Sources:
Avodah Zarah 18a relates an incident involving Rabbi Meir, who went to free his sister-in-law from captivity. He wished to bribe the guard to release her, but the guard said that he feared the authorities. Rabbi Meir responded: “Say, ‘Elaha DeMeir Aneini ve-mitzlate’” — meaning, if the authorities seize you, say the words “Elaha DeMeir Aneini,” and the Holy One, blessed be He, will save you miraculously. This is indeed what occurred later in the Gemara’s account. From this, the holy Jewish people adopted the practice, in every time of distress and adversity, of praying to the Holy One, blessed be He, and invoking the merit of Rabbi Meir through the words “Aneini Elaha DeMeir Aneini.” Similarly, in Selichot we say this in the plural: “Aneinu Elaha DeMeir Aneinu.” However, it would seem that this mentions the name of the holy Tanna without the title “Rabbi,” which apparently does not accord with his honor. Although the Gemara itself records it without the title “Rabbi,” one could say that this is because it was the formula transmitted by Rabbi Meir himself; therefore, in humility, he stated his own name without preceding it with the title “Rabbi.” We, however, when saying this formula, might need to say “Elaha DeRabbi Meir.” The Maharsha, in his Chiddushei Aggadot to Avodah Zarah there, explained that this formula does not refer to Rabbi Meir at all, writing: “It may be said that he said ‘Elaha DeMeir,’ etc., only as an identifying sign based on his name, but he did not at all intend his own name. Rather, he intended: the G-d Who illumines the Land of Israel and its inhabitants, may He answer us; or, the G-d Who illumined us during the preceding Greek kingdom through the miracle of the Chanukah lights, as the paytan composed, ‘And who will illuminate for You, Meir,’ etc. — may He answer us and save us from their hands miraculously.” End quote. Nevertheless, since the common practice is to understand the aforementioned “illumination” as referring to Rabbi Meir — as is also evident from the continuation of the Selichot text, where we say, “Answer us in the merit of Bar Yochai” — it requires consideration whether the word “Rabbi” should not be added. We find that Maran the Chida, zlh”h, in his Kaf Achat, siman 3, ot 2, wrote in a prayer formula which he composed, “Elaha DeRabbi Meir Aneini.” See also his Petach Einayim on Avodah Zarah there, and Marit HaAyin there[1]. Mahar”a HaKohen, zlh”h, likewise adopted this wording in Taharat HaMayim, ma’arechet resh, ot 56, in a formula he composed against an evil spirit. Mahar”i Rokach, zt”l, also wrote in his Sha’arei Tefillah, at the end of the laws of Elul, that it was customary to say “Elaha DeRabbi Meir,” so that it should not be understood as referring to the Holy One, blessed be He, Who illuminates the world — that is, to exclude the Maharsha’s interpretation cited above. This reasoning is likewise cited as an alternative view in Beit El, mentioned below. This wording also appears in a Selichot volume printed in Livorno in 1790.
