The Shape and Design of the First Hebrew Letter: Aleph
======================================================

The first letter of the Hebrew alphabet is the letter "Aleph".

Aleph is shaped, according to kabballistic literature as a combination of two other letters, the vov and the yuhd.

Vov is a tall narrow letter. In forming the aleph, the vov is tilted over, slanying with the top of it closer to the left, and the bottom of it at the baseline further to the right. There is an appriximate 60 degree angle.

Yuhd is a small fascinating letter, with much of its own significance, to be discussed later. In forming the aleph, two duplicates of yuhd are attached to the tilted vov. One yuhd is attached at the top right-hand side, rotated clockwise to attach to the upper third of the right-hand side of the vov. The other yuhd is attached at the lower left-hand side. The lower yuhd is almost upside-down, but corresponding to the angle of the upper yuhd.

Significance of This Shape
==========================
Vov symbolized a connection and relationship of the above, the spiritual realm of the heavens, and the below, the material reality in which we dwell. Vov is also representative of "him-shach-chah", "drawing down", from above to below, or "ha-al-lah", "lifting up", from below to above.

Parenthetically, vov is actually composed of a yuhd, with an extension from the upper body to the baseline. Actually, all Hebrew letters, relates Kabballistic literature, are derived from the yuhd.

The two yuhds (two parts of the 'yid') symbolize the two halves of every person. Each person has a heavenly part connected to an earthly part. The goal of the lower earthy part of the person is to draw down and become influenced by the lofty heavenly part (, and as a result become elevated and lift up their being to the heights of the spiritual part).

Beginning of Creation
=====================
Rhe Medrash (a collection of books featuring various explanations of Biblical topics, phrases, episodes, and events) relates that G-d sought a justification for beginning the text of the Hebrew Bible with a certain letter (as we said earlier about the uniqueness of Hebrew which the meaning of every word is most influenced by its first letter). G-d asked then each Hebrew letter to present its case, starting with end of the alphabet.

Each letter tried and failed to present a winning argument. It cited complimentary words that began with that letter. But in counter-argument, a negative word was also sighted. This continued for each letter.

Finally, it was beis' turn, the second letter of the alphabet. He argued that he should be chosen, because the word, "boruch", "blessed", bergins with a beis. And living a life is a blessing like creation itself. Well, it was a convincing argument.

Poor aleph didn't even have a chance to plead its case. G-d noticed how dejected aleph looked, and consoled him. "Don't fret, Aleph," said G-d, "you'll start the Ten Commandments." With hearing that, aleph was happy agasin.

The Solid Stance of Aleph Shows Truth
=====================================
The shape of each Hebrew letter is either sturdy and strong, or unbalanced and weak, from a physics standpoint. When a Hebrew letter is shaped sturdy and strong, this is called "emet", or "truthful". Similarly, when a Hebrew letter is shaped unbalanced and weak, this is considered "sheker", or "falsehood".

The aleph stands up in a balanced manner, sturdy and strong. It is considered a true letter, and even begins the Hebrew word for truth, "emet".

A typical Aleph - from the popular standard Hebrew font,

Frankruhl.

An Aleph, made up of two rotated yuhds, and a rotated vov - from Merubas, a new Hebrew font design, based upon the famous Vilna-Black typeface of the nineteenth century.

Just few questions, I would be thankful if answered in short:
1. Is Divine/Heaven left or right-handed?
1+Rotates Clockwise or CounterClockwise?!
2. Did Divine/Heaven create One or more writing Systems?!
3. Why did Divine/Heaven make it difficult to Man to understand?!
3+ Or Man was created to do puzzles?!
4. Who Created the other langauges/writing systems? Arabic by Arabs?!
5. Was Man created to read from left to right or right to left?!
5+ From Top to Bottom like Japaneses or Bottom to Top like Rongorongo?
6. Does "smile" smiles in Hebrew? And "Suck" Sucks?
7. Is Hebrew Translitratable?
8. Is Hebrew crosswordable in Flowers?
http://www.wordandnumberpuzzles.com/flowers/WFlowers.htm
9. Did Devil create any script?

