Reviewed by: The Nonverbal Language of Prayer Gerald J. Blidstein The Nonverbal Language of Prayer, by Uri Ehrlich. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004. 303 pp. €89.80. An appreciation of Uri Ehrlich's Nonverbal Language of Prayer ought to begin with the background against which the book was written. Academic study of Talmudic prayer has classically meant study of the the origins, history, and variations of the prayer-text. One need only recall the classical students of prayer—Elbogen, Heinemann, Fleisher—and the picture comes into focus. Ehrlich's project posits that the act of prayer involves more than its text. The pray-er is a person, and the act of rabbinic prayer (classically, the Amidah) prescribes physical gestures as elements of a total ritual act, along with the text to be recited. This physical reality also includes bodily orientation. Thus, in studying the gestural aspects of prayer, Ehrlich (who teaches in Ben-Gurion University's Goldstein-Goren Department of Jewish Thought) does groundbreaking, pioneering, work. Needless to say, the appearance of this book (originally done as a Hebrew University dissertation a decade or so ago) now, reflects the contemporary interest of Jewish culture in its physical basis. It also places research in Jewish prayer into the familiar framework of international ritual studies, a field which does not limit the study of liturgy to texts. Indeed, Ehrlich's work leads one to ask whether the student of Jewish religion can learn even more from ritual studies. Ehrlich analyzes the following elements of the physical aspect of prayer, generally focusing on the statutory Amidah prayer: the standing posture, the bowing gesture, directional orientation of the face and the eyes, placement of the hands, departure from the prayer site, clothing and shoes appropriate for prayer, and vocality. On the whole, this study of gesture attempts two tasks: first, a description of the gesture required, its history and geographic provenance and, at times, the rabbinic debate surrounding its status and definition; second, an analysis of its significance in the context—both Jewish and non-Jewish—of Talmudic time and place. Ehrlich is well aware of the historical dimensions of these gestures; [End Page 195] he discusses, for example, the transition from the biblical practices of prostration and spreading one's hands in prayer to the vastly different rabbinic regimen. The standing rabbinic posture, he indicates, owes much to Roman norms governing the servant-master relationship. On occasion he finds prayer gestures to have been influenced by priestly temple practice or even by the model provided by angels at their service. More generally, gesture in prayer before God also reflects the inter-personal sphere. Nonverbal Language does not limit itself to the physical aspects of the gestures studied, then, but discusses as well how these express and contribute to the human-divine relationship. Rabbinic prayer, we see, takes the divine presence as given and engages this presence in the language of gesture. Indeed, rabbinic prayer is characterized here as "dialogic," based on the reality of a divine presence which hears and listens. Ehrlich makes the case that as kavvanah (inner intention) became more significant, physical gesture itself became less salient. Does this indicate a resurgence of textuality at the expense of gesture? All in all, Ehrlich suggests that we discern a struggle between gesture and intentionality, perhaps even between individualism and standardization. If he is right, gestures gradually become governed by intentionality—but within limits. Ehrlich's study is thorough but avoids hair-splitting and nit-picking. The writing is clean, cutting superfluous verbiage and argumentation to the bone. The Index is unusually user-friendly: in addition to indices of source, topic, and rabbinic figures, Ehrlich provides a most helpful index of "gestural categories." It should be noted that this is a study of rabbinic sources and practices. Though medievals and even moderns are occasionally cited, the book is anchored in the Talmuds and associated literature. This should have been made apparent in the sub-title. Ehrlich sticks by his chronological framework—so far as I could see, he does not discuss the prevalent practice of swaying in prayer, probably because he found no clear indication of this custom in rabbinic times (though perhaps...
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jan 1, 2011
Peter J Tomson 
Open Access