Introduction

• Topic: Engaging all the senses in the making and inauguration of a Torah scroll as a paradigm for how sacred texts become meaningful through artefactual (material/sensory) and hermeneutical (interpretive) uses.
• Core aim: Examine how multi-sensory engagement during handling of sacred texts triggers cognitive, emotional, and social processes that contribute to individual subject formation within a collective framework.
• Context: The study contrasts traditional focus on semantic meaning with the performative/iconic uses of texts, emphasizing material engagement, ritual display, and decoration within Jewish practice.
• Key concepts introduced:
  • Artefactual use of scripture: handling a sacred text as a physical object, transforming it into a manipulable symbol and creating transitivity among participants, environments, and communal representations.
  • Hermeneutical use of scripture: a two-step interpretive process (text analysis and consideration of its worldview) leading readers to accept, transform, or reject the text’s proposed worldview.
  • Transitivity: the relational effect where the text, its materiality, and the users connect private/cultural beliefs with the artefact and its social contexts. This concept, drawn from Brian Malley, is central to understanding how sacred texts function beyond their words.
• Theoretical claim: Artefactual use dominates in the Torah-scroll process because making and inaugurating a Torah scroll is a highly material practice that binds participants through shared sensory experiences and material cues while hermeneutical use remains present but limited.
• Methodology note: The analysis integrates empirical data from documentary sources and aligns it with broader Jewish traditions and ancient Israelite texts to identify likely sensory triggers and their functions.

Theoretical framework

• Two main aims of the framework:
  • Distinguish hermeneutical vs artefactual uses of sacred texts, and qualify their complementary roles in religious life.
  • Explain how sensory integration in artefactual use facilitates meaning-making and social bonding.
• Distinction and origins:
  • Hermeneutical use: a circular, two-step process (text analysis to decipher implied semantic whole; then consideration of whether to appropriate, transform, or refuse the worldview) following Ricoeur’s approach:
    $\text{Ricoeur (two-step): text analysis} \rightarrow \text{worldview evaluation}$
  • Artefactual use: treating the sacred text as a physical object whose material properties (form, texture, smell, sound) trigger sensory cues that link the text to environments, memories, and communal norms, often non-consciously.
• Relationship to canon debates:
  • Canon debates explore how canons store norms and exclude/include members, but tend to focus on elite usage and overlook lay engagement.
  • Schleicher aligns with anthropological material turn (e.g., Malley) to stress how texts hold a place in a community through material processes and social ties, not just through words.
• Malley’s transitivity concept:
  • scripture as artefact creates links between private/culturally transmitted beliefs and the text-as-object, generating connections across contexts and users.
  • Schleicher extends this by arguing hermeneutical uses, though less frequent, operate alongside artefactual uses to shape interpretive horizons.
• Core claim about senses and meaning-making:
  • Senses enable a nonconscious negotiation between individual memories, cultural representations, and the immediate environment, contributing to self-continuity and collective belonging through constant feedback (a life-world sense-making loop).
• Nervous system and sense integration:
  • The autonomic nervous system mediates nonconscious perception, with experience-triggered memories surfacing to consciousness depending on prior storage;
  • The five senses serve distinct but interlinked functions that anchor meaning-making in immediate material rituals.
• Summary of key theoretical points:
  • Sacred texts function as hubs that connect individuals, communities, and places through artefactual cues.
  • Artefactual use is often the dominant mode in ritual handling of sacred texts, given the material and performative nature of such practices.
  • Hermeneutical and artefactual uses are not mutually exclusive but are activated as needed; hermeneutical use is more conscious and elite-guided, while artefactual use is shared by lay and elite alike through embodied practice.

The senses and their modalities

• Framework proposition: The five senses mediate the process of artefactual use and meaning-making, each with distinct pathways and social implications.

• Touch (haptics)

  • Information through pressure and tactile contact with parchment, bindings, and tools.
  • Functions: establishes nearness and intimacy; enables precise handling; can evoke calming, defense, or arousal responses depending on context.
  • Social consequence: physical closeness to the text and others reinforces communal belonging and shared responsibility for the sacred object.
  • Source: Bundy et al. (2002) on tactile processing and social embodiment.

• Hearing (audition)

  • Processing of sound waves during scribal writing, reading aloud, and ritual recitations; differentiates familiar vs. novel auditory input via feedback loops.
  • Functions: supports spatial orientation and collective movement; conveys verbal and non-verbal cues such as rhythm and intonation that influence mood and cognition.
  • Social consequence: audible cues in ritual contexts contribute to group cohesion and shared emotional states.
  • Source: Bundy et al. (2002) on auditory processing and social cognition.

