This article is a revised version of a paper presented at the Tenth World Congress of Jewish Studies, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, August 16–24, 1989.

1. Amichai, Yehuda, “The Voyeur,” trans. Beris, Samuel. From Amichai, She'at hesed [A moment of grace] (Jerusalem: Schocken, 1983), p. 32.Google Scholar

2. Kurzweil, Baruch, Hipus hasifnit ha'israelit [The search for an Israeli literature] (Tel Aviv: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1982), p. 226.Google Scholar

3. Ibid., p. 225.

4. Ibid., pp. 226–227.

5. Mozna'im, 1969, p. 278.

6. For the ambivalent perception of God in Bialik and U. Z. Greenberg, see Kurzweil, Baruch, Bialik vetchernichovski: mehkarim beshiratam [Bialik and Techernichovski: studies in their poetry] (Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1960)Google Scholar. Kurzweil's claim in regard to Greenberg's poetry that “divinity has not been reduced to the level of relativity and atrophy even in the crudest poetry of loss and protest” (p. 46) certainly suits Bialik, Steinberg, Shlonsky, and many other poets of the period of the revival of Hebrew culture. Moshe Steiner clearly makes this point in his “Merida be'clohim o ma'avak le'emuna bashira ha'ivrit” [The revolt against God; or, the struggle for faith in Hebrew poetry], Ha'umah 17 (1979): 375–385, in which he notes the profound respect and deep faith that were characteristic of the pioneers of modern Hebrew poetry, even in their most extreme complaints to heaven (Y. L. Gordon and Tchernichovski) and their harshest declarations of the death of God (Shne'or and U. Z. Greenberg).

7. Such as Sokoloff's, Naomi detailed study, “On Amichai's El male rahamim,” Prooftexts 4 (1984): 127–140, in which she presents a sophisticated analysis which connnects Amichai's sharply satirical attack upon the vocabulary of religion to the general modernist loss of faith in the power of language to signify.Google Scholar

8. Kurzweil, Hipus hasifrut ha'israelit, p. 241

9. Mikhali, B. Y., Pri ha'aretz [The fruit of the earth] (Tel Aviv: Massada, 1966), p. 214Google Scholar

10. Bahat, Ya'akov, “Mekorot yisra'el vezikhreihem beshirei Yehuda Amichai” [Jewish sources and their recollection in Yehuda Amichai's poetry], Al Hamishmai; Sept. 27, 1963.Google Scholar

11. Kurzweil, Hipus hasifrut ha'israelit, p. 243.

12. Katznelson, Gideon, Le'an hem holkhim [Where are they going?] (Tel Aviv: Alef, 1968), p. 110.Google Scholar

13. Zemah, Shlomo, “Matzevet ushalakhta” [A trunk in fall], in Yehuda Amichai: A Selection of Critical Essays on His Writings, ed. Yehudit, Tzvik (Tel Aviv: Hakibutz hame'uhad, 1988), pp. 70–74.Google Scholar

14. Katznelson, Le 'an hem holkhim, p. 248.

15. Sandbank, Shimon, Hashir hanakhon [The correct poem] (Tel Aviv: Sifriat Poalim, 1982), pp. 82–83, 86.Google Scholar

16. Mikhali, Pri ha'aretz. pp. 213–214.

17. Gila Ramras-Rauch, “Kosmos prati umitos leumi: mivnim venuskha'ot beshirat Amichai” [Private universe and national myth: structures and formulations in Amichai's poetry], Moznaim 7–8 (January-March 1986): 19.

18. Shimon Sandbank, the first to point out the similarity between Amichai's use of simile and the conceits of the seventeenth-century metaphysical poets, compares him to John Donne (Hashir hanakhon, pp. 93–94). But he is satisfied with drawing our attention to the stylistic resemblance and does not go into the more substantial significance which might be suggested by such similarity (he finds Amichai's conceits to be rather “poor” compared to Donne's).

19. Fishelov, David, “Yehuda Amichai: A Modem Metaphysical Poet,” Orbis Litterarum 47 (1992): 188. To my mind, the reduction of Amichai's conceit to a game or satire misses the element of deep ideas which it bears in his poetry. The conceit expresses Amichai's unique conception of “correspondences” (in poems with general existential messages like “Tahazit” [“Forecast”] and “Sonet habinyanim” [“The Sonnet of Verbal Voices,” for instance]), as well as being a unique means of expressing a paradoxical view of the world or an inversion of values (as in theological poems like those discussed below).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. Raphael, Zvi and Kauffman, Azriel, Mam el ha'emet habeduya [An essay on fictive truth] (Haifa: Renaissance, 1968), pp. 35–36.Google Scholar

21. Kremer, Shalom, Panim ve'ofen [Faces and manners] (Ramat Gan: Massada, 1976), p. 278.Google Scholar

22. Arpali, Bo'az, Haprahim veha'agartal: shiiim Amichai 1948–1968 [The flowers and the urn: Amichai's poetry, 1948–1968] (Tel Aviv: Siman Kri'ah, 1986), p. 174.Google Scholar