Yet the widespread ancient custom among Sephardic communities has been to say “Aneinu Elaha DeMeir,” without the word “Rabbi.” It may be said that even if the intention is the name of the Tanna Rabbi Meir, unlike the Maharsha’s explanation, there is nevertheless no diminution of his honor in omitting the word “Rabbi,” since this is the formula that he himself directed people to say. “Greater than Rabban is one’s name”; moreover, mentioning him alongside the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, is itself an honor, and whoever adds detracts. Furthermore, it is possible that mentioning an honorific title while associating it with the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, detracts from the honor of Heaven, for “there is no haughtiness before the Omnipresent” (Berachot 10b, in another context). Where the honor of Hashem is involved, honor is not accorded to a rabbi. See Sefer Chassidim, siman 838, which writes that Elisha — the foremost disciple of Eliyahu HaNavi — when he prayed, said, “G-d of Eliyahu” (II Kings 2:14), rather than “G-d of my master Eliyahu,” because there is no haughtiness before the Omnipresent. See there. This is likewise stated in Kenesset HaGedolah, Yoreh De’ah siman 240, Hagahot Beit Yosef, ot 11; and the Chida in Birkei Yosef, Yoreh De’ah siman 240, se’if katan 4, cites this in the name of his grandfather, the author of Chesed LeAvraham, zlh”h. The same applies to Elaha DeMeir. Teshuvot Mayim Chaim Mashash, cited below, likewise writes that one who says “Elaha DeRabbi Meir” acts improperly, as this constitutes haughtiness before the Omnipresent. This is also written in Halichot Olam, vol. 8, p. 53, based on the above Sefer Chassidim. It writes there that this is unlike Makor HaChesed, ot 1, which maintained that the words of Sefer Chassidim concern only prayer for a sick person, because his mazal has been impaired[2]. For this reason, “Rabbi” should not be said in the formula Elaha DeMeir. In fact, it is reasonable that here the concern is even greater than in Sefer Chassidim, since one mentions the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, together with Rabbi Meir’s name, and one must be more careful not to display haughtiness. It may be said that even the author of Makor HaChesed would concede this point.
Rema MiPano, zlh”h, likewise wrote in Asarah Ma’amarot, Ma’amar Chakur Din, end of part 1 (end of chapter 26), that we say, “Elaha DeMeir Aneini.” See there in the commentary Yad Yehudah, which explains that he refers to praying with this very formula, “Elaha DeMeir Aneini,” with Rabbi Meir in mind. [The Chida, in Shiyurei Berachah, Yoreh De’ah siman 203, cited Rema MiPano as saying “DeRabbi Meir,” but this was his own emendation in keeping with his position, for all editions of Asarah Ma’amarot explicitly read “DeMeir.”] This is also related in the name of the Chatam Sofer, zlh”h: before his passing, he instructed that a pidyon be made for him and that “Elaha DeMeir Aneini” be recited (Siddur Chatam Sofer, in the section Moda’ah LeCholeh). It is also related in the name of the holy Baal Shem Tov, zy”a, in Ta’amei HaMinhagim, section Inyanei Segulot, p. 40a[3].
Rabbi Chaim Palachi, in Teshuvot Lev Chaim, vol. 2, siman 160, wrote that the correct wording is “Elaha DeMeir Aneinu,” without the word “Rabbi,” following the Gemara’s wording, because there are secrets in this formula. He wrote likewise in Ateret HaChaim, siman 50, ot 8; Mo’ed LeChol Chai, siman 19, ot 31; and Refuah VeChaim, chapter 1, ot 4. The words of Lev Chaim are cited approvingly in Sdei Chemed, Asifat Dinim, ma’arechet Eretz Yisrael, ot 7. His son, Rabbi Avraham Palachi, likewise adopted this view in VeHochiach Avraham, printed in Mai Chanukah, p. 73. Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, zlh”h, the Rishon LeTzion, likewise adopted this wording in Teshuvot Yisa Ish, in the piyyut printed on the final page after the indices. Similarly, in a letter by the sages of Jerusalem in 1870 — signed by the then Rishon LeTzion Rabbi Avraham Ashkenazi, zlh”h; Rabbi Rafael Meir Panigel, zlh”h, author of Lev Marpeh and later also Rishon LeTzion; Rabbi Yaakov Valero, zt”l; Rabbi Shlomo Amzalag, zt”l; and many others — printed in Yehudei HaMizrach BeEretz Yisrael, vol. 1, p. 55, they wrote: “May Elaha DeMeir answer us in our prayer.” Rabbi Eliezer Papo, zlh”h, likewise wrote so in Chesed LaAlafim, end of siman 92, and in Beit Tefillah in several places — in the Motzaei Shabbat order, in the prayer after Torah study for a Chanukat HaBayit, and in the prayer to merit a male child — writing “Elaha DeMeir” without the title Rabbi[4]. Rabbeinu Yosef Chaim, zlh”h, the Ben Ish Chai, likewise wrote in Ben Ish Chai, second year, Parashat Re’eh, ot 3: “When a person is in distress, he may make a vow, etc., and the one making the vow should say, ‘Elaha DeMeir Aneini,’ intending the intention that Rabbi Meir Baal HaNes intended in this, etc.” End quote. He similarly wrote in Leshon Chachamim, vol. 2, siman 28, and Ateret Tiferet, p. 171. Rabbi Reuven ben Avraham likewise wrote so in Derech Yesharah, vol. 4, p. 819. This was also the ruling in Eretz Chaim Sathon, Yoreh De’ah siman 203. Rabbi Yaakov Chaim Yisrael Alfiyah, zlh”h, wrote in responsum 36, printed in Reiach LeYitzchak, p. 102b: “The arrangers of the prayers likewise instituted for us on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, ‘Aneinu Elaha DeMeir Aneinu,’ and this is the custom in all corners of the earth.” End quote. Chibat Yerushalayim, in Ma’amar Gulet Tachtit, ot 9, similarly writes that it was the custom of holy Jews in times of distress to say “Elaha DeMeir Aneini”; this is cited approvingly in Siftei Tzaddikim by Rabbi Salman Mutzafi, zlh”h, p. 80. Rabbi Yosef Chaim Shrem, zlh”h, a distinguished emissary from Jerusalem, likewise used this wording in a “shay” formula he prepared for a donor, as recorded in HaShaliach HaBoded, p. 150, indicating that this was the practice in Jerusalem in those days. The segulah formula of the Admor, author of Emunat Avraham, zy”a, cited in Siddur Tzelota DeAbba in the morning-rising order, also says “Elaha DeMeir Aneini.” The same wording appears in a prayer composed by Rabbi Moshe Tzvi Schwartz, zt”l, in Avodat Tamid. Teshuvot Mayim Chaim Mashash, vol. 1, siman 232, likewise writes at length that the correct formula is “DeMeir,” not “DeRabbi Meir.” Rabbi Yosef ben Na’im, zt”l, records this as the custom in Noheg BeChochmah, p. 31. It is likewise written in Keter Shem Tov, Keter Torah, p. 23; and in Yad Binyamin Didi, in the booklet Ma’aseh Nissim, p. 7. Rabbi Avraham Harari Rafaul, zt”l, likewise followed this practice, as recorded in the biographical chapters at the beginning of his Imrei Avraham, p. 150; see also the body of the work, Parashat Chayei Sarah, p. 22. Rabbi Matzliach Mazouz, zt”l, author of Teshuvot Ish Matzliach, followed this practice, as testified in Teshuvot Revid HaZahav Barda, vol. 1, siman 43. His son, Rabbi Meir Mazouz, in his glosses to Nefesh Chayah Tzaban, ma’arechet aleph, siman 15, wrote that those who add the word “Rabbi” are mistaken; this is also the wording in the Ish Matzliach Machzor. Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, zt”l, likewise wrote this in Divrei Mordechai, in his eulogy for Rabbi Shalom Mashash, zt”l, p. 243. Rabbi Ateret Paz wrote so in Tehillat Pinchas, p. 287, and in Tashit LeRosho, p. 432, adding that this is the widespread custom. See also Asis Rimonim on Rosh Hashanah, siman 1.
This is also the wording in Machzor Sha’ar Binyamin, following the Damascus customs, p. 398; Selichot Ateret Avot, following Moroccan customs, p. 78; Selichot Siftei Renanot, following the customs of Djerba and Libya, p. 81; the “Kol Nidrei” Tiklal Machzor, following Yemenite-Shami customs, in the Selichot for Yom Kippur Shacharit; the Selichot order of Rabbi David Shlush, zt”l, p. 85; Selichot Ohalei Shem by Rabbi Moshe Peretz, shlit”a, p. 53; and Machzor Tefillat Rafael by Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Hillel, shlit”a, p. 27; and more.
