Amen and amen: blessings of a heretic - like me

Judaism, Spring, 2002 by Jeremy Kalmanofsky

WE WHO OBSERVE JEWISH LAW OFTEN WANT TO KNOW what the Halakha is. No less, we ought to ask what the Halakha means. We should consider not only the rules and principles that underlie a given legal decision, but also the phenomenology of adhering to that ruling, and what attitudes it conveys. When determining how to pray, how to give tzedaka, or what food to eat, Halakhic methods are qualitative as well as quantitative. Halakhists never merely add up the list of texts and rabbis that point one way, add up the list of those pointing the other way, and conclude neatly that the law follows the majority. (1) Along the way, there are and should be myriad evaluative judgments about what the hour demands, what is the most ethical course, which texts and teachers are authoritative, which precedents are apposite and which are irrelevant. Inescapably, this involves choosing to accent some features of the Torah tradition and to mute others, to say that one thing is essential and another peripheral. A posek (Halakhic deci sor) rarely finds the answer to a hard question spelled out in block letters in an old tome, and rarely uses arithmetic to calculate what in the textual tradition carries the most authority. Rather, every ruling represents a Halakhic expert's construction of what it means to be a religious Jew. (2)

Studying Halakha with this consciousness--reading for meaning as well as for guidance in normative living--permits us to see what an art it is to build Jewish life from the Torah. But while each normative decision may manifest a profound and subtle Judaic vision, it is rarely the only one possible. Almost always, there are alternatives, which we reveal when we seek out the many voices of rabbinic discourse. This array of alternatives does not mean that legal rulings are arbitrary or subjective without mooring. In fact, the greater the sage, the more he or she will craft a vision of Jewish life based upon learning and wisdom. (3) But we must own up to the fact that poskim are not God's mechanical mouthpieces; and that Halakhic rulings reflect their authors' particular articulations of the meaning of Jewish life. Alternative visions and revisions are entirely possible.

In this essay I examine the laws of saying amen to blessings in order to explore how certain legal decisions construct Judaic meaning. On a basic level, amenis one person's affirmation that he or she believes what another has just said. If one person praises God "who clothes the naked," then another responds by saying: amen! Yes, indeed. I believe that too. Thus, amen has a paideic effect; it inculcates the theological professions we should make. For petitionary prayer, amen carries the further valence that the one who hears also wishes for what the one who blessed sought. If one prays, blessed is God who heals the sick, then those who respond amen add their prayer, too, that God heal the suffering. (4) Thus, amen has the socially binding effect of prompting our fellow Jews to pray along with us that our needs and desires be fulfilled. Furthermore, in Halakhic terms, responding amen is the action that enables one to fulfill one's obligation through another's blessing, with exactly the same completeness as if one said it one's self.

If we penetrate deeper into the law on saying amen, we discover that this response also constitutes a transformation in which an individual's blessing becomes a social act in which the Jewish community participates. All alone, Jews may recite private blessings, and fulfill a limited measure of their religious duties. But according to a number of Halakhic and Aggadic sources, only when another human being responds with the affirmation amen, can the act of blessing truly reach its fulfillment. Thus, amen constitutes the sociality of blessing.

For example, one who recites the prayer over bread must not begin eating "until amen has been completed in the mouths of the responders." (5) Rashi explains this rule with the following comment: "For answering amen is part of the blessing." The thirteenth-century Talmudist R. Yom Toy of Seville (Ritba) comments similarly: "As long as they are still answering amen, the blessing has not concluded." According to these rulings, the blessing is not one religious act and amen a separate one. Rather, they form an integrated whole. And for complete fulfillment, this ritual act needs both partners. That is, a blessing needs Jewish society.

This religious vision is expressed most boldly by R. Isaac of Vienna, author of the thirteenth-century code Or Zarua, based in turn on the Jerusalem Talmud. (6) The Or Zarua writes that-even with one's mouth full in the middle of a meal-one must respond amen: "It is impossible not to respond amen. For if he [the hearer] did not respond amen, neither one will discharge his obligation." That is to say, even one who holds an apple, recites "Blessed are You, God, Master of the cosmos, who creates the fruit of the tree," and then takes a bite, would not have properly recited the blessing if another Jew did not affirm her blessing with amen. (7) With these Halakhic rulings, it seems to me, these rabbis teach us to socialize a blessing through the response of amen. Through amen, we transform an individual act of worship to a communal one.