Its easy to dislike Siddur Ve’ani Tefillati because of its rather, shall we say, unique design. Although I admit that some parts are really hard to read, I actually like it. I think its elegant, and love having margins to write in.
I wrote this detailed description what of its special content when my congregations was considering whether or not to adopt it (we did):
Siddur
Ve’ani Tefillati was first published by Masorti Movement in Israel in 1998;
the revised version was published in 2009 in cooperation with Yedioth Ahronoth
Books. It is different from both Orthodox prayer book such as Rinat Yisrael,
which was previously used by Hod veHadar, and US Conservative prayer books (for
example, Silverman and Sim Shalom [complete]).
Unlike Orthodox
prayer books but like US Conservative prayer books, Ve’Ani Tefillati
phrases the morning blessings (V 20, SS 10-11) in positive language. For
example, instead of “who has not made me a slave,” Conservative prayer books
praise God “who made me free.” However, Ve’Ani Tefillati is different
from its US counterparts in making the two blessings “who created me in His
image” and “who created me free” optional, the idea being that both of these
are included in “who has made me a Jew.” The revised Ve’Ani Tefillati
is, to the best of my knowledge, unique in including the blessing “who has made
me according to His will” for both men and women.
Another
shared characteristic of all Conservative prayer books is phrasing the musaf
prayer in the past tense, acknowledging that our ancestors offered sacrifices
to God in the Temple but not praying for restoration of the sacrificial service
in the future. Like Sim Shalom (but not Silverman), Ve’Ani Tefillati
also includes the option of adding matriarchs to the amida and other
prayers where the patriarchs are mentioned.
Modifications
in Ve’Ani Tefillati to make the service more appropriate for a modern
Israeli context include translations of all Aramaic texts into Hebrew, prayers
for Memorial Day, Israel Independence Day and Jerusalem Day, as well as
additional prayers to be said in times of drought and other difficulties (V 47,
265-284). The prayer, “bring us safely from the ends of the earth and lead us
in dignity to our holy land” (SS 347) is replaced with “bring us blessing and
peace from the four corners of the earth and help us walk upright in our land
(V118). The same wording appears in Rinat Yisrael Eidot Hamizrach but not
in the other versions. Furthermore, the special prayer for Tisha B’av (V 46) is
changed so it no longer refers to Jerusalem standing in ruins. A different
change in the same spirit appears in Sim Shalom (SS 176). The text in Ve’Ani
Tefillati was (if I remember correctly) originally written for Kibbutz
Hadati but has not found its way into standard Israeli Orthodox use.
One
characteristic of Ve’Ani Tefillati that is more similar to
Reconstructionist liturgy than other Conservative prayer books is toning down
texts that gloat over our enemy’s defeat or denigrate non-Jews. For example, in
the prayer describing the Exodus from Egypt the words, “and water covered their enemies, not one of them survived” (V 119) is printed in gray as an optional
text.
Ve’Ani
Tefillati includes Mi sheberach prayers for a wider range of
lifecycle events including the adoption of the child and becoming grandparents,
which are not included in the traditional liturgy.
At the end of
each amida, Ve’Ani Tefillati Ve’Ani adds a modern Israeli
poem on an appropriate theme. For example, the weekday afternoon prayer recited
in the midst of the day’s activities includes a prayer/poem by Admiel Kosman, which IMHO really hits the spot, but I don't want to put the translation of a copyrighted poem online without permission. However, its included in this book review. Search for "Wanted: a quiet place on which to
rest the soul" and you'll find it.
Unfortunately I find it too hard to read. It is unclear to me why they didn't print black on white. The orange color is baffling and distracting.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the textual changes/renditions/editions.. sure but having too many alternative texts in one source is also confusing.