The taming of “the” Sh’ma
Sh’ma, Yisrael . . .
Hear O Israel . . .
Many of us have heard and/or read that translation literally hundreds of times. But tell me, where does the “O” come from? For that matter, why do we talk about “the” Sh’ma—where does the “the” come from? Check the original, in Parashat Va’etchanan, Deuteronomy 6:4—neither word is there.
Sh’ma, in its original context, is a command from Moshe (Moses) to remember that HaShem is our only god. The best translation I’ve ever literally seen is an American Sign Language interpretation that uses the sign for “Pay Attention!” as the translation of “Sh’ma!”.
I think that, by turning Sh’ma into “the” Sh’ma and adding the word O, we’ve reduced Moshe’s thunderous command to ritual baby food, simple enough for a child to say. But the original text was aimed at parents—"Teach them [these words] to your children"! In my opinion, we should take away the O and restore just plain Sh’ma to its original status as one of Moshe’s marching orders: As Eliana Light translates it, “Listen up!”
Here's a version of Sh'ma in ASL.
2 Comments:
Copied from Facebook:
Shira Salamone
Rabbi Reuven Kimelman
Reply
4d
Shira Salamone
An ASL version of Sh'ma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UrQHYOeAus
The Shema Prayer
YOUTUBE.COM
The Shema Prayer
The Shema Prayer
Reply
Remove Preview
4d
Shira Salamone
Ellen Dreskin, Evelyn Goldfinger
Reply
20h
Shira Salamone
Copied from a comment to my Feb. 1, 2023 "74 and going for more" post: Judith Naimark said, "Shira Salamone your posts came up in my news feed, so I read them. In truth, I don't have a problem with either issue you mentioned. "O" before Israel is simply an intensifier, in a style that is now passe and foreign to our ears. But one could even argue that it clarifies that Israel is the recipient of the order and not the object that is to be heard.
Reference to "The Shma" indicates that it is a distinct and important feature of the prayer service. The entire section from Barchu through Gaal Yisrael in Shacharit or the texts following Hashkiveinu in Arvit is called Shma uvirchoteha - Shma (as an entity) and Its Blessings.
What did sound odd to me, back when Temple Emanuel's Friday Night Service was broadcast on WQXR, was their use of the phrase "The Kiddush Service," as if that were a distinct entity. While the Rabbis didn't categorize it as such, perhaps, since it is really a home ritual that was inserted into Shabbat and Yom Tov Arvit for the sake of those who might not have a home in which to make Kiddush, those Classical Reform guys were justified. But to call Kiddush a "service" still sounds strange to me.
Shira Salamone
Judith Naimark also commented:
BTW, a colleague wrote a very funny article in our Jerusalem campus student newsletter, in which he translated such seemingly unnecessary biblical verbiage into modern language of the time (1989). Hinei - "Lo" in English translation - was modernized to "Yo." The phenomenon in which the verb is doubled - haloch halach, or shamoa tishma - became "really f'ing." There was a third phrase he translated, but I can't remember what it was just now. I saved his article, but it's somewhere in storage, at present.
Reply
2hEdited
Shira Salamone
Judith Naimark, yeah, Kiddush as a separate service sounds a bit weird. I suppose one could make a case for using the description "The Sh'ma Section" for that part of a service, but Sh'ma itself doesn't need a "the." As for those translations, whoever wrote them must have had a good time doing it. 🙂
Post a Comment
<< Home