In this matter, the wording used by the sages of Tiberias, zy”a, carries particular weight, since one may assume that they were more knowledgeable regarding the tradition of seeking salvation in the merit of Rabbi Meir. This was the principal source of income for the kollelim of the holy city of Tiberias from the era of Maran the Beit Yosef onward[5]. We find that they used “Elaha DeMeir” without “Rabbi.” Foremost among them was Rabbi Chaim Abulafia, zlh”h, who in a letter from 1744 called it “Elaha DeMeir Aneini,” as cited in Sefer Tiberias, p. 230. The context of that letter indicates that Rabbi Chaim Abulafia wrote this in reference to the segulah of praying in this formula, rather than as a reference to the Gemara’s statement. Those who followed him likewise wrote in various documents that the segulah formula omits the word Rabbi. Thus it appears in Mignazei Chachmei Tiveria, vol. 1, in Midrash Shmuel, end of siman 1; Teshuvot Vayomer Meir, in the introduction of the benefactor Rabbi Moshe Wankin, zlh”h, and on the title page of vol. 2; the approbation of Rabbi Yaakov Chai Zarichan, zlh”h, Rabbi Malkuf Shitrit, zlh”h, and other sages of Tiberias to the aforementioned Teshuvot Vayomer Meir; and a letter from Rabbi Chaviv Sathon, printed at the beginning of Notzer Adam. This also emerges from the words of Rabbi Avraham Palachi in Korban Elitzur, section Tal Torah, p. 37. Most recently, Rabbi Dov Kook, shlit”a, wrote in Yifrach KaShoshanah, vol. 4, p. 209: “The Jewish people customarily say regarding every affliction, ‘Elaha DeMeir Aneini.’” See also the account of the expulsion of a spirit from the Etz Chaim Beit Midrash in Tiberias in 1873, recorded by Rabbi Avraham HaLevi ben Sussan, zt”l, who lived in Tiberias at that time. It describes how the sages of holy Tiberias used the formula “Elaha DeMeir Aneinu” to expel the dybbuk, repeating it again and again. This is also cited in Zimrat HaAretz, published by Rabbi Aharon Buchbut, p. 155.
[It may also be inferred that the custom was to omit “Rabbi” from the words of the teacher of the Chida, in Teshuvot Mahar”i Navon, printed at the end of Zikaron Baruch Pachlaiv, siman 9, s.v. “Veher’ani”; see there[6].]
Therefore, regarding practical conduct, Maran the great halachic authority Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, ztzk”l, already ruled in Halichot Olam, vol. 8, p. 53, that one should say “Elaha DeMeir” without the word “Rabbi.” He added that he had heard this from the great Kabbalist Rabbi Meir Abuchatzeira, ztzk”l, who said that this is the correct formula — namely, according to Kabbalah. He repeated this ruling in Chazon Ovadia, Yamim Nora’im, p. 18, where he supported it with the words of Teshuvot Lev Chaim cited above. See there. I have now also seen in Batzur Yarom, p. 35, an incident that reveals the reason for this ruling: “Someone was praying near Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef, zt”l, and would say, ‘Aneinu Elaha DeRabbi Meir.’ After he finished, the Rabbi called him and said: ‘Do not say Elaha DeRabbi Meir, for he will not answer you, since there is no haughtiness before Hashem. Rather, say only Elaha DeMeir.’” End quote.
Indeed, some time ago I saw in Yirat Elokim by Rabbi Rafael Yedidiah Abulafia, zlh”h, a disciple of the Rashash, that the initials of “Elaha DeMeir Aneini” spell the holy Name אד”ע, a Name beneficial to write in every amulet and effective for every trouble and distress. According to this, it is obvious that one should not add the word “Rabbi,” for then the initials would be אדמ”ע, and the power of the holy Name alluded to in this formula would be lost.
