Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

There are two nusachos with the fourth brocha in Shemoneh Esreh of which I am aware. One, extant today in nusach Ashkenaz, certain nusach Sefard, and Teman Baladi, and present in very old siddurim, ends "deah, binah, v'haskel". Why are these three words linked conceptually?

Strictly by way of comparison, other nusachos have "chochmah, binah, vadaas", which have a clear source in that they are three linked sefiros.

share|improve this question
1  
The former method is AFAIK a Nusach Sefard change. –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 2:17
1  
2  
Rambam's siddur and R Amram Gaon has the regular Nusach Ashkenaz version. Machzor Vitri seems to have two versions: one like Nusach Ashkenaz and one that adds Chochmah. I suspect the latter is a typo because a similar mistake appears in some printings of the Rambam. –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 2:26
4  
Yoel, do you want the origin (like the first Siddur to use it), or the textual/conceptual basis (like a Pasuk or reformulation of a series of Pesukim)? –  Seth J Jan 3 '13 at 3:13
2  
@yoel Do you have any evidence that Chochmah Binah vaDaat is not a "later" Kabbalistic/Arizal adjustment to the Siddur? If you don't, then I'm not sure I follow how the comparison in the question strengthens your question. Deah Binah veHaskel is original and you can ask why the Anshei Keneset Hagedola chose it just as easily as you can ask why they chose lots of other words in Tefillah (which is fine as a question). –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 5:58

1 Answer 1

Avudraham explains that Deah and Haskel are based on the Posuk in Jeremiah 3:15. The earliest source I can find is Tana Davai Eliyahu.

share|improve this answer
    
Ok...and it exists hundreds of years earlier in the Rambam, Seder Amram Gaon and Machzor Vitri as we already established above. –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 16:25
    
Also, the question did not seek "the origin (like the first Siddur to use it)," but rather it sought "the textual/conceptual basis (like a Pasuk or reformulation of a series of Pesukim)". So not sure how this answer the question. –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 16:28
    
@GershonGold (and Double AA) does my edit improve the question, and make it easier to provide an answer? –  yoel Jan 3 '13 at 16:45
    
@yoel IMHO yes! –  Double AA Jan 3 '13 at 16:55
1  
So what about binah? Seems weird to stick it in between them if that's the source. I think it's also telling that binah is the one shared between nusachos. –  yoel Jan 3 '13 at 21:10

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.