cellio | struggling over Yom Tov

sinning

Question, what does that mean in the Jewish context?

As this is a transgression against God but not against another person, it means I'm damaging, presumably slightly, my relationship with God. The yetzer hara (evil inclination) has won out over the yetzer tov (good inclination).

Judaism doesn't have a "hell" concept the way Christianity does, but the inevitable result of sin is that (1) it drives you just a bit farther away from God and (2) it becomes slightly easier to do it again. (The rewards for keeping God's commandments are the inverse.)

Whether there's more depends on whether you believe in individual, fine-grained reward and punishment. Reward and punishment, to the extent that they happen, happen in this world, though. It's not about determining your final destination.

Judaism doesn't have a "hell" concept the way Christianity does
..and not all Christians see "hell" in the same way..
You see, in my world, "hell" is an absence of G-d.

I like how this is phrased. It's pretty much what i've been thinking about the "sin" concept, but with words.

..and not all Christians see "hell" in the same way..

Good point. I gather that Christians in general agree that hell exists (in some form), but that they disagree on what it means.

Ironically, the first time I asked a Jew about hell, she said almost the same thing as you: "hell" is the absence of God. This is very different from the fire-and-brimstone view I grew up with. (That Jew was Gail, by the way.)

Yeah, I grew up Presbyterian. G-d was a very scary man. I *really* understood why people kept saying "Be not afraid" in the bible. I'd have to be calmed down before I took a message from that kind of G-d, too :-)

When I realised that everyone was right, the absence of G-d, or seperation from G-d was as hell like as I could muster. The funny thing is that I can't imagine athiests or agnostics being punished. I like to think that there are a lot of people who did very bad things in His name being forced to live with each other for all of eternity.

Okay, I give up, I've been wondering this for a while.
What is the reason for writing G-d instead of God?

Because you're not supposed to erase/desecrate the name of God. This leads Jews to interesting practices; for example, used prayer books are sometimes buried with scholars rather than being tossed. Another practice is to put documents in a "Geniza", which is basically an attic/etc out of the way. This practice was invaluable to scholars of Jews in the middle ages, as the Geniza in Cairo was particularly big, and contained all sorts of documents which were written in Hebrew, and since it was discovered (in the 1920s?) it's been a veritable treasure trove of information about the Jews of Cario and Egypt in general in the middle ages.

Now I personally tend to vacillate about "G-d" vs "God". Because, well, neither is really G-d's name, since that's the four letter hebrew word which nobody knows how to pronounce anymore. When I'm writing by hand I often end up writing "Gd" with a big horizontal dash in the G. Some Orthodox jews write "Hashem", which literally means "The name", and others go further to write "H-shem", which I think is really going too far. When I'm writing on the computer, it's also complicated because nothing is as permenant as on paper...

Hmm.
It occurs to me that it's good for this purpose that it's a phonetic writing system being used. If it were an ideographic writing system, you would never be able to write a replacement nonword like that, because any symbol you came up with to replace the symbol for God's name would become equivalent to the original, a symbol for the name of God, through its use as such.
Hmm... this ties into idea that whatever you write to mean the name of God really is the written representation of that name as long as other people can understand it and pronounce it equivalently to the original--all you've done is introduce a spelling irregularity into the language.

Anyway. Does this mean that the name of God is actually written out in those stored/buried prayerbooks? Is the abbreviation only used for documents which are doomed to destruction at their time of writing? I can see why it would be necessary for computer communications--if it were displayed on the monitor you might be obligated to wait until the next power outage before you could use the computer for anything else. :)

Anyway. Does this mean that the name of God is actually written out in those stored/buried prayerbooks?

In passages that are taken directly from the Torah (such as the Shema), the name is written out so as not to corrupt Torah text. In other passages (constructed prayers that are not Torah text) it is usually abbreviated[1], presumably to reduce the chance that it will be erased.

I write "God" rather than "G-d", both on paper and electronically, because "God" is not God's name -- it's just a handle to God's name. I don't write the real name (the 4-letter Hebrew name) at all, and of course I don't say it because we don't know how. [2]

As Goljerp said, some write "Hashem" (which literally menas "the name"), and this has led some to write "H-shem". I think this is not only incorrect but actively destructive, causing people who learn that tradition but not all the reasoning behind it to lose sight of the real purpose of all of this.

[1] For reasons unknown to me, this is usually abbreviated as the Hebrew letter "yud" written twice. This letter is one of the four letters in the true name, but it does not appear twice, only once. I don't know the origin of this practice.