• Vision (seeing)

  • Visual cues: contrast, color, form, movement, depth; nonconscious guidance of motor actions; recognition of script and sacred status.
  • Functions: memory and wayfinding; helps identify sacred objects and their status within a space (e.g., scrolls, torah shields, covenants).
  • Social consequence: standardized visual cues (Assyrian script, margins, letter layout) create a recognizable sacred norm and signify ritual purity.
  • Source: Bundy et al. (2002) on visual-spatial processing.

• Smell (olfaction)

  • Odors arise from tanning, resin, limewater, and other processing substances; carry emotional and social associations.
  • Functions: odors can trigger sentimental memories and affect.in-group/out-group perceptions; olfactory links to the limbic system (amygdala and hippocampus) influence emotions and recall.
  • Social consequence: shifts in smell perception (e.g., lemon-like modern scent vs acrid traditional odors) reflect evolving norms and community tolerance toward ritual materiality.
  • Source: Porteous (1985); Waskul et al. (2009).

• Taste (gustation)

  • Taste receptors on the tongue identify sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami; food rituals accompany ritual moments.
  • Functions: taste supports survival and shapes cultural preferences; rituals link food to sacred meanings (e.g., tasting as internalizing divine words).
  • Social consequence: shared edible elements (sweet, salt, etc.) reinforce in-group identity and collective memory of the inauguration.
  • Source: Hayes & Keast (2011).

• Integrative note on senses:

  • Sensorial inputs create a dynamic, nonconscious-to-conscious negotiation that binds participants to the sacred object and to each other through a shared environment and ritual script.

Analysis: The process of making and inaugurating a Torah scroll

The making of a Torah scroll

• Scriptural command and ritual origin:
  • God’s command: $"Now write down this song and teach it to the Israelites and have them sing it"$ (Deut 31:19).
  • Babylonian Talmud (c. $7$th century CE) prescribes every Jewish man write a Torah scroll; if unable, he can hire a scribe ($b Sanhedrin 21b$; $b Megillah 27a$).
• Artefactual vs hermeneutical use in this stage:
  • The Talmudic instruction, while addressing practical distribution, is interpreted as artefactual usage that serves late antique concerns about access to parchment and involvement in Torah studies.
• Modern significance and transitivity:
  • Commissioning a scroll becomes a memorial act, linking the donor, the memory of the deceased, and the future use of the scroll (transitivity among parties and contexts).
• Practical sourcing and preparation of parchment:
  • Kosher animal skins (goats, cattle, deer) used; tanning must be performed with intent to produce parchment for ritual use (b Megillah 19a).
  • Process steps: soaking in water for days; subsequent soaking for $18$ days in a water-salt-calcium-dung mixture historically (dog or bird dung; Parashat Bo, Yalkut Shimoni; limewater today replaces dung);
  • Pores opened with barley flour; tannic/ resin from gall-nuts to contract and harden skins; hair and fat scraped away; skins dried on stretching rack; parchment prepared on both sides and cut into square sheets (bShabbat 79b).
  • Visual-textual norms: letters are written in the Assyrian script on parchment with ink; vowels/accents are not used in ritual scrolls (Mishnah references: mYadayim 4:5).
• Sensory notes in tanning and writing:
  • The tanning process generates strong smells; modern accounts note persistent lime odor on scrolls; the smell is negotiated by community norms and individual associations.
  • The scribe’s visual task includes precise alignment, margins, and blank space to enclose God’s words; the scribe must declare intention aloud before writing God’s name; any error can render a sheet unusable (the name must be written without margin errors) (bMenachot 30a; Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 22).
• End of the writing phase:
  • After all sheets are filled except the final section in Deuteronomy, the tactile act of making the scroll concludes with sewing sheets and attaching cylinders at the ends (bBaba Bathra 14a).
• Gender note:
  • Historically, scribes were male due to ritual requirements (tefillin); a few women scribes exist in later periods, but traditional rulings restrict women from scribing ritual scrolls in orthodox contexts.
• Economic facet:
  • The writing of the last letters is commonly funded by donors, sometimes via selling the right to finish the scroll (bMenachot 30a on Deut 31:19); this expands transitivity to the donors’ households and financiers.
• Important numeric references:
  • Final letters stage: $1$ last letters; the claim that even one corrected letter can be considered equivalent to writing it, used as an artefact in funding and process narratives (bMenachot 30a).
  • Typical commissioning costs: often around $20{,}000$ USD or more (Avrin 1991).

