff.

⁹ Finkelstein, 142–169. F. K. Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und der Vaterunser und der Reim (1950), 15–21, argues that the prayer was originally written in rhymes.

¹⁰ Cf. A. Spanier, Die erste Benediction des Achtzehngebets, MGWJ, 81 (1937), 71–75. “The Shield of Abraham” is a quotation from Gen. 15,1 which alludes to the Covenant of Abraham. But the eulogy reads: “Shield of fathers” in Pes. 117 b. Which reading is “original?” Cf. Elbogen, 43; Finkelstein, 27.

¹¹ Cf. Elbogen, 44, and below, n. 29. As Dugmore (n. 6) observes the idea that God can save from death “in the twinkling of an eye” is paralleled in I Cor. 15, 52.

¹² Cf. Elbogen, 45 and 61; 586–587; Finkelstein, Revue des études juives, 93 (1932), 3 f.

¹³ The beginning of this section in the Palestinian text is a quotation from Lamentations (5,21). The better text has been preserved in Babylonian recension. Cf. Finkelstein, 10 and Finkelstein ap. Dugmore (n. 6), 126, n. 3.

¹⁴ I translate the text as reconstructed by Finkelstein, 149. The Blessing is called that “for strength” in Abod. Z. 8a and “Healing and Strength” in p. Ber. 2, 4 (p. 4d). Cf. Elbogen, 48.

¹⁵ The text is reconstructed in Finkelstein, 151. The Palestinian text is interpolated. There is a request: “Hasten the arrival of the year (appointed for) the time of our redemption.” The idea was that redemption is essential for the blessing of the land. Cf. L. Ginzberg, Commentary on the Palestinian Talmud, I (1941), 323 f.

¹⁶ Another fragment of Palest. recension offers a variant reading: “For apostates let there be no hope unless they return to the Torah.” The mention of “arrogant” (zedim) in the eulogy led to the interpolation of a petition against “the arrogant kingdom” (cf. Jer. 50, 31) which now interrupts the context and thus, despite K. F. Kuhn, (n. 9) Vaterunser und der Reim (1950), 19, who refers to II Mace. 1, 28, cannot be original. On the textual history of this Blessing see Elbogen, 51 and 519. Baron (above, n. 1) 2, 135 and 2, 381, n. 8; M. Simon, Verus Israel (1948), 235. Cf. below n. 38.

¹⁷ The translation according to Finkelstein's text (p. 159) with some changes in wording which follow variant reading in the Ms. C of Palestinian recension. But all Mss. add a reference to “the kingdom of the house of David,” which is an obvious interpolation. The eulogy of the high-priestly blessing for the Temple was: “who has chosen Zion,” or according to R. Idi: “who dwells in Zion.” The latter variant was probably the original eulogy of the 14th blessing. Cf. Elbogen, 53, and below, n. 24.

¹⁸ The benediction referring to David is already mentioned T. Ber. 3, 25. On the other hand, it is stated expressly in Midr. Num. Raba 18, 21 that the blessing “Speedily cause the offspring of David, etc.” was instituted after the formulation of the malediction against the sectarians. Cf. Elbogen, 40.

¹⁹ The text after Finkelstein, 161.

²⁰ After the destruction of the Temple the text of this section was naturally subjected to many changes. A reference to sacrifices has been preserved in Babylonian recension. Palestinian recension has another good reading: “may Thy servants serve Thee (that is offer sacrifices) in Jerusalem.” The beginning is quoted as “Accept YHWH to dwell in Zion.” Cf. Elbogen, 55.

²¹ The emphatic request: “bless us, all us, jointly” deserves attention.

²² Sifre Deut., n. 395, p. 142a, ed. M. Friedmann; p. 394, ed. L. Finkelstein. R. Simlai (ca. A.D. 275) in Berach., 32a: R. Hannina (or R. Huna), Ber., 34a. R. Joshua b. Levi pal. Ber., 2, 4 (3).