[2] Actually, when we encounter the 4-letter name, we substitute the Hebrew word for "my lord", which is "Adonai". Some people abbreviate/corrupt the word "Adonai" in writing (and similarly write "L-rd" instead of "Lord").

Hmm. Why is substituting a different word better than substituting an approximate pronunciation? Is this a recent thing because you don't know how to pronounce it, or did the Jews previously avoid speaking the name of God as well? (I suppose it's very hard to misuse the name of God if you don't use it at all, so that's a bonus...)

I'm sorry if these questions are either annoying or trivial, feel free to ignore at any point...Also, I'm coming from a background where they've been freely corrupting God's proper name (and that of every other person who appears in scripture) for centuries, so this is a little different...and makes me wonder why no common Christian prayers use the proper name of God-the-father when they're so free with the proper name of God-the-son.

Why is substituting a different word better than substituting an approximate pronunciation?

Just a guess, but if you substitute a different word then anyone looking at the text and hearing you knows you're not speaking the true name. Since we're not supposed to speak the true name (even if we knew how), this is good. There is a concept in Judaism called "marit ayin", "giving the wrong impression", that says that you don't do things that are ok if they can reasonably be mistaken for not ok, especially if this might cause someone else to imitate you and sin. So, as a minor example, if you're going to serve those fake bacon bits with the salad, you put out the jar of fake bacon bits on the table, but you don't spoon them into a serving bowl and lead people to believe you're serving pork.

Is this a recent thing because you don't know how to pronounce it, or did the Jews previously avoid speaking the name of God as well?

When the Temple stood, the high priest spoke the name of God once per year, on Yom Kippur, inside the holy of holies (not publicly). This is the only sanctioned usage as best I recall, though clearly there must also be a mechanism to transmit this knowledge to the next high priest.

And yeah, if you never say the name at all then it's harder to take it in vain, which is a big bonus.

When the Temple stood, the high priest spoke the name of God once per year, on Yom Kippur, inside the holy of holies

Woah, and I thought that the movie Pi was just making that up.

Okay, so, considering that the name of God has a standard meaning, that being "I am", how do you prevent people accidentally saying it if the need to assert their existence arises in a conversation?

Actually, God has several names, only one of which is the name (by which I mean the four-letter Hebrew name). As far as I know, that word doesn't have any other meanings and is unlikely to come up in casual conversation.

You're probably thinking of God's answer to Moses' question at the burning bush. God doesn't actually use the four-letter name there; he says "ehyeh asher ehyeh", approximately "I will be who I will be". Volumes have been written on what this means.

I came across this thread and just wanted to add my two cents. There are a couple reasons for not spelling out the word G-d. Aside from the biblical prohibitions against taking G-d's name in vain and erasing His name, it's just repsect. And another reason I've always found to be rather beautiful is that it's a small way of acknowledging that G-d is more than and above mere letters and words. Anyway. Sorry to disturb the conversation!

And another reason I've always found to be rather beautiful is that it's a small way of acknowledging that G-d is more than and above mere letters and words.

I like that interpretation. Thanks!

Like everything, there have been various strands of Jewish thoughts over the years. One which slightly contradicts what you said an idea of "Gehennom", as a place which isn't all to pleasant where one might go -- for a finite period of time -- to atone for one's sins.

I've heard of Gehennon but thought it wasn't mainstream or necessarily literal. Is it held to be a place? A place of torment? Just a place without God?

When did this idea enter Judaism? Is it possibly a reaction to Christian Hell, or is it earlier?

Yea, I know that the Torah has one cryptic reference to descending into "Sheol", and I don't recall offhand what the commentaries have to say about it. I mentally indexed it under "hand-wave", but I guess now I'll have to look it up if I can remember where it is. (It's in Genesis somewhere, I'm pretty sure.)

I'm pretty vague on what the Prophets have to say about the subject. First, I haven't read them thoroughly; second, they frequently are clearly speaking figuratively and not literally anyway.

I've heard of Gehennon but thought it wasn't mainstream or necessarily literal. Is it held to be a place? A place of torment? Just a place without God?

I don't think it's mainstream now, but it was a strand of thought during late rabbinic/early middle ages. Originally "Gehennon" was a place (outside Jerusalem, where the garbage got thrown?), but in by the late rabbinic/early middle ages it morphed into a place one might go before going to heaven. There were lots of different Jewish opinions on this sort of thing, although mainstream Judiasm focuses on this life rather than what might happen after death.

Is it possibly a reaction to Christian Hell, or is it earlier?

I think probably it must have been influenced by christian ideas, given the time I'm placing the idea. The difference (as far as I know, based on Dante mainly) is that Christian Hell is a place of eternal torment, while Gehennom is only a temporary place, even for the nastiest people.