Dressing the Torah (gelilat ha-Torah)

• Purpose and ritual function:
  • Prepare the scroll for its journey to the setting of use (synagogue or institution); analogous dressing to the high priest’s attire in the Tabernacle (Exod 28).
• Dressing practices and materials:
  • Items include a Torah binder, mantle in Ashkenazi practice, and a wooden or silver box in Sephardic communities; local artisans may embroider donor names and motifs on mantles; inscriptions/ornamentation on Torah boxes.
• Ornamentation and symbolism:
  • Torah crowns or pomegranates adorn the cylinders; bells are attached to the crowns to signal readiness and alert participants to change their behavior in procession (Exodus 28).
  • A Torah shield (often with the two tablets and Ten Commandments) is attached; donor names on the shield emphasize donor–scroll transitivity.

The Torah procession

• General function:
  • Dressing parallels the tactile experience and signals nearness to the sacred during transport to the inauguration site (synagogue).
• Processional elements and social meaning:
  • Donor and family carry the scroll under a canopy; other participants bless and congratulate the donor; kissing of the scroll expresses a desire for health and longevity for those involved.
  • The procession situates the scroll within a broader narrative web linking Mosaic and Davidic imagery and Jerusalem as a spiritual center.
  • The route and accompanying participants create multiple transitivity links among donor, scrolls (old and new), and the space traversed.
• Scriptural and mythic associations:
  • The canopy and procession echo biblical scenes (e.g., King David in 2 Sam 6:14-15) and the earlier arrangement of the ark and tablets, creating a palimpsest of sacred memory.
• Practical details:
  • Donor provides sweets to children to foster positive memory and participation.

Circumambulation (hakafot)

• Ritual dance around the reader’s table:
  • In orthodox circles: seven circuits around the table; in more liberal streams, mixed genders join in.
  • Simchat Torah liturgy accompanies the circuits; on the sixth circuit, Hasidic communities recall Shoah deaths (Six Million) during the ritual.
• Spatial and symbolic focus:
  • Seven circuits culminate with the old scrolls returning to the ark; the ark faces Jerusalem, symbolizing a direct link to holy space.
  • The Torah cupboard (ark) and the parochet (curtain) connect ritual space with divine presence; inscribed phrases like "Know in front of whom you are standing" signal the ontological significance of the setting.
• Function of processional spaces:
  • The scroll becomes a metonymy for God through its content and presence within the synagogue.

The Torah reading and the terminus of the ritual

• Reading ceremony:
  • After circumambulation, the scroll is undressed and placed on the reader’s table; a blessing is recited to mark a new event—new scroll and new attire (Berakhot 54a; Pesachim 7b; Sukkah 46a).
  • A designated reader reads Deuteronomy 34, continuing a long tradition of Torah reading aloud for all generations (Deut 31:10-12; Josh 8:34; Neh 8:8; 2 Kgs 23:2-3).
• Prohibition on touching letters:
  • Touching the letters is forbidden; readers use a Torah pointer to avoid direct contact, reflecting an ontological distinction between God and humans.
• The ontological framework:
  • The ritual reflects the idea that no human can behold the divine face and live (Exod 33:20); the high priest’s access is regulated to protect ritual purity and divine proximity.

The raising of the Torah (hagba'ah)

• Display moment:
  • After the reading, a layperson raises the scroll with three columns visible; the congregation bows and declares, "this is the Torah"; some believe that perceiving the words brings divine lights to the observer.
• Transitional function:
  • The act serves as a public, shared visualization of the Torah’s centrality and unity within the community.

The second dressing (Gelilah)

• Accessibility and responsibility:
  • Any participant may perform the second dressing, reinforcing lay access to interacting with the sacred object and re-emphasizing the scroll’s social embeddedness.

Inauguration (hachnasat ha-Torah)

• Processional sequence:
  • The dressed scroll is passed to the cantor, who transports it to the Torah cupboard while the congregation sings and dances.
• Sensory milieu:
  • Odors of sweat, body odor, and local voices fill the space; the cantor hands the scroll to another lay participant who places it in the cupboard.
• Liturgical culmination:
  • The cantor recites Psalm 24 (God entering Jerusalem) and then prayers such as Aleinu and Mourner’s Kaddish, linking the ritual to broader holiday liturgies and musical traditions.
• Functional meaning:
  • Liturgical readings and recitations foreground the scroll as a metonymy of God’s presence and link local congregational voices to universal scriptural memory.