²³ Dan. 9, 17. Cf., e.g., Sir. 36, 17; Judith 9, 11. The shortened abstracts of the Tefillah, spoken by various rabbis ca. A.D. 100–135 and quoted T. Ber. 3, 7; Ber. 29a; p. Ber., 8a., also end with the concluding eulogy of the section 15: “Blessed art thou who heares prayer.” The high priestly prayer on the Atonement Day was concluded by the same formula. Pal. Yoma 7, 1. p. 44b. Cf. also Enoch, 84.

²⁴ M. Yoma 7, 1; Yoma 70 a (Sota 41a). Pal. Yoma 7, 1, p. 44a. Cf. Elbogen, 31. At the Atonement Day the High Priest read the pertinent passages of the Torah (Lev. 16; 23, 27–32; Num. 29, 7–11). Then, he spoke eight benedictions: for the Torah, for the Temple service (Abodah), ending with the formula “We fear and worship Thee alone” (cf. the Tefillah, 16 at the end); Thanksgiving (Hodaah) using the formula “Who is good and to whom thanks are due” (cf. the Tefillah, 17, at the end); for forgiveness of sins saying at the end of the blessing: “Who pardons iniquity of the people of Israel mercifully.” Cf. the Tefillah, 6. The blessings for the Temple (th e formula: “who has chosen the Temple,” or according to R. Idi: “who dwells in Zion”). For Israel (the quoted formula is: “who has chosen Israel”); for the priests (“who has sanctified the kohanim”). Then he prayed for the nation, asking God to help Israel that needs help. At the end he blessed Him who hears prayers. It is interesting to note that there was no special blessing for Jerusalem. (It was later interpolated in some Mss. Cf. Ch. Albeck's edition of the Mishna.)

²⁵ The prayer service of the priests in the Temple consisted of an introductory blessing, the Torah reading (the Decalogue, Deut. 6, 4–9; 11, 13–21; Num. 15, 37–41), and three formulae: the eulogy after the Torah reading (“True and firm”), the Abodah and a Priestly Blessing (Tamid 5,1). The Abodah, that is a benediction concerning the sacrificial service, must have been similar to the 16th section of the Amidah. The last (18th) Benediction of the Amidah was also called “Priestly Blessing” (Birkat kohanim: M. Rosh Hash. 4,5). Can we identify these two Priestly Blessings? Cf. Elbogen, 59; Finkelstein, 21, n. 48.

²⁶ Ab. Zara 7b-8a. Later discussions: Ber. 16b-17a and 34a.

²⁷ T. Berak. 3, 13. In M. Rosh Hash. 4, 5 these six sections are enumerated: Abot (1), Geburot (2), Kedoshathashem (3), Abodah (16), Hodaah (17), and Kohanim (18). The sanctification formula (ib., and T. Ber. 3, 10 kedoshat hayom) of course varied according to the character of the festival day.

²⁸ A. Marmorstein, JQR 34 (1943–1944) believed that “The Oldest Form of the Eighteen Benedictions” appears in a Greek prayer preserved on a codex leaf written in the fourth or fifth century in Egypt (P. Edgerton, 5 ap. H. I. Bell, T. C. Skeat, Fragments of an Unknown Gospel, 1935, 58–59). But, as A. D. Nock kindly advises me, there is no reason to suppose that the prayer is Jewish and not Christian. Since both Jewish and Christian prayers, used the Old Testament phraseology, there are necessarily some verbal parallels to the Amidah in P. Edgerton, 5.

²⁹ Jewish prayers which were superficially christianized and included in the “Apostolic Constitutions” are again variations of Biblical motifs also used in the Amidah. Thus Const. Ap. 7, 33, 2–7 deals with the merits of the patriarchs. Const. Ap. 7, 34 speaks of God's powers (cf. the Amidah, 2) but in the creation of nature. Cf. generally E. R. Goodenough, By Light, Light (1935), 306–358 and cf. K. Kohler, Jewish Encycl. 4, 593 and The Origin … of the Eighteen Benedictions, HUCA I (1924), 387–425; Idelson (above, n. 1), 301–308. Cf. also I Clem. 59.