I'm pretty vague on what the Prophets have to say about the subject.

I think it was a post-prophetic idea.

By the way, the word that is usually translated "sin" or "transgression", which in Hebrew is "cheit", really means "missing the mark". That analogy works quite well for me, but is hard to invoke in casual conversation. :-)

I understand how you feel on this one. I'm sitting at work today as well. I have a website going live on Friday and I opted to take the first two days of Pesach off instead of the first and the last. The only thing that really digs a bit is missing Yizkor (which is on day 8 and even though I'm in the camp of folks who think day 8 is no longer really Pesach, I would still like to be at services tomorrow).

I think you hit on something about the end of Pesach not being as 'real' since there's no ritual associated with it. Doesn't change the commandment of course, but it helps figure out where the behavior is coming from. Maybe we should start a tradition of having another (much smaller) festive meal to mark the end of the holiday - although I'm already so sick of Matzo, it's hard to imagine cooking even more with it!

In any case, try not to be too hard on yourself - the important thing is that you're moving forward, not sliding back. When I began my path towards observance, I found it very important to take things in stages because like you, once I take on a mitzvah, I don't want to turn back, but I also don't want to take more than I can/will do at a time. That's why it's taken me 5 years to have a Kosher kitchen. I wasn't ready for it when I started so I did stages, gave up pork, later gave up shellfish, later gave up mixing cattle and dairy (don't get me started on the chicken/dairy argument! ), later only purchased Kosher meat (that one was tough for me - I hate paying over 3x more for something than I used to pay), and finally this year, buying all new stuff and making the kitchen official. I'll still eat Kosher-style out of the house (e.g. I'll eat non-kosher meat, but I won't mix it w/ dairy, and I won't eat inherently non-kosher animals at all), but eventually, I'll probably just go fish/veggie when I eat out. I'm not there yet, but I'll get there.

How did I get here? Oh yea, we were talking about Pesach. I am really the Queen of taking a tangent and running with it.... Anyway, what I was trying to say, is you'll take on the observance when you're ready. It sounds like you're pretty close anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if next year there's no entry for Pesach day 7 in your live journal. :-) But even if there is, the struggle you're going through is important as well and there are good things that come out of the process....

Maybe we should start a tradition of having another (much smaller) festive meal to mark the end of the holiday

OK, so it might seem silly to reply to my own post, but when I saw this article, I had to pass it along:
http://www.jsonline.com/entree/cooking/apr02/31927.asp

Neat! We may have to try that next year. :-)

[Translation for everyone else: Yizkor is a memorial prayer, said both communally and privately for the dead (privately for your relatives, communally for everyone else). It is said four times a year in connection with holidays.]

Locally, the congregations that observe a 7-day Pesach do Yizkor on the seventh day. That means turnout was really low yesterday morning at Tree of Life (Conservative), because many of the members of that minyan grew up with 8th-day Yizkor and went elsewhere for it -- even though Tree of Life had done it the previous day and they had the option to attend that. (I don't know if they did Yizkor twice, or went elsewhere both days so they could get it once and on the 8th day.)

I actually don't like attending Yizkor services. My parents (thank God) are alive, and none of my grandparents were Jewish. I'm not there for any personal connection. And I'm aware of the taboo against attending if your parents are alive. (Don't believe in it, but it's another contributor of minor weirdness.) So while I feel bad about working that day, I don't feel bad about missing Yizkor.

the taboo against attending if your parents are alive

My parents have told me that they don't mind if I go while they're alive, but basically have said that since I don't have to do Yiskor, they are fine with me leaving. And in this case, I agree.

Some people have gotten very offended at my leaving during Yiskor - "Six million died in the Shoah, and you're leaving during Yiskor?" - but I think that's really confusing the issue. Yom Hashoah is its own holiday, and I try to respect the memory of those who died in the shoah in other ways.

Thanks for the words of encouragement. I guess in a way it's a good sign that I feel bad about this; it means I'm still climbing the ladder rather than descending. As you said, the struggle is important too, not just the outcome.

Sounds like the truly festive meal is at the end of the last day -- havdalah and bread. :-)

My kashrut path is similar to yours. I started by eliminating non-kosher species, then meat/milk mixtures. I spent a brief period trying to go either way in restaurants (i.e. I would eat meat if I was convinced there wouldn't be butter in the other dishes), but I gave that up pretty quickly as infeasible. Around the same time I separated the dishes at home (I already had multiple sets, none complete -- leftovers of a student lifestyle). Somewhere in there I said that I wouldn't buy non-kosher meat any more -- and eating in a restaurant is an extension of "buying" -- but I'll eat it in friends' and relatives' homes as long as it's a kosher species not mixed with milk. (If they offer me a vegetarian/dairy option, though, I take it.) Eventually I attacked the kitchen beyond just separating the dishes. And so it goes.

