Too bad the backward name is missing alephs which would have correctly spelled hu/he.
I dont see the huge story in this.
I have heard everything now...
That's why I translate pronouns referring to God as "it".
(Right, old-timers, I still haven't given up my greatest-sidder-ever plans.)
Wow, did this rabbi miss all that talk about the shechinah? I can't believe that.
Anthropologically, it isn't a surprise we tend to have G-d mentioned in male terms because we tend to emphasize the judgment and punishment aspects of G-d which we tend to associate with masculinity as opposed to the forgiveness and love aspects which we associate with females (males do this as much if not more than females which tells you how much we long for mom's comfort versus dad's sternness).
We almost certainly tend to think of G-d more often in terms of judgment and punishment because we have a natural tendency when anything goes wrong to ask, "why me" instead of "why not me". We almost always think that s**t happens to US and not that s**t merely happens PERIOD.
We tend to think that everything is for a reason of some kind even if we have no idea what it is, and that's partly our conscience pecking at us for what we know to be misdeeds and partly our paranoid guilt which like religious faith works on assumption, namely that we screwed up somewhere.
In essence, we probably worry about G-d striking us down or laying out plagues not because Torah says that He did it before, but because we're guilt-ridden paranoid insecure creatures who need to chill out and get centered. Maybe then we might actually get to realizing that the same G-d who might have punished us with a flat tire, could definitely have done worse and with surgical precision had He wanted to, hence it is unlikely that the flat tire was punishment but merely another of life's ups and downs.
For all you documentary theorists out there, which bits of the tenach did She write?
By the same token, lulei demistafina, the cry "Booyah!" is actually "Iyov" backwards, indicating that one wishes upon himself the reverse of Job's travails.
Not hoo-hee. Hoohah.
I like this quote:
"Sameth has shared his image of a dual-gendered God with the seventh- and eighth-graders he teaches at his synagogue. He said they've been very receptive, which isn't surprising because they are growing up in a post-modern age.
"As post-moderns, we've been conditioned to a different relationship with language," he said. "That's why there is all this interest now in Jewish mysticism."
He wonders how, 2,000 years from now, people will understand the final chapter of "Ulysses," which includes no punctuation. Will they try to add punctuation, believing that it's been lost? Or will they grasp that James Joyce knew what he was doing?
"Joyce was playing with language, using language to play with the medium," Sameth said. "And the Torah isn't just about Noah taking the animals, twosies by twosies. If that's what the Torah was all about, how could it have captivated Western civilization for 3,000 years? There had to be more."
"
However, I think everyone is missing what the article is really saying. And what is "new" about it.
Wow. Thank you Mark Sameth of the Pleasantville Community Synogogue. FYI, "Pleasantville Community Synagogue was founded in the winter of 1997, Westchester, New York's first “trans-denominational” synagogue, dedicated to building an inclusive home in Northern Westchester for all those seeking a progressive, spiritually-based Judaism. Our members travel to us from as far away as Yonkers, Yorktown, and Stamford (CT), and their backgrounds range from across the full spectrum of liberal Judaism: Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform, and Renewal. Our emphasis on what we call “Joyful Judaism."
That's really great. I run a congregation out of my basement that meets twice a year, although not as trans-denominational as Mr. Sameth's, and our motto is "Judaism is the Shizz". I would also like a platform to look like I'm scholarly. Who do I contact?
"full spectrum of liberal Judaism: Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform, and Renewal. Our emphasis on what we call “Joyful Judaism."
"
I like how "full spectrum" just means, not Traditional.
I know TO
Shizz might be the most disgusting word in our language
http://www.urbandictionary.com/d....php?
term=shizz
Shame on you.
What's interesting is that "poetic Hebrew" is often written in the feminine and yet is translated as masculine.
1. Anyone who read even one book on Kabalah, Chasidus, Rambam or MaHaral etc. knows that G-d in his essence is not male or female, but is completely non definable.
2. Anyone who read even one book on Kabalah, Chasidus, or MaHaral etc. knows that G-d PRESENTS himself (because he chosses to) in a way that is symbolized by the male (i.e. giver) or as a female (i.e. as a receiver)
Therefore:
A. G-d is not MADE of male or female, as much as a person is not made of happy and sad (and even more so).
B. When referring to G-d the way he presents himself as Male (giver), you cannot be referring to him the way he presents himself as a Female (receiver) because they are mutually exclusive.
The idea that G-d is dual-gendered (hermaphroditic ) is simply a joke. Why not call him a cross dresser?
This is nothing but a someone trying to shoehorn his true religion (i.e. liberalism) to make it fit with his torah hobby. (not my words)
As he himself writes.
"This is the kind of God I believe in, the kind of God that makes sense to me”
I'm afraid there's little doubt that over the generations, most people imagined God as a male, and only some imagined it as not human, tzelem or not.
Still, grammatical gender is mostly arbitrary and not strictly indicative of biological sex, something that was understood at least by some during some decades of the 2th ct, before feminists in the 70s ablished this knowledge.
"B. When referring to G-d the way he presents himself as Male (giver), you cannot be referring to him the way he presents himself as a Female (receiver) because they are mutually exclusive.
"
This isn't entirely true.
The sephirah of Malchut for example is understood to be both Female and representive of King David.
I have personally wondered when the GLBT community was going to use Kabalaistic texts to define thier communities. (been waiting for a few years now for it to happen)
Shechinah? Same as sakina? The presence of the indefinable aspect of divinity?
---Grant Patel
Daganev,
“The sephirah of Malchut for example is understood to be both Female and representive of King David.”
Your misunderstanding the concept.
Every person has attributes that are Male and attributes that are Female.