³⁰ Cf. Enoch, 84, a prayer probably written in the third century B.C.: “Blessed be thou, O Lord, King, Great and Mighty and Thy Greatness, etc.” A praise of God's might follows. Then, Enoch prays God to destroy the wicked only. “And hide not thy face from the prayer of Thy servant, O Lord.” Again, the invocation of “Lord God of our forefathers” opens the Prayer of Azariah.

³¹ On the formula: N. is the sole god. Cf. E. Peterson, Heis Theos (1926); M. Smith, Journal of Biblical Literature, 74 (1952), 138.

³² Ber. 29b. The ancient rabbis, for whom the whole Amidah was composed by the Elders of old or by Men of the Great Assembly (Elbogen, 28), tried to find a Biblical support for the structure of the Prayer, quoting for instance the fact that the name YHWH is invoked eighteen times in Ps. 29. Cf. Strack-Billerbeck (above, n. 1), 4, 1, 209. Modern tentatives of the same kind are no more convincing. See M. Liber, Structure and History of the Tefillah, JQR, 40 (1950), 331–357.

³³ Cf., e.g., Is. 11, 11; Ps. 147, 2; Jer. 30, 3; Ezech. 20, 34, etc. Sir. 36, 1–17; II Macc. 1, 27. Ps. Sol. 8, 28. Cf. P. Volz, Die Eschatologie der juedischen Gemeinde (1934), 344–345. The mention of “liberation” in the Amidah prayer agrees with II Mace. 1, 27.

³⁴ The petition, based on Is. 1, 26–27, must mean that Zion shall be redeemed by justice. But it is not a criticism of the administration of justice (Elbogen, 34). The accent is rather on the second verse: “Reign over us Thou alone.” Cf. Jos. Annt. 14, 3, 2, 41.

³⁵ Samuel the Little merely added a malediction against the sectarians to a much older formula against the separatists. This birkat ha paroshim is still recognized as a separate blessing in T. Berak, 3, 25. Cf. S. Lieberman, Tosefta-ki-Fshutah, Zeraim I (1955), 54. The first words of the present Section (12) are directed against “apostates.” Professor Boaz Cohen (Jewish Theological Seminary of America) kindly called my attention to the definition of a meshumed in Tos. Horyot 1, 5 (p. 474, ed. Zuckermandel), “he who eats carrion, terepha, (cf. Moore 2, 74) detestable and creeping things, he who eats swine, and drinks wine offered as libation, he who profanes the Sabbath. … R. Jose b. Judah said, who wears clothes of mixed wool and linen, R. Simeon ben Eliezer said: who does anything (of the forbidden things) defiantly,” that is in defiance of the Law. Cf. also Hor. 11a. The antinomian motif is a later interpretation. Originally it was not the religio animae, but acta, to use Augustine's contradistinction (de civ. Dei 6, 10) which counted. A much later text can still speak of men who eat terepha, carrions, creeping things, and become converts to eat good food as the Jews do, and to observe Jewish festivals. Tanhuma do Be Eliyyahu, p. 146, ed. M. Friedmann quoted in C. G. Montefiore, H. Loewe, A Rabbinic Anthology (1960), 577.

³⁶ On the “Elders” in the Thirteenth Benediction of Babylonian recension cf. Elbogen, 52; Kuhn (above, n. 9), 21. Originally this Blessing was a separate one. Even after the final redaction of the Amidah, the rabbis recognized the legitimacy of reciting it separately. T. Berak. 3, 25. Cf. Lieberman (above, n. 38), 54. He also shows that the mention of “the remnant of the scribes” in the same Benediction (Babyl. recension), enigmatic as it is, must also be very old. Cf. Megill. Taanit on the 17th of Adar.