Furthermore, Rabbi Shimshon of Ostroh, zlh”h, who was martyred al kiddush Hashem, wrote in Dan Yadin on Sefer HaKarnayim, ma’amar 6 — concerning the statement there that Rabbi Meir nullifies the kelipot sustained by the dog of Baal Tzafon — that the formula “Elaha DeMeir Aneini” is said twice, and thereby has the gematria of 944, to nullify the kelipah of “Reshem Dam,” whose gematria is 944, referring to the dogs attached beneath the kelipot. Likewise, “Elaha DeMeir Aneini Aneini” — with “Aneini” twice, as in “Aneinu Elaha DeMeir Aneinu” — has the gematria of 1,904, in order to nullify the dogs beneath Baal Tzafon, which is “dog” doubled and has the gematria of 1,904. See there. Thus, if one adds the word “Rabbi,” all those gematriot that nullify the power of the kelipot are lost. One might argue that perhaps adding the word “Rabbi” also yields some gematria that nullifies other forces; that may be so, but as long as our Kabbalistic masters have not revealed this, why should we forfeit the effects that they did reveal to us, which operate specifically without the word “Rabbi”?[7] [Rabbi Chaim Palachi, in the aforementioned Ateret HaChaim, cited Yalkut Reuveni, Shemot 11, ot 7, which cites the words of Dan Yadin concerning this gematria. Apparently for this reason, he wrote in Teshuvot Lev Chaim that there is a secret in the formula Elaha DeMeir Aneini. Rabbi Darkei Chaim VeShalom also cites this in siman 21. Rabbi Chaim Yaakov Chamtzi, zt”l, of Izmir likewise concluded in Teshuvot VeHeshiv HaKohen, Orach Chaim siman 25, that according to Sefer HaKarnayim, one should not add the word “Rabbi.”]
Although in Selichot we say “Aneinu” rather than “Aneini,” and it would seem that we thereby also lose the gematria of Sefer HaKarnayim, nevertheless we see that the original segulah formula omits the word Rabbi. Since the Selichot wording was derived from it, it should be left in its original form, without the word Rabbi. I later saw that something similar was written in Shevet Yehudah, vol. 1, siman 16. Moreover, even in Selichot the gematria is not entirely lost, for “Elaha DeMeir Aneinu,” said twice by the chazzan and congregation, together with the number of words and the הכולל, again totals 944. This is because the first “Aneinu” is not counted in any event according to the first version in Sefer HaKarnayim.
In Beit El by Rabbi Avraham Chamuvi, zlh”h, p. 91b, סעיף 2, both views are cited without a ruling. He brings an additional secret that accommodates both views: the gematria of the letters filling out the word “Meir” equals Tishbi, referring to Eliyahu HaNavi, through whom many miracles and salvations occurred. Nevertheless, the discussion there appears to lean toward omitting the word “Rabbi.” Accordingly, in his Zeman Beit Din, in the Selichot order, he writes only the version “Elaha DeMeir,” and nothing further.