Hmmm. In Pirkei Avot (Chapter 5) you have the statement that a lot of miraculous stuff in the Torah was created in twilight before Sabbath of the first week of creation. This includes writing, the stylus, and the actual inscribed Decalogue on rock, siting there since creation for Moses to find. This idea is an effort to solve the problem that the Rabbinic Sages accepted the Greek idea of the Cosmos, or nature according to orderly law. Thus they were uncomfortable with miracles that went against the laws of nature.

Personally, I find it a charming and clever solution, but quite unconvincing. In any case what engraved that was engraved on the sacred tablets is unlikely to have been the Aramaic script that Judaism adopted after the Babylonian exile--as the sages themselves recognize. Thus I find it a stretch to ascribe, even by Mishnaic standards, sacred status to the shapes of the current Hebrew alphabet, derived from the Aramaic rather than even the ancient Hebrew one. And Moses and the Israelites may well have been using another dialect.

Of course, if you go to mystical ideas, you can get anything--or not. I find the Hebrew aleph-bet rather magical, but also the Roman alphabet, which is derived from the capitals of the hated Romans. All scripts in long use have something mysterious and charming about them, in my view.

Air-Spaces In The Shape of the Hebrew Letters
=============================================

Sometimes, Hebrew letters are designed as such as a total or partial enclosure.

Look at the final form of mehm (the mehm that comes at the end of Hebrew word):

Sometimes, there is a small opening, like in the letter tes:

Also, sometimes, there are two openings, like in the letter hei:

Before I continue, let me respond to some remarks:

AzizMustafa,

> Just few questions, I would be thankful if answered in short:
> 1. Is Divine/Heaven left or right-handed?

Kabballistic literature states clearly that "ain smol lemaylah - no left exist above".

Polarity is based inly in our reality. In the heavenly realm, there is only right (sic).

> Rotates Clockwise or CounterClockwise?!

Direction again assumes dimensions. Heaven is beyond dimension, as dimension was created by Him, like time and space.

> 2. Did Divine/Heaven create One or more writing Systems?!

Our literature inly speaks of Hebrew. Plus super-human qualities found in Hebrew don't exist in other language systems.

Interestingly, both the Iranians, and the CIA, have invested serious resources to mastering Hebrew and the Talmud in particular, to derive the secret powers of the Israeli. Since this includes mastering Talmud, clearly the aim is not to merely fathom the language of the Israelis.

Furthermore, is it any wonder that the Israelis lead the technology race, even in front of the USA, as their mode of thinking is in Hebrew. For example their latest technology is to remotely disable an anti-missile system, rendering any country in effect defenseless of counter attack. I think that this is the ultimate weapon of deterrence.

Aziz,

> 3. Why did Divine/Heaven make it difficult to Man to understand?!
> 3+ Or Man was created to do puzzles?!

A general principle in Judaism is that G-d created the world for us to do our part, Jew or gentile. Some people call thos, "tikun olam", making the world a better or 'corrected' place.

As I understand it, life is not meant to be easy, as we say, "man was created to toil".

Solving puzzles, putting all the pieces together to form a beautiful picture, surely is a part of this.

We even feel better with ourselves and what we do when it takes effort and requires creativity.

I think that's what type design is all about.

Aziz,

> 4. Who Created the other langauges/writing systems? Arabic by Arabs?!

People.

Aziz,

> 5. Was Man created to read from left to right or right to left?!
> 5+ From Top to Bottom like Japaneses or Bottom to Top like Rongorongo?

I think that people can do anything that they set their mind to. Each culture created the system best for them.

Aziz,

> 6. Does “smile” smiles in Hebrew? And “Suck" sucks?

I don't understand your question.

People who speak Hebrew smile and suck; it's international! :)

Aziz,

> 7. Is Hebrew Translitratable?

It is commonly done.

> 8. Is Hebrew crosswordable...

Check the Israeli newspapers; it's done every day.

9. Did Devil create any script?

Although Judaism speaks of a human inclination towards doing evil (ie. yetzer harah), and many middle eastern people's believe in an "evil eye", the Devil is not a Jewish concept. It's Christian in origin. I believe also Islam rejects the notion of the devil.