Festive meal (seudat mitzvah)

• Etiquette and ritual meals:
  • The group washes hands; the donor blesses bread; pieces are distributed with salt; a special inauguration cake (hachnasat sefer Torah cake) is served.
  • Ezekiel 3:3 is invoked to connect tasting with spiritual ingestion of divine words; the cake symbolizes internalizing sacred text.
• Taste and memory:
  • Tastes and smells associated with the inauguration are intended to wire ritual memory to future experiences of similar flavors and aromas, reinforcing in-group identity.
• Post-meal reflections:
  • After the meal, grace is recited and Torah scholars discuss the text’s significance, embedding the ritual within ongoing communal learning.

Conclusion

• Summary of sensory dynamics:
  • Touching and close handling of the scroll create nearness and intimacy, linking participants to the text and to blessings that follow when proper reverence is maintained.
  • Smell is a historically variable and culturally negotiated currency; today’s lemon-like associations reflect modern adaptations and in-group evaluation of ritual smells.
  • Visual cues and donor-name engravings on scroll-related objects provide recognizable markers of transitivity, linking the donors to the sacred object and its social setting.
  • Sounds of words and ritual recitations, as well as the rhythm of the processional and liturgical music, form a sensory fabric that ties participants to collective prayer and the divine presence.
  • Tasting and eating the inauguration cake function as a symbolic ingestion of divine words, reinforcing transformation of participants through divine word-embodiment.
• Hermeneutical vs artefactual usage in practice:
  • Hermeneutical use occurs rarely and is exemplified mainly in specifying textual visual characteristics (parchment, margins, lines) rather than ongoing dualistic interpretive engagement.
  • Artefactual uses dominate, creating a network of transitivity between the scroll, donors, congregation, spaces, and historical/mythic resonances (Davidic, Mosaic, Jerusalem as symbol).
• Implications and directions for future study:
  • The integration of ritual senses in sacred-text use highlights how lay and elite participants share access to sacred content and meaning through embodied practice.
  • The study calls for broader research into ritual stimulation of the senses across other sacred texts and traditions, especially in contexts where material handling is a central feature of meaning-making.

Key terms and concepts (glossary)

• Artefactual use: Handling sacred texts as physical objects and using their material form to generate meaning, affect, and social connectivity.
• Hermeneutical use: The interpretive engagement with sacred texts to reconstruct meaning and evaluate or transform the worldview they convey.
• Transitivity: The linking effect created by the artefact and its social/ritual contexts that connects individuals, communities, and places.
• Simchat Torah: A festival celebrating the Torah and its perpetual reading cycle, featuring processions, dancing, and public reading.
• Hagba'ah: The ritual raising of the Torah scroll for public view.
• Gelilah: The dressing of the Torah after it has been read, typically by lay participants.
• Hachnasat ha-Torah: Inauguration of the Torah scroll into its place of use (synagogue).
• Parochet: The Torah curtain before the Holy of Holies, symbolizing sacred separation and access.
• Parallels and allusions in ritual memory:
  • Mosaic law, Davidic imagery, and Jerusalem as metonymies of divine presence inform contemporary practice and connect modern rituals to Scriptural narratives.

References (selected)

• Assmann, Jan. 2006. Religion and Cultural Memory.
• Avrin, Leila. 1991. Scribes, Script and Books.
• Bundy, Anita B., et al. 2002. Sensory Integration: Theory and Practice.
• Elbogen, Ismar. 1993. Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History.
• Finkelberg, Margalit; Stroumsa, Guy, eds. 2003. Homer, the Bible and Beyond.
• Friedman, Jen Taylor. nd. Milestones. www.hasoferet.com.
• Grimes, Ronald L. 2005. Procession.
• Hayes, John E.; Keast, Russell S. J. 2011. Two decades of supertasting.
• Keeley, Brian L. 2002. Making sense of the senses.
• Malley, Brian. 2004. How the Bible Works.
• McDonald, Lee Martin; Sanders, James, eds. 2002. The Canon Debate.
• Porteous, J. Douglas. 1985. Smellscape.
• Ricoeur, Paul. 1979; 2003. The Sacred Text and the Community; The Rule of Metaphor.
• Schleicher, Marianne. 2009a; 2009b; 2010; 2011. Various works on artefact/hermeneutical use and the Torah.
• Scholem, Gershom. 1952. Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der kabbalistischen Konzeption der Schechina.
• Stern, David. 1987. Midrash.
• Waskul, Dennis D.; Vannini, Phillip; Wilson, Janelle. 2009. The aroma of recollection.
• Watts, James W. 2013; 2015. Iconic scriptures and related topics.