Rabbi Yehudah Berachah, shlit”a, in Simchat Yehudah, vol. 2, siman 62, maintained that the primary wording should be “Rabbi Meir,” because this is the Chida’s view, and one should not rule like Rabbi Chaim Palachi against the Chida, whose rulings are accepted. He further argued that the secret revealed by Sefer HaKarnayim is not the teaching of the Arizal and should not be relied upon. However, with due deference, it appears to this writer that the present case differs, because the fundamental ancient custom of Sephardim everywhere has been to say “Elaha DeMeir.” [The few who say “DeRabbi Meir” do so because it was printed in the Mansour siddur, Tefillat Yesharim. It should be noted that although the Mansour siddur — due to the absence of other siddurim for many decades — established numerous wordings among all Sephardic congregations, it did not succeed regarding the wording of Aneinu. I recall from my youth in São Paulo, where communities arriving directly from Arab lands gathered, each preserving its customs meticulously as they had practiced them in their countries of residence. In those days, only the Mansour siddur was available, yet they would nevertheless say “Elaha DeMeir”: the Aleppo community, the Egyptian community, and the Lebanese community alike. There was only one Egyptian individual, of blessed memory, who prayed with the Lebanese at Congregation Har Sinai and would call out “Rabbi,” following the wording in his siddur; they did not heed him. Even here in Eretz Yisrael, the vast majority have always said “Elaha DeMeir,” despite the contrary wording in their siddurim.] Therefore, in light of all the above — that Rabbi Chaim Palachi and the majority of the great later authorities wrote that the primary formula omits the word “Rabbi,” and that this is so according to the secrets of the matter — there is ample reason to say that established custom prevails and should not be changed. This is especially so in light of the explicit words of Rabbi Rafael Yedidiah Abulafia cited above, whose Torah came from the Rashash and is regarded as the Torah of the Arizal. Nor is the acceptance of the Chida’s rulings absolute; although we generally rule in accordance with him, there are many known exceptions, including matters of textual wording — such as the wording of the conclusion of the blessing against the minim and informers, where we do not follow the Chida, and many similar cases. If one invokes accepted rulings, we see plainly that Sephardic communities accepted the rulings of Maran Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, zlh”h, in every matter, far more than the rulings of the Chida. As stated, Maran Rabbi Ovadia Yosef issued his holy ruling to say “Elaha DeMeir”; accordingly, we shall not depart from it.
One of the graduates of our Beit Midrash, Rabbi Shlomo Sharvit, shlit”a, wrote a responsum in Teshuvot Emet LeYaakov, vol. 1, supporting “Elaha DeRabbi Meir.” At present, I have not found the time to study his responsum; the reader may examine it. Another graduate, Rabbi Avraham Maimon, shlit”a, wrote in HaMatmon on Chodesh Elul, p. 56, that the primary ruling is to omit the word “Rabbi.” This is indeed the primary ruling, as stated above. As for what HaMatmon writes there, that Rabbi Chaim Palachi himself cites a formula including “Rabbi” in Ginzei Chaim, p. 20, ot 16, in the name of Rema MiPano — this need not concern us, for it is copied from Shiyurei Berachah, whereas Rema MiPano himself wrote without the word “Rabbi,” as explained above.
Notes:
[1] However, in Teshuvot Chaim Sha’al, vol. 1, siman 36, the Chida wrote a prayer as follows: “I have placed my trust in Hashem; may He brighten my darkness — Elaha DeMeir, Who causes light to shine.” There he used specifically “Meir,” rather than “Rabbi Meir,” because his intention was the Holy One, blessed be He, Who illuminates, as he concludes, “Who causes light to shine.” See also the end of his work Midbar Kedemot, after the indices, and his approbation to Teshuvot HaRif.
[2] In truth, the distinction of Makor HaChesed seems difficult. Since the rationale concerns the honor of Hashem — that it is inappropriate to mention the honor of others while praying before Him, may He be blessed — one should avoid it because it is intrinsically improper, not merely because it affects the acceptance of prayer or the like. Makor HaChesed cites from the Ashkenazic wording of Birkat HaMazon, where they say, “May the Merciful One bless my father and teacher.” It may be said that, since one does not state one’s father’s name, the words “my father and teacher” are not an added title, but rather identify the person for whom one is praying. The primary concern is when one mentions the name and then adds an honorific title. One might ask that he could still have said “my father” without “my teacher”; nevertheless, these two terms go together, and there is not such concern unless one mentions the actual name. Makor HaChesed also cites as proof that Yemenite Jews, in the period of the Rambam, would say in Kaddish, “and during the lifetime of our master Moshe ben Maimon.” In my humble opinion, there is no proof at all from that practice. Historical sources make clear that Yemenite Jews began doing so after receiving instruction from the Rambam on how to combat the false messiahs of that era. The reason for adding the Rambam’s honorable name to Kaddish was to elevate the Rambam’s standing in the eyes of Yemenite Jewry, so that they would follow and heed him rather than follow emptiness and falsehood. Clearly, had they mentioned his name in Kaddish without the title “our master,” they would have achieved the opposite result. Thus, one cannot derive from such a temporary measure concerning the formulation of a prayer for mercy.