The relationship being discussed is what dictates who is the Male and who is the Female.
For example.
In the relationship of G-d and the Jewish people, G-d is the Male and the Jewish people are the Female.
In the relationship between a teacher and a student, the teacher is the Male and the student is the Female.
Therefore King David may be the Male in one relationship and a Female in another.
Shechinah= Jewish
Sakina=Islam
Is it the same? I don’t know.
But Shechinah (the Jewish version) most defiantly dose not represent the ultimate “indefinable” aspect of divinity.
As a matter of fact the very words “The presence of the indefinable aspect of divinity” are an oxymoron because the word “Presence” (as opposed to non-presence”) and the word “aspect“ (as opposed to something that is unified and has no aspects) are both definitions in themselves.
In Hebrew, swords are feminine and breasts are masculine.
re: the Jewish people being Female in relationship to G-d as a Male-yeahbut many of those "females" are males so.....-
Every person has attributes that are Male and attributes that are Female.
That was my point. Its not mutually exclusive.
"As a matter of fact the very words “The presence of the indefinable aspect of divinity” are an oxymoron because the word “Presence” (as opposed to non-presence”) and the word “aspect“ (as opposed to something that is unified and has no aspects) are both definitions in themselves.
Think | 07.21.08 - 3:19 pm | # "
You arn't understanding what he is saying.
He is talking in translation, not in english.
He is simply saying that the concrete experience of Y K V K, is done via the Shekinah.
"Therefore King David may be the Male in one relationship and a Female in another.
Think | 07.21.08 - 3:09 pm | # "
Its really very simple.
Malchut = King David = Shekinah.
hey- the article says the Tetragram appears 6,323 times in the Tanach. In gematria katan 6=8=2=3=19 which is equal to Chava! Oooooooh cue twilight zone music tee hee
re Think-but you said G-d's giving and receiving aspects are mutually exclusive !!
oops preview is my friend
it's 6+8+2+3=19 @#%%%$##@@!#
Daganev,
“That was my point. Its not mutually exclusive.”
It is,
When we refer to G-d being Male or Female, we are referring ONLY to the way G-d is acting in a particular relationship, we are not referring to G-d himself who is beyond definition. Therefore in a particular relationship G-d is Male OR Female, not both.
Therefore take your pick.
If you are referring to G-d as he is in his essence, then he is not Male nor female, and if you are referring to the way he defines himself in a particular relationship, then he can be Male or Female but not both.
The fact that he can define himself as Male or Female dose not mean he consists of both, it means he consists of non of them.
and some people do think G-d is male. One time at an AA meeting I heard a woman very proudly proclaimed that her god is definitly is a he and not a she. Nobody in the room said anything including me, much to my shame. But later on I thought what if she has said her god is a Caucasion and not a hispanic!!! She's have been laughed out of the room.
Shoot Anne Coulter made fun of feminist who believe in "god as they understand her" And imagine if Michalangelo had painted a black man on the ceiling of the Vatican thingy or even better a black woman .
Whatever,
“but many of those "females" are males so.....”
When you hear the words “Male” and “Female” in Kabalah, replace them with the words “Giver” and “Receiver”, don’t think about gender. So yes, a Female can be defined as a giver in certain relationships (e.g. when she’s teaching), and a male as a receiver.
And if I am a person standing in a bucket brigade, I can be both male and female. Giving a bucket, and receiving a bucket.
Maven,
Lol. I'm pretty sure the urban dictionary is not the end-all-be-all of definition authority nor is it "our language." I use "shizz", or in other contexts the word "shizznit", as speaking of something totally freaking awesome, such as what my basement congregation promotes.
”And if I am a person standing in a bucket brigade, I can be both male and female. Giving a bucket, and receiving a bucket.”
When you are in a bucket brigade, then in the relationship with the person you are handing the bucket to at that moment, you are ONLY a giver, and in the relationship with the person you receive your bucket from, you are ONLY a receiver. The fact that a moment later or even at the same time you maintain a second relationship that is opposite of the first makes no difference.
Ok... and in a conversation, you are both a giver and a receiver to the same person, often at the same time. But ofcourse, its only your mouth that is giving and your ears that are receiving... right? Its not the brain that is doing both.... Ofcourse not.
I heard "m'achorei hapargod" that the "hoo" makes the "hee" sit in the back of the "merkava" 
About 25 years ago, the great and holy inneffable name was revealed to me during a telepathic transmission that also included a great recipe for cottage cheese with shredded carrots. This occurred after I consumed a couple of strangely tasting brownies delivered to me by a friend during a camping trip in New York's Adirondack mountains.
I feel that after years of contemplation, the time is now ripe to share the secret Tetragrammaton with the blogosphere.
Repeat slowly 3 times after morning negel vasser to hasten Moshiach's arrival: RAMALAMADINGDONG (oh baby ! is optional)
Talking about hoo and he
There’s the story of the Hungarian Rebbezin who used to beat her Yekke husband.
Once while chasing him around the house he turned to her and said “why are you chasing me? I should be chasing you! after all its says that g-d told Chava “Vehu Yimshol Boch” – and HE (Adam) will rule over you (Eve)
Ahh she says, that’s cause I’m Hungarian, and Hungarians pronounce the “Vehu” as “Vahee” (i.e. she)
Fool says the husband! If that’s the case then the rules of dikduk require it to say “Timshol” not “Yimshol” (Timshol being loshon Nikavah)
True says the wife, but don’t you know that us Hungarians don’t learn dikduk ….
gabe,
"I heard "m'achorei hapargod" that the "hoo" makes the "hee" sit in the back of the "merkava""
Yes, and Chayos are demanding a pargod in the merkava
Think,
Nice
Commenting by HaloScan