³⁷ On the term “Our father” in the Fifth Benediction see n. 13. Despite Is. 63, 16, Origen (de orat. 22, 1) believed that the “boldness” of addressing God as Father in a prayer was lacking in the Old Testament. The great exegete was right as to the formal prayers in the Hebrew Bible. But he neglected the Apocrypha. Ben Sira (23,1) and Eleazar in III Maccab. 6, 8 in their prayers boldly appeal to God as Father.

³⁸ Cf. II Mace. 1, 1–6. In 124 B.C. the Jews in Jerusalem prayed for their afflicted brethren in Egypt, that God might give them a mind to do His will (cf. Fifth Benediction) and enlighten them “with His Law and His statutes.” Cf. the mention of the Law in the Fourth Benediction. Afterwards God will listen to their (penitential) prayers (cf. Sixth Benediction) and be reconciled to them (cf. Seventh Benediction). Sir. 17, 7 ff. says that God filled men with knowledge of wisdom (Fourth Benediction), and gave them the Torah so that they might praise His holy Name and beware of wrongdoings. The right knowledge is the basis of the right behavior. Lucian, Navig. 24: cf. B. Gaertner, The Areopagus Speech, Acta Seminarii Neotest. Upsalensis 21 (1955), 91. Again, the blessing for knowledge is a part of a hymn which expresses confidence in forgiveness of sins in the sectarian “Manual of Discipline” (11, 14–15). Later, the rabbis stressed the connection between understanding and repentance. P. Ber. 2, p. 4d. On other, rather far-fetched, similarities between the Amidah and the sectarian prayers cf. M. R. Lehmann, Talmudic Materials, RQ I (1958), 403; S. Talmon, The Manual of Benedictions of the Sect., etc, RQ II (1960), 492.

³⁹ P. Ber. 2, 4 (5) p. 4d. On the selicha of the High Priest, cf. above, n. 24.

⁴⁰ Commentators strangely misjudge the meaning of the Seventh Benediction, refer it to the restoration of national independence, and accordingly believe it is misplaced. Cf. Elbogen, 35; Liber (above, n. 32) 347. Yet, the phraseology of petition is derived from Ps. 119, 1953–1954.

⁴¹ M. Taan. 4, 8. The reference to 15th Ab is puzzling. On penance as a substitute for atoning sacrifice cf. Moore I, 502. It is stated in Taan. 27 that reciting of the “order of offerings” in the synagogal service equals sacrifice and brings atonement.

⁴² Finkelstein, 23, already grouped the Benedictions according to the terms of address and emphasized the importance of this criterion for the history of the Tefillah. On the historical meaning of variations in the use of divine names cf. S. Lieberman, Light on Cave Scrolls, PAAJR 20 (1951), 400. The appellation YHWH Elohenu is Biblical (Ex. 3, 18). I Chr. 29, 16. For the rabbinic usage cf. A. Marmorstein, The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God I (1927), 70 f.

⁴³ Parallel structures of the Eighteen Benedictions and Greek prayers were already noted in Ed. Norden, Agnostos Theos (1913), 206. Cf. also Spanier, A., Die Formgeschichte des altjuedischen Gebets, MGWJ 78 (1934), 438–443Google Scholar, and Y. Baer, Yisrael ba Ammim (1955), 32–35, who rightly stressed similarity to prayers from Aeschylus, quoted below, n. 45.

⁴⁴ Institutional religion being neglected by modern scholars who are rather interested in reflections of poets, philosophers, and so on, about religion, we still lack a comprehensive work dealing with state rites of the polls. Some pertinent material for Civic Prayer may be found in K. Keyssner, Gottesvorstellung und Lebensauffasung in griechischen Hymnen (1932), 146 ff. J. Rudhardt, Notions Fondamentales de la Pensée Religieuse … dans la Grèce classique (1958), 187 f.

