Q&A: Mentioning the Name “Elohim” together with the Tetragrammaton
Mentioning the Name “Elohim” together with the Tetragrammaton
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I saw a video of yours talking about faith as something rational, etc.
But I noticed that you mention the name “Elohim” together with the Tetragrammaton,
which gives away that you are not classically Haredi, and that’s perfectly fine.
I’m just curious from the standpoint of Jewish law,
I looked around a bit and found this passage:
“Rabbi Yitzhak Gabai points us to the source in the Talmud.
‘The view that holds that one should not say the name “Elohim” but rather “Elokim” is a view that most of the religious public is wary about.
In the Talmud, in tractate Shevuot, it is stated that the name “El” is one of the names that may be written but may not be erased. In other words, it is forbidden to erase it because it is one of the names of the Holy One, blessed be He.
One of the names that possess holiness is Elohim. When a person speaks to the Holy One, blessed be He, in personal prayer, he may address Him by the name Elohim, but
when speaking casually, people use the form Elokim.
The idea is to treat the name with respect and not use it at every opportunity.’
What is the Rabbi’s view on the matter?
Thank you,
Answer
I do not think a person’s decisions are supposed to be determined by, or express, his biography. One can make decisions that run contrary to the education one received. I have quite a few of those.
As for the question itself, indeed I do not see a problem with saying God’s name as long as it is done matter-of-factly. On the contrary, some see a problem in using distorted forms such as “Elokim.” That seems exaggerated to me, and therefore I sometimes use that too.
As for erasing the name, that is a different discussion. There, if you write it with a heh, there is a problem, because it may later be erased. However, regarding this I have written an explanation: I spell it with a vav, “Elohim,” and that is not the name that may not be erased. The name that may not be erased is without a vav.
Discussion on Answer
In principle yes, although “Elohim” is also an appellation (just as judges are called elohim in the Bible). It refers to His function, the God of the world. The name “Adonai” is an actual name, and therefore more problematic. I do not think there is any prohibition in any matter-of-fact usage. Tossing out the name in a storm of emotion cheapens it, and it is not proper to do so.
Of course there are “light” people. Those who cut corners even by their own standards. Traditionalists. What bothers me is treating someone who thinks differently from me as “light” simply because his approach is different.
Indeed, I do have a real grievance against the Haredi public, because its conduct is warped and wicked. I do not know of any other public whose conduct is wicked. Among individuals, of course, there are all kinds. That is certainly true of Haredim as individuals too. I am speaking about public conduct.
Trying to take the good things from every sector is excellent. But that has nothing to do with judging the sector. It does not mean one should not judge it. Statements of the kind you make are what allow Haredim to wrap themselves in the mantle of a “legitimate approach” and avoid recognizing their wickedness.
Thank you very much for your reply.
Can the name “Adonai” also be said
if it is done matter-of-factly?
And also, how do we define “matter-of-factly”?
Do you mean someone who uses the name when upset as an emotional reaction,
as many people do when they say words like
“dammit,” or “to hell,” and the like?
It would be interesting to know whether well-known halakhic decisors such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, and the like addressed this, for example. May their memory be a blessing.
In another video you spoke about people who relate to others as “light religious.”
And that really bothered you.
How do you define who is “light”?
Bottom line, there is a reality of religious people who are less strict about various things.
There is a broad spectrum of stringencies.
For example, one could say in general that every sector has the things it is more careful about than others; the Religious Zionist sector is very stringent about the commandment of settling the Land of Israel,
and perhaps less so about kosher stringencies.
It sounds like you have a real grievance against the Haredi public.
I try to take the good things from every sector.
May we hear good news, amen.