Here is where my melting pot view of Judaism comes into play.

As I don't believe that homosexuality is wrong, that means that some things in the Torah have changed. I have always believed that the Torah is a living document, and that means that it grows and changes.

There are so many days in the Torah where you're supposed to "do no work" that many places of employment will start having fits if you're out that much. (Unless you happen to work for a temple) Since, being at work is necessary to your survival you have to pick and choose the days and times that are most important to you.

If, next year, you feel compelled to take the day, by all means do so. If not, find a way to remember the departure from Egypt in your own way that is between you and G-d.

To quote one of the wisest Rabbi's I have ever met.

"There are some people who would love to wrap themselves in the Torah. Not me. If I wrapped myself in Torah...yes I would understand the words but I couldn't see the world that I should apply them to. The Torah would blind me, and cut off my air, and I couldn't see my children to teach them Torah.
No, Instead I will wrap myself around the Torah. I will absorb its goodness into my heart. I will absorb its lessons into my soul and teach the world by my example. I would find that some parts are best left in the time of Moshe, and others are truer today than any other. "

Either way...happy end of Pesach to all.

Sorry to run on.

Good points!

I also believe that Torah is a living document, to be interpreted in each generation. (I do not believe it is the precise word of God, though I believe it is the result of an encounter with God at Sinai.) There are certainly things in the Torah that I don't do, either.

I do, however, strive for consistency. If I'm going to observe the Torah-mandated holidays, I should either do all of them or have a well-thought-out explanation for why I skip some. I shouldn't "just not get around to it", and that's what I've been doing with the last day of Pesach. Now that it has bubbled up to the conscious layer, I have to think about it and make a decision.

This has worked for me in the other direction once, but I'm going to make a separate journal entry.

And, correspondingly, the last day of Sukkot
But that's easier, because it's at least got a name of its own - Shmini Atzeret.

The end of Pesach is just... well... the end of Pesach.

Despite the fact that my shul realized that enough people wanted to work and go to Yizkor that they had a 7am Yizkor minyan yesterday, there were a good number of people who were at shul today and presumably didn't go to work.

I find it meaningful as a way of making the end of pesach meaningful as well as the beginning. It's a way of bookending the holiday, rather than letting it taper off. And if you think of the fact that pesach and shavuot are themselves bookending a period of 7 weeks, you get some nice symmetry.

And some cool torah readings as well... on the 7th day you get to cross the red sea again... and 8th day, of course, has Yiskor...

I ended up having meals with friends on Wednesday lunch & dinner and Thursday lunch, and that helped a lot, too!

I am working tomorrow (ugh, later today) so I'd better stop LJing...

But that's easier, because it's at least got a name of its own - Shmini Atzeret.

Yeah, but ask even moderately-educated folks what that means and, beyond translating the words, they probably won't say anything useful. :-) I mean, it's another day of Sukkot, special name or not -- you don't do anything differently, and it doesn't really feel any different. Now Simchat Torah feels different, and on the Israeli calendar it gets plopped right on top of Shmini Atzeret, but that presumably doesn't help people who believe in two days of Yom Tov.

7am Yizkor? Eeek. I presume there was also a later option...

Shmini Atzeret does get short shrift, especially for a holiday which has its own name and is specifically mentioned in the torah.

When I was at Brandeis, "Shmini what?" was the common response of people to the holiday.

I mean, it's another day of Sukkot, special name or not -- you don't do anything differently, and it doesn't really feel any different.

According to some people, Shmini Atzeret is a day where it's optional to eat in the sukkah. So it's slightly different than the rest of sukkot.

At one point I was working on a bit of purim torah around shmini atzeret, with people trying to understand it like the other holidays ("So, have to eat in the sukkah, right?" "No." "So we can't eat in the sukkah?" "No..." "But it's traditional to eat cheescake?" "No, that's shavuot."... and so on. It was funnier, really...)

I presume there was also a later option
Yep, normal minyan at 10am.

struggling over Yom Tov

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

Re: Why "G-d"?

no subject

no subject

Gehennom...

Re: Gehennom...

Re: Gehennom...

sin

i had no idea i would write so much! :-)

Re: i had no idea i would write so much! :-)

Re: i had no idea i would write so much! :-)

Yizkor

Re: Yizkor

Re: i had no idea i would write so much! :-)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Shmini what?

no subject