⁴⁵ Hesiod, Op. 225 ff.: Justice let the polis flourish. There is peace, neither famine, nor plague, the earth produces abundantly, sheep and women are fertile. In the prayer of the Danaids for Argos, Aeschylus (Suppl. 625 ff.) varies the same traditional themes. For instance, the suppliant maidens ask the gods to ward off both foreign war and civil strife. Again, conforming to the dramatic situation, they pray that the Argives may honor Zeus the guardian of strangers. But peace, health and fertility remain the three topics of their prayer. In Aesch., Eumen., 916 ff. the chorus prays for Athens. The poet — naturally — again plays the same theme with variations: no harm to trees and fruits, increase of flock, fertility of earth, no untimely death for men, no civil war. The tripartite prayer is comparable to, yet differs from, the traditional blessing (and malediction) formula which promises life and progeny or death and sterility to pious men and violators of an oath respectively. Cf. Hom., Od. 19, 109–114. For oaths, cf. L. Robert, Études épigraphiques (1938), 313.

⁴⁶ An Athenian father prayed for the health and prosperity of his family (ὑγείαν. … καὶ κτῆσιν ἀγαθήν) Isaeus 8, 16. An eternal variant of the same timeless prayer is that of older men (Plut. q. conv. 3, 6, 4): ἀναβαλλ’ ἄνω τὸ γέρας ὥ καλὰ ’Aøροδίτα.

⁴⁷ Aristoph., Aves, 736: under the rule of the Birds men will have wealth with health, happiness, life, and peace. The comic poet also adds: revelry, dance, etc. The Civic prayer in Arist., Aves, 878, after the pattern of Athenian ritual, mentions “health and safety” (διδόναι ὑγείαν καὶ σωτηρίαν). At the end of his “persians,” Timotheos asks Apollo to come to the city with gifts of prosperity and peace under the Law (eunomia.) J. M. Edmonds. Lyra Graeca 3, 324. Menander, Colax fr. 1 Koerte (Athen. 14, 659d), the gods are asked: διδόναι σωτηρίαν, ὑγείαν, ἀγαθὰ πολλὰ.

⁴⁸ The usual Athenian prayer was for health and safety of the Council and the People. Every priest of the State cults uttered this petition during a sacrifice. Cf., e.g., Ch. Michel, Recueil d'inscript grecques (1900), 1490. Some variants are interesting. In 332 B.C. sacrifice and prayer were offered ἐø’ὑγείαι καὶ σωτηρὶαι of the Athenian people “and children and wives and of all in the country” (καὶ τῶν ἐν τῆι χὠρα πάντων), Michel, ib., 106. In a decree of the third century B.C. (Michel, ib., 1483) health and safety are also requested “for all those who are well-minded toward the People” (καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ὅσοι εἴσιν εὔνους τῶι δήμωι). On another occasion, the prayer also covers “the produce of the countryside” (καὶ τῶν καρπῶν τῶν ἐν χώρα). Syll. 684.

⁴⁹ Theogn., 885–886. Tutelary gods “hold” their city. Using the same verb (ἔχου) Theognis substitutes peace and wealth for the Olympians.

⁵⁰ Syll. 589 = F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées de l'Asie mineure (1955), 32. Cf. Syll. 695 = Sokolowski, 33.

⁵¹ Cf., e.g., I Reg. 19, 15; II Chr. 30, 19. King and sacrifices: II Chr. 8, 12. Cf. I Sam. 13, 18; II Sam. 6, 13; 14:21. Ezek. 45, 17. In II Reg. 16, 15 voluntary sacrifices of “all the people of the land” are distinguished from the royal sacrifices. In II Chr. 29, 21 the king offers expiatory sacrifices for himself, the temple and the people (“Judah”). Then (v. 31) the people present voluntary offerings. Of course, individual men and groups, say a village, could sacrifice and pray that the earth yields its increase. See, e.g., Ps. 85, 12. Cf. also Ps. 67, 6; 132, 15; Is. 30, 23; Jer. 31, 12; Jub. 12, 17.

⁵² Cf. good wishes for the king in pre-exilic psalms, as, e.g., Ps. 61, 8. Cf. 28, 8; 63, 12; 84, 9; I Sam. 2, 10. Cf. Ps. 20 prayer for king's victory and Ps. 72 a prayer for the king.