In any event, regarding both the first proof and the second proof, the question does not arise in the first place. It may be said that mentioning an honorific title in prayer is not an outright prohibition, but merely not the ideal practice. Therefore, even if we occasionally find that this was not observed scrupulously in every instance in Ashkenazic and Yemenite texts, this proves nothing. Certainly, one should not derive from this that we ought, conversely, to be particular to innovate the addition of the word “Rabbi” and alter the Gemara’s wording, “Elaha DeMeir Aneini.” Ultimately, omitting the title does not demean Rabbi Meir’s greatness, because the reason for its omission is that in reality there is no haughtiness before the Omnipresent. Consider this well.
[3] For the benefit of those seeking salvation, the pleasant wording of the Baal Shem Tov’s formula is copied here, since it is a precious segulah in a wording that is not widely known: “If one comes into danger and requires a miracle, he should give eighteen large coins for lights in the synagogue and say clearly: ‘I vow these eighteen large coins for lights in honor of the soul of Rabbeinu Meir Baal HaNes: Elaha DeMeir Aneini, Elaha DeMeir Aneini, Elaha DeMeir Aneini. Therefore, may it be Your will, Hashem, our G-d and G-d of our fathers, that just as You heard the prayer of Your servant Meir and performed miracles and wonders for him, so perform for me and for all Israel who require hidden and revealed miracles. Amen, may this be Your will.’” End quote. It likewise says “Your servant Meir,” apparently because there is no haughtiness before the Omnipresent.
[4] However, in Pele Yoetz, entry Beit HaKnesset, he follows the opposite view, which requires further study. Nevertheless, it is reasonable that in his prayer book he was more meticulous concerning textual formulations. This is especially so regarding the prayer to merit a male child, whose source is Kaf Achat by the Chida; even so, he was careful to alter the wording and omit the word “Rabbi.”
[5] Rabbi Chaim Palachi wrote that it may be assumed that the use of the formula “Aneinu Elaha DeMeir” in the Selichot order began with the sages of Tiberias and spread from there to other places.
[6] Although there the mention was not for purposes of prayer but as a literary expression, nevertheless, had it been customary in his day to say “Elaha DeRabbi Meir,” that wording would have suited the expression needed there all the more. Yet it may be said, with difficulty, that he preferred the Gemara’s wording to the wording used specifically for the segulah.
[7] I later saw that Rabbi Moshe Hariri, zt”l, in Vayivchar Moshe, p. 13, cites his father, zt”l, in the manuscript work Tov Einayim, who gave allusions even according to the version “Elaha DeRabbi Meir”: its initials spell אדם and its final letters spell ירא. He explains them there. If it is a received tradition, we accept it; however, it appears somewhat that his father composed these allusions from his own pure heart in order to justify the version of Maran the Chida, because the Chida is a great authority. Apparently, this does not carry the same weight as the intentions of Sefer HaKarnayim and the writings of Rabbi Rafael Yedidiah Abulafia, zlh”h, who were early Kabbalists whose words rest upon tradition. See also Teshuvot Eshmach BaHashem, Orach Chaim siman 29, by Rabbi Yaakov Harari, zt”l, who cites these allusions from Vayivchar Moshe and concludes on their basis that both are words of the living G-d. See further his Teshuvot Lev Simchah, Orach Chaim siman 71.
This response was translated automatically from Hebrew and has not yet been reviewed by a person. Therefore, it may contain inaccuracies and should not be considered a definitive reference.