23. Kavkov, , “Devarim bemesiba likhvod Amichai” [An address given at a party for Amichai], Hado 'ar 11 (1970)Google Scholar

24. Barzel, Hillel, “Haharissah el hakodesh” [Destruction toward holiness], in Shirah umorashah [Poetry and tradition], 2 vols. (Tel Aviv: Eked, 1971), 2:67.Google Scholar

25. Abramson, , “Amichai's God,” Prooftexts 4 (1984): 116–117Google Scholar

26. Kronfeld, , “Allusion: An Israeli Perspective,” Prooftexts 6 (1985): 159.Google Scholar

27. Abramson, “Amichai's God,” p. 53.

28. See Ibid., pp. 13–18, for Amichai's Jewish background and close knowledge of Jewish religious matters. In an interview with Eyal Megged, Amichai himself stated: “I came from a very religious household, and when I wrote about prayers, for example, it wasn't because I wanted to find roots, but because it was my natural childhood” (Yediot Aharonot, Nov. 8, 1985).

29. Amichai, Yehuda, Veto 'al-menat lizkor [Not just to remember] (Jerusalem: Schocken, 1971), p. 33. These lines and all other poetic passages in this essay were translated by Rena Navon, unless otherwise noted.Google Scholar

30. Arpali, Haprahim veha'agartal. pp. 179–190.

31. Amichai, Velo 'al-menat lizkor, p. 103.

32. Me'adam ata ve'el adam tashuv [From man thou art and unto man shalt thou return] (Jerusalem: Schocken. 1985), p. 78.

33. Amichai, Yehuda, 'Akhshav Bara'ash: shirim 1963–1968 [Now in the storm: poems, 1963–1968] (Jerusalem: Schocken, 1968), p. 108.Google Scholar See Stephen Mitchell's translation of this poem in Vie Selected Poeny of Yehuda Amichai (1968), pp. 60–86. Comprehensive analyses of this central poem can be found in Hillel Barzel, “Haharissah el hakodesh” [Destruction toward holiness], in Shirah umorashah [Poetry and tradition], 2 vols. (Tel Aviv: Eked. 1971). 2:68–71; Arpali, Haprahim veha'agartal, pp. 161–164; Abramson. “Amichai's God,” pp. 18–22; and others.

34. 'Akhshav bara'ash, p. 94; Selected Poems, p. 45. Trans. Assia Gutmann

35. Ahkshav bara'ash, p. 36

36. Me'adam ata, p. 27.

37. She'athesed, p. 46.

38. 'Akhsltav bara'ash, p. 88; Selected Poems, p. 80. Trans. Harold Schimmel.

39. Ibid.

40. Me 'adam ata, p. 68. The image which suggests the parallel between religious injunctions and the rules of football is repeated in Amichai's interview with Yotam Hare'uveni in Yedi'ot aharonot (Oct. 17, 1985), where it is given a clear explanation: “What is religion? It's like a game of football. Twenty-two men and the spectators decide that they will not touch the ball or go offside. It's amusing. After ninety minutes you're allowed to touch the ball and stand in an offside position and everything. Imagine if football players controlled the world and imposed their rules. What a bore…. I detest intolerance. The destruction of religion will only come out of the religious establishment.”

41. Ibid.

42. Barzel, “Haharissah el hakodesh,” p. 67.

43. “Sandals,” Me'adam ata, p. 65.

44. Betsaron, June 21–22, 1984.

45. Buber, Martin, “De'otav hakdumot shel hano'ar” [The prejudice of youth], in Te'udah veyi'ud [Mission and destiny], 2 vols. (Jerusalem: Hasifriah hatsionit, 1961), 2:383–386.Google Scholar

46. Kohelet Raba 5, trans. Samuel Beris. Bialik, H. N. and Ravnitsky, Y. H., eds., Sefer ha'aggada [The book of legends] (Tel Aviv, 1960). p. 457.Google Scholar

47. Gam ha'egrof, p. 12. Trans. Samuel Beris.

48. “North of Be'er Sheva,” Me'adam ata, p. 66. The Shema prayer, from which this verse is taken, continues: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.”

49. Gam ha'egrof, p. 136. Trans. Samuel Beris.

50. Ibid., pp. 135–136.

51. Ibid., p. 137.

52. Gam ha'egrof, p. 121.

53. Shirim, p. 122.

54. Gam ha'egrof, p. 131. Trans. Samuel Beris. The quotations from “The Jews” and “I Do So Want to Confound the Bible” were translated by Samuel Beris. The poems appear in full, translated into English by Barbara and Benjamin Harshaw, in Even a Fist Was Once an Open Palm with Fingers, which contains a selection ofpoems from Amichai's last two books. Me 'adam ata and Gam ha 'egrof.