⁵³ The same principle operated in other Oriental monarchies. See, e.g., ANET, 396; The Hittite King or a priest on his behalf daily prayed to the gods to favor the ruler and his house, to grant life, health and fertility, and destroy the enemy. The people answered: “Let it be so.” But in Seleucid Babylon, the priest asked the Deity to grant mercy to the city. ANET, 331.

⁵⁴ Ber. 26b. Cf. M. Ber. 4, 1 and T. Ber. 3, 1 where the rule is stated that the morning Tefillah may be said until Midday, and the evening Telfillah in the afternoon because the continual burnt-offering was offered in the corresponding hours. The Tefillah was also recited when the additional statutory sacrifices were offered on Sabbaths and festal days. M. Ber. 4, 1.

⁵⁵ Elbogen, 102; Moore, 2, 220.

⁵⁶ Dan. 6, 11. Cf. Judith 9, 1.

⁵⁷ The sacrifice, as its Latin and Greek (hierourgia) names show, is “action within the sphere of things sacred to gods.” W. Robertson Smith, The Religion of the Semites, ch. VI. On the sacrificial act as action, cf. A. Loisy, Essai historique sur le sacrifice (1920), 25 and 88. The sacrifice without prayer seems to have been neglected by students of religion. For the formula of surrendering an offering to a god in primitive worship, cf. F. Heiler, Das Gebet (4th ed. 1920), 76. Among the Arabs sacrifice, and every slaughtering, is accompanied by the formula of presentation (”In the name of God”) but there is no prayer, though in the piacula the worshipper identifies himself expressly to the victim. J. Chelhood, Le sacrifice chez les Arabes (1955), 55; 176; 201. In the Egyptian daily ritual, the priest simply presented food and drink to the idol with the appropriate formula, as, e.g., “Take the whole offering.” M. Alliot, Le culte d'Horus à Edfu (1949), 58. Prayers for the king were inserted in this ritual of the Ptolemaic period on festivals and independently from the oblation (ib., 155) though a reference to the king also appears in some parts of the daily service. The surrendering formulae in the worship of the dead are similar. See, e.g., E. A. W. Budge, The Liturgy of Funeral Offerings (1909), 68: “I have brought it to thee, place thou it in thy mouth.” Cf. generally H. Bonnet, Reallexicon der aegyptischen Religionsgeschichte (1952), 548 and 551.

⁵⁸ II Mace. 1, 23. The whole episode is patterned after Elijah's miracle on Mount Carmel. Here, too, a prayer is spoken before the oblation (I Reg. 19, 36) and the fire of the Lord consumes not only the victim but the wood, the stones of the altar and the water poured on the altar. For prayer during a private sin offering: Job, 42, 8. When Is. 56, 8 calls the Temple “house of prayer,” he speaks of prayers and voluntary sacrifices of the aliens.

⁵⁹ When Solomon offered a thousand burnt offerings at Gibeon he obviously formulated no petition on this occasion. For God asked him in a dream what was his request. On the other hand, at the dedication of the Temple of Jerusalem, God heard and then, in a vision, answered Solomon's prayer. But this prayer was uttered not during a sacrifice but between two series of sacrifices, though before the Temple altar. Voluntary public or private sacrifices were necessarily accompanied by prayers stating the meaning of the offering. Cf., e.g., Ps. 26, 5; 27, 7; 81, 4; 116, 7.

⁶⁰ The prayer is quoted in Targum of Song of Songs, 4, 6, p. 89, ed. R. H. Melamed (1921). I was referred to this remarkable text by Strack-Billerbeck (above, n. 1) 2, 79. The same prayer is paraphrased in Taan. 27b. The priestly prayer for acceptance of the sacrifice became the sixteenth section of the Tefillah. A rabbinic text stresses the fact that only on one occasion (Deut. 26, 13) the Jews supplemented the offering by a demand. Cf. S. Lieberman, Tarbith 27 (1958), p. 186, n. 34.

⁶¹ M. Tamid, 7, 3. Cf. II Chr. 29, 27; II Mace. 1, 30. According to Sir. 50, 16 the Levites sang only after the libation. Songs were performed only over the prescribed public offerings. Arak. 11b.

⁶² M. Tamid, 4 and 5, 1.

⁶³ Aristeas, Epist. ad Philocr., 92 and 98. Tos. Yoma 1, 4; Sukk. 50a. Cf. A. Buechler, Die Priester und der Kultus (1895), 70, n. 5. When Jeremiah (14, 11) describes God's refusal to hear pleading for Israel he let the Deity say: “Though they fast, I will not listen to their cry, and though they offer up burnt-offering and meal-offering, I will not accept them.” Supplication is a part of a fast service.

⁶⁴ Lev. 17, 11. Cf. Jub. 6, 14; 50, 11. The stones of the Altar established peace in Jerusalem; Johanan b. Zakkai, Mekh. Exod. 20, 21 (3, p. 290, ed. Lauterbach). S. Schechter, Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, 226 and 300; Bonsirven, 2, 95.

⁶⁵ Lev. 5, 5; M. Yoma, 3, 8; 4, 2; 6, 2.

⁶⁶ M. Yoma, 5, 1. One High Priest's prayer in the Temple, cf. also Yoma, 53a; pal. Yoma, 5, 2, p. 42c; Taan. 24b; Lev. R. 20, 4, p. 455, ed. Margules.

⁶⁷ M. Yoma, 7, 1. The High Priest spoke the confession of sin for the people before sending the scapegoat off to the desert (Lev. 16, 21; M. Yoma, 6, 2) but he did not pray when the sin-offering bullock and the sin-offering goat were sacrificed (Lev. 16, 27; M. Yoma, 6, 6). The rabbis only discussed whether he read Lev. 16 after the sending away of the scapegoat. Cf. pal. Yoma, 6, 6.

⁶⁸ Those who were present at the reading of the Torah (and prayer service) in the Court of Women could not see the sacrifice prescribed in Lev. 16, 27, because both actions were performed simultaneously (M. Yoma, 7, 1).

⁶⁹ Cf. M. Yoma, 7, 1, and the discussion of this rule in Yoma 68b.

⁷⁰ M. Sota, 7, 8.

⁷¹ I Macc. 12, 11. Cf. the intercession prayer for the Egyptian Jews in 124 B.C. (II Mace. 1, 6). The Greeks equally prayed for their political friends (Athenians and Platea: Herod. 6, 11) and for the co-religionists. W. S. Ferguson, The Athenian Orgeones, Harvard Theol. Rev., 37 (1944), 101.

⁷² Theopomp. 115, fr. 104 Jacoby (Schol. Arist., Aves, 878). Cf. Ad. Wilhelm, Jahreshefte des Oesterr. Archaeol. Inst. 5 (1902), 127. Cf., e.g., Syll. 661: the prayer for health and safety of the citizens, etc. “and of friends and allies.”

⁷³ The prayer for the pagan overlord accompanied the special sacrifice on his behalf, just as, say, the Captivity in Babylon, according to Baruch, 1, 11, sent money to the Temple to offer a sacrifice and pray for the life of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. These voluntary offerings should not be confused with the statutory service. Jonathan, as the wording of his letter shows (“on every occasion,” “unceasingly”), speaks of the regular sacrifices on festivals.

⁷⁴ Sir. 50, 19. The Cairo Hebrew version of Ben Sira has the verb ranan, shout, but in Hebrew, with reference to a prayer, it would rather mean “shout praise” and not supplicate. Proseuche is tefillah (so also in the Cairo version) or techinna. For the expression “supplicate with prayer,” cf. Dan. 9, 18 and 20.

⁷⁵ Elbogen, 73 identifies this supplication with the Tachanunim, that is the individual petitions which follow the Amidah in the synagogual service. But Ben Sira speaks of a collective prayer. Further, this supplication, and also the Amidah in the Synagogue, preceded the priestly blessing (cf. M. Ber. 5, 4; T. Ber. 5, 6). The Tachanunim follow the priestly blessing. Last but not least: the Tachanunim are no part of the statutory liturgy.

