Friday night

[cellio]

At the oneg I received a rather effusive compliment on my torah reading on Rosh Hashana. I'm impressed that this long after the event someone sought me out to praise me. Nifty.

During the service I realized why I have a reaction that I do to one small bit. Our service leaders almost always face the congregation. There are points in the service where one is supposed to bow toward the ark (which is at the back of the bimah); the norm is for the leader to turn around at that point and do so. Someone on our bimah (not my rabbi) sometimes does the bow but doesn't turn around (so bows toward the congregation). This bugs me. I understand why it was happening (the reasons no longer apply but the pattern persists), but it still bugs me.

Last year after the Sh'liach K'hilah program there was a discussion in comments in my journal about which way the chazan faces, though not this particular detail. The article I'd read (that started the discussion) asserted that when the chazan faces the ark (to lead much of the service, not just these bowing bits) it facilitates more private prayer than when he's facing the congregation. That may be true, but it's just part of it.

When the chazan stands in the front of the room, faces the ark, and bows, he is leading us in prayer. He is our representative, our sh'liach tzibur, almost our stand-in, before God. Whose representative is he when he bows toward us?

I had this epiphany Friday night. It is as if the person bowing toward the congregation is representing God in the transaction. And that's just wrong. We do not presume God's participation and response in our prayers.

I don't mind the chazan conducting most of the service facing us; I understand how seeing a back for the entire service could be alienating to some. But there are parts where I'd rather the person turn around and be our representative.

Comments

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

I personally think that the "richness" in liturgy is somewhat like those infamous layers on onions -- as one comes to enough understanding to peel of another layer, one begins to see that underneath is another layer, to be studied and felt and analyzed. I also think that rather than having nothing when one has peeled back all the layers, one has a more complete sense of understanding, and a glow of realization (and incarnation, if one is of the belief that a bolt of the lightning of intelligence and insight flashing down the tree strikes the container and the contained and Poof! the magic of incarnation is accomplished).

And then, of course, the universe opens up and we see that we have more layers yet to our understanding. ;-)

Oops, sorry, that was my "philosophy of life and understanding" soap box. I'll put it back under the desk now...

Is this book the current Pope Benedict's work, or an/the earlier one?

[mrpeck.livejournal.com]

I think you have a good point about there being many layers in liturgy. It's the current Pope's work. He wrote it a few years ago.

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

Thanks!