Jewish though does identify an angel with tremendous powers like Christianity's devil, but this angelic force is described as actually seeking good, and simply tests us to achieve our G-d-like potential. This is a radically different take on the purpose of evil than in Christianity which reduces and limits the power of the Infinite Being of G-d.

William Berkson,

> Hmmm. In Pirkei Avot (Chapter 5) you have the statement that a lot of miraculous stuff in the Torah was created in twilight before Sabbath of the first week of creation. This includes writing, the stylus, and the actual inscribed Decalogue on rock, siting there since creation for Moses to find.

I don't think that this refers to writing, as writing certainly existed before Moses' time.

What does it say (Avot 5:6)? Ten things were created on the Sabbath evening, at twilight...the writing...

Our sages tell us that this refers to the writing of the Second Tablets. Although if we peruse the face value of the words, it says merely, "haketav" or the writing, so we would think that it refers to writing in general. However, Jewish people believe in the explanations of their predecessors, and don't take things at face value.

> This idea is an effort to solve the problem that the Rabbinic Sages accepted the Greek idea of the Cosmos, or nature according to orderly law.

I think that the Rabbinic Sages had much greater insights into knowledge and reality than their Greek counterparts. Why then did so many brilliant minds from among the Greek sages jump ship, and like Ben Hay Hay and Ben Bagg Bagg in Avot (5:21) and become Jewish? If Greek wisdom was to be admired, why was it rejected, and Jewish wisdom prefered?

> Thus they were uncomfortable with miracles that went against the laws of nature.

The Talmud, which was the basis of the thinking of the Rabbinic Sages, is filled with accounts of miracles that went against the laws of nature. To rationalize everything was attempted by the Maskilim in the nineteenth century, but failed. The Rabbinic establishment at the time made every effort to reject this approach. Although Talmudic Judaism appreciates the logic and rationale in the laws of nature, we accept that at times G-d intervenes into nature and does perform miracles, even more often than we recognize.

Is there then a significance between a small opening, like that of a chet, and between a large opening like that of the hei?

Let's look at the three letter Hebrew word for leavened bread, which we are allowed to eat all year atound, except for Passover. The three letters which make up this Hebrew word of "chometz" are chet, mehm, and the final form of tzaddik (the form of tzaddik which comes at the end of a Hebrew word, known as "tzaddik sofo" or the "longa tzaddik" in Yiddish).

Compare it to another three letter Hebrew word for the kind of flat, unleavened bread, that we are allowed to eat on Passover. This flat bread is known as "matzah". The three Hebrew letters are mehm, tzaddik, and hei.

What is the difference between the Hebrew words of "chometz" and "matzah"?

The difference between then has to do with an important lesson, reflected in the shape and air-spaces of Hebrew letters.

Both words have a mehm and a tzaddik. They only differ in their third letter, the chet and the hei. Let's look again at the different shapes of the chet and the hei.

The chet only has one openning below, and not above. It is seeing things in a limited way. This is like leavened bread, which is full of itself, like a self-centered person.

The hei on the other hand has two opennings, one below like the chet, and one close to above, on the left side towards the top.

This shows that it is flexible, much more open-minded, and less full of itself. This is likr the flat unleavened bread of matzah, that we eat on Passover.

In kabbalistic language, this "flatness" is called: "bittul", while "leavened" is called: "gaavah".

Bittul allows more to come in, because it thinks less of itself. Gaavah refuses Above (G-d) to enter, because it thinks so much of itself.

Since we should think more about G-d at Passover, and the miracles that He did for us which we describe at the Seder, we are then required to rid ourselves and our property of chometz, and eat only matzah.

William,

> Of course, if you go to mystical ideas, you can get anything—or not. I find the Hebrew aleph-bet rather magical, but also the Roman alphabet, which is derived from the capitals of the hated Romans. All scripts in long use have something mysterious and charming about them, in my view.

I agree that letter forms are in deed very deep representations of something beyong our understanding.

Kabballistic literature call letters like rocks. When you assemble them together, like putting stones together to form a house, letters joined together make words. When the words are arranged together in a logical sequence, the sentences carry intelligence.

Assembled Hebrew letters and words carry with them not only intelligence, but some much higher than intelligence. For example, certain sentences in Hebrew also contain acrostics of other key words in the first or last letters of the words. Sometimes, these acrostics even form one of the very names of G-d, or the name of the author of the poetic prayer. Also, the gematria (numerical equivalent) of all the letters in the sentence equals the values of the gematria of significant concepts. Thos can only be done in Hebrew, even if there os great beauty and intelligence in letterforms, such as Roman/Latin, Georgian, Arabic/Urdu, Armenian, etc.

William,

> Thus I find it a stretch to ascribe, even by Mishnaic standards, sacred status to the shapes of the current Hebrew alphabet, derived from the Aramaic rather than even the ancient Hebrew one. And Moses and the Israelites may well have been using another dialect.

You raise a very valid point, apparently.

Seemingly, the modern-day Hebrew letter forms do not hold the same significance as drawings which were found inscribed in stones, which we attribute to early versions of Hebrew script (or derived from Phoenician script, as it appears from a design viewpoint). If so, since these Hebrew designs are not similar, certainly then Moses and the Israelites were using another dialect that we know as Hebrew.

I disagree with this, though like much of which you presented, they make good tales.

The ancient Dead Sea Scrolls contain hand-scribed Hebrew letter forms very much resembling those of modern Hebrew letter forms.

The Phoenician-like truncated set of Hebrew letter-forms found from stone engravings indicate two things: a) the letters are a limited set, closer to the language used by the Phienicians, and b) the designs do not contain curve-like attributes, and designs most conducive to enraving in stone. Hence, they are not indicative of what Jewish people have commonly used as ink on parchment.

Furthermore, the Talmud relates that a special Hebrew letter form was reserved for holy scripts, like in a Torah scroll, tefillin rolls, or a mezuzah parchment (used to this very day).

Our understanding of the shape and design style of the modern-day Hebrew letter forms are actually not very modern-day at all. Many of the block or square letter forms were thought by most secular scholars to be related to the advent of the printing press over 500 years ago. They were unaware that drawings of hand-scribed Hebrew books featuring block or square letter forms existed prior to the invention of the printing press.

In fact, these thick square letter designs resembled very old drawings of Sephardic origin. Other ancient drawings, similar to the famous Koren type design, created by the late seventies Israeli type designer, Eliyahu Koren. (This is similar to the popular designs of the late Israeli type designer, Tzvi Narkiss, which stringly resemble the hand-drawn posters created in the Warsaw Ghetto of sans serif font designs - something which was not thought to have existed for Hebrew in the forties.)

So, clearly we see that "new" Hebrew designs appear to have been created recently, but in truth are derived from similar drawings of Hebre letter forms from very earlier periods, and perhaps back even to the times of the Bible. This brings into serious question of the historical validity of the ancient letter forms engraved in stone. Perhaps, they are a derivative of the Phoenician script which they resemble?

ישראל,

אז דו מאכסט פון טיפאפײל תורה, טארסטי דאס אױך נישט אין תשעה באב׃

—Joel

GoHebrew, extracting answers from your answers:

1. In the heavenly realm, there is only right (sic).

Direction assumes dimensions. Heaven is beyond dimension.

2. ... I think that this is the ultimate weapon of deterrence.

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/06/nasrallahs_speech_hezbollah_ru.php

3. Man was created to toil... We even feel better with ourselves
and what we do when it takes effort and requires creativity.
5. Each culture created the system best for them.

Save Heavenly Hebrew?! Others were created to toil.

6. I don’t understand your question.

Rewording: Does Hebrew have Synonyms?
BTW: Arabic virtually has not.

7. Hebrew is Translitratable.
Then Judaism is Divinely/Heavenly regardless of the script?!
Otherwise means otherwise.

8. Any link to any Hebrew Flower Crosswords?!
8+ What is the longest word in Hebrew?
BTW, Flower Crosswords are good for 6-letter words or shorter.
Thus more suitable to Arabic — the mother of 6minus-letter words.

9. .. but this angelic force is described as actually seeking good,
and simply tests us to achieve our G-d-like potential.

Was Hebrew created by that good-seeking angelic force or?!
______________________
Thanks with Flowers

This is all interesting. My perspective, as weak as it is, has always been that the mystery schools used folk maps of the CNS, and that the real application had to do with combining various branches of what we now call psychology with initiation to create more fully functioning people. For example, through the study of various archetypes and through initiation the aspirant learns to become all possible minds within the collective human mind and to move with purpose from state to state. This tends to over-write the base level personality and give tools to get around certain limitations that nature and nurture impose. The convoluted nature of the system keeps the knowledge secret to anyone that is not properly instructed and initiated, as the practitioners and keepers tend to believe strongly that they have increased their powers of influence and want to keep these powers concentrated with those that are trusted.

The encoded geometry, in my mind, is very similar to other methods that are designed to exhaust the mind and eventually create a receptive state for the actual experience of learning how the mind can direct the electro-chemical activities in the physical body.

Q: Would the script be a component of a model like the tree, or would the tree be a secondary ideation that incorporated the script?

Israel, I'm having a hard time seeing what these midrashim have to do with the design or use of Hebrew letters.

Also the midrash about matzah and chometz to me seems a little silly. I'm all in favor of being open minded and not arrogant, but it has nothing to do with eating with bread. After all, we eat bread the other 51 weeks, so should be we arrogant except on Pesach? I don't think the metaphor goes very far.

William,

> I’m having a hard time seeing what these midrashim have to do with the design or use of Hebrew letters.

The discussion is around the topic of the shapes and the design of Hebrew letters.

So far, we've basically two types of examples:

a) the first regarding the letter aleph, and how it is formed from three elements, two letters of the yuhd and one other letter the vov.

b) the second regarding the difference between the chet and the hei: the chet only having one opening, symbolizing limited acceptance of G-d, and the hei having multiple openings, symbolizing great flexibility and a willingness to accept G-d.

I think the fact the design of Hebrew letter forms is the subject of analysis clearly shows us that this is significant, to better understand how to correctly form and use Hebrew letters.

> Also the midrash about matzah and chometz to me seems a little silly. I’m all in favor of being open minded and not arrogant, but it has nothing to do with eating with bread. After all, we eat bread the other 51 weeks, so should be we arrogant except on Pesach?

You raise a good question. I recall that in yeshiva, this question was raised also.

The act of eating fluffy bread or flat bread is not the issue. Arrogance and humility result from how we relate towards others, and the manner of importance we reserve for ourselves.

However, our Jewish sages apply to the act of Jewish people not eating bread on Passover, and eating only matzah, this meaning and symbolism. Kabbalistic yeachings add another dimension.

When we eat only matzah and rid ourselves of chometz during the eight days of Passover, this accumulated "bittul" lasts all year around, enabling us to eat chometz (the symbol of arrogance) during the rest of the year, and not be affected by it.

Does this answer your concern?

Joel

> אז דו מאכסט פון טיפאפײל תורה, טארסטי דאס אױך נישט אין תשעה באב׃

Unfortunately, my mother spoke only English to me when I was a child, so my mother-tongue is English, and I don't understand many Jewish people's mama-lashon, Yiddish, except some small amount of words.

Hence, please translate your comment.

I’m all in favor of being open minded and not arrogant, but it has nothing to do with eating with bread. After all, we eat bread the other 51 weeks, so should be we arrogant except on Pesach?

But if you can cause the eating of bread to become a sacred act because it triggers and idea! The point is that there is a difference that is recognized every day during the eating of a meal. That sort of ritual works for the xtians as well.

Aziz,

You have a very interesting name, which is derived in Hebrew from the word for 'strength'.

> 1. In the heavenly realm, there is only right (sic).
> Direction assumes dimensions. Heaven is beyond dimension.

I am unsure if this is a comment, or a question.

Having only right, which in kabballistic lingo is not dimensional, but refers not to polarity of right and left, but to a pure kind of simplicity beyond polarity. Differences only come about later when G-d creates physicality and these concept become applicable.

> 3. Man was created to toil... We even feel better with ourselves
> and what we do when it takes effort and requires creativity.
> 5. Each culture created the system best for them.

> Save Heavenly Hebrew?! Others were created to toil.

I don't think that one language competes against the other. Each language has its unique even superior qualities over other languages.

This blog and special interest section focuses on Hebrew. I have brought to people's attention interesting aspects of Hebrew type designs, and how these qualities are unique to Hebrew.

I think what might have ticked some people off is to attribute Divine qualities to Hrbrew, as claimed by our ancient Jewish sages. I have tried to show already, and hope to show more, examples that are unique to Hebrew and even have these Divine qualities.

...

> 9. .. but this angelic force is described as actually seeking good,
> and simply tests us to achieve our G-d-like potential.

> Was Hebrew created by that good-seeking angelic force or?!

I tried to explain that Judaism does not have the G-d-like Devil concept. It is a Christian concept which has become incorporated into the western mind and culture. I believe Christianity wrapped this popular notion because the masses related to it well. I believe it originate from an ancient Persian religion.

Judaism's concept good-seeking angelic force which test people to bring out their potential is not a creative force, be it a script, a language, a recipe, etc.

It is difficult to explain in detail the concept of Hebrew, but since though and souls exist above the creation of angels, the creation of Hebrew is likely also before the creation of angels, as thought requires language.

Does this answer your question?

Aziz,

> 2. ... I think that this is the ultimate weapon of deterrence.

> http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/06/nasrallahs_speech_hezbollah_ru.p...

I am unsure what the purpose of this discussion is. My remark was parenthetical.

As a person from New York city, who witnessed the destruction and clean-up of 9/11 upfront, and as a Jew who lived in Jerusalem at the time of bloody terrorist acts, or one who knew personally countless dislocated Israelis when Nasrallah unleashed an inhumane reign of terror and missiles, I only can say it can not happen sooner for all the evil Nasrallahs in the world to die a painful death and be gone forever.

Again, I truly think the ultimate weapon of peace is that which disables weapons of destruction.

Aziz, you seem to be a reasonable and proud man. You surely agree then that the ultimate strength of a human being is not to destroy one's enemy, but to change him or her into a trusted friend.

jupiterboy,

> Emphasized I’m all in favor of being open minded and not arrogant, but it has nothing to do with eating with bread. After all, we eat bread the other 51 weeks, so should be we arrogant except on Pesach?

> But if you can cause the eating of bread to become a sacred act because it triggers and idea! The point is that there is a difference that is recognized every day during the eating of a meal. That sort of ritual works for the xtians as well.

I don't know who xtians are. Are they from Mars or Venus?

Actually, a meal with bread is not just a simple act of eating. Rather, when adjoined with a certain kind of washing of the hands, various blessings, and a dvar Torah (a Torah thought), with salt on the table, our ancient Jewish sages compared it to an act in the Holy Temple.

I don’t know who xtians are. Are they from Mars or Venus?

Now there’s a good question.

Actually, a meal with bread is not just a simple act of eating.

It is for a dog or chimp. And it is for lots of people as well. What you are talking about (excuse my presumption) is the transformation of the mundane or profane into the sacred through initiation and ritual.

jupiterboy,

> the transformation of the mundane or profane into the sacred through initiation and ritual.

Actually, the aim of all the instructions of the Torah are to transforn mundane into the sacred. This is connected to the "lifting up of sparks" to correct the world.

A human meal with bread is one example.

For example, Jacob cut strips of bark to cause the sheep to give birth to striped offspring to achieve what Jewish men accomplish today with Tefillin. In Jacob's pre-Sinai times, the strips did not have a permanent effect to transforn mundane into the sacred. But today, in post-Sinai times, the placing of Tefillin do have a permanent effect to transforn the mundane leather straps into sacred objects.

The same with ordinary food (if its kosher), which becomes transformed into the substance of a holy meal because of a few simple actions.

Actually

I didn’t intend to imply that ritual and transformation were reserved for eating bread.

So this