⁷⁶ Note that Ben Sira describes the pontifical service. According to Jos. Antt. 5, 5, 7, 236, the High Priest sacrificed on Festivals, the New Moon Days, and Sabbaths. But the Temple service on these days was distinguished only by additional sacrifices. There is no reason to suppose, as commentators do, that Ben Sira refers to the Day of Atonement.

⁷⁷ A Hymn inserted in the Cairo Hebrew recension of Ecclesiasticus after 52, 12, though modeled after Ps. 136, often agrees in wording with the Amidah and sometimes with the prayers of the Covenanters of Qumran. Cf. W. O. E. Oesterley, The Jewish Background of Christian Liturgy (1925), 55–57; Ch. Rabin, Qumran Studies (1957), 56; Talmon, S., The “Manual of Benedictions” RQ 2 (1960), 492Google Scholar. The Hymn cannot be authentic, because its author, quoting Ps. 132, 17, gives thanks to God “who makes a horn to sprout for the house of David.” That agrees with the Fifteenth Benediction in the Babylonian recension of the Amidah, that is with a text inserted in the Prayer at least three centuries after Ben Sira. Cf. above, n. 18. Again in v. 14 God is called “the King of the Kings of Kings.” In the Bible God is just “King.” In the Hellenistic age, he becomes “King of Kings” (e.g., Enoch 9, 4; Jub. 8, 20; III Mace. 5, 35). But the title in the Hymn presupposes the existence of earthly rulers who called themselves “Kings of Kings.” The latter title was not used in the time of Ben Sira, but was re-introduced by the Parthian kings in the first century B.C. Accordingly, God is sometimes called “King of Kings of Kings,” in rabbinic sources. M. Abot 3, 1; and other passages quoted in Bonsirven I, 143.

⁷⁸ Ben Sira concludes the description of the service in the Temple by formulating his own prayer which repeats motifs of the Civic Prayer: gladness of heart, peace, and divine favor. He again adds the hope for deliverance (Sir. 50, 23). The Syriac version (followed by the Cairo Hebrew) adds the petition for the High Priest Simeon, which has been omitted by the Greek translator who worked after the fall of the high priestly dynasty of the Oniads.

⁷⁹ Sir. 36, 13–14. The Greek version speaks of “aretelogia.” Cf. Nilsson (above, n. 50), 2, 216.

⁸⁰ Jub. 22, 6–9. Cf. the Athenian table song asking the goddess Athena to set straight the city, save it, and the citizens from sickness, sedition and untimely death (Athen. 15, 694c). L. Finkelstein, The Birkat ha-Mazon, JQR, NS, 19 (1929), 219 f. has shown the structural analogy between Abraham's prayer in Jub. 22, 6–9 and the Grace after Meal, and has proven that the earliest text of the third blessing in the Grace was identical with the Twelfth Benediction of the Amidah.

⁸¹ Ps. 51, 18; Sir. 35, 1.

⁸² Cf. T. Taan, 1, 11 (12) according to the text and interpretation in S. Lieberman, Tosefta-ki-Fshutah 5 (1961), 1074.

⁸³ Cf. Moore 2, 12; M. Avi Yonah, Geografia Historit shel Eretz Israel (1951), 63.

⁸⁴ M. Taan, 4, 2.

⁸⁵ Cf. my observations in the Annuaire de l'Inst. de Philol. et d'Hist. Orient. (University of Brussels), 7 (1944), 5.

⁸⁰ Ezra 5, 12 and 17.

⁸⁷ Ps. 12, 6 and 147, 14. Cf. 29, 11; 72, 7; 128, 6.

⁸⁸ The notion that God protects Zion was, of course, a current one (cf., e.g., Ps. 25, 22; 51, 20; 69, 36: 130, 8.) Again men asked for prosperity for themselves or their children (e.g., Tob. 10, 11), and so on, but the Tefillah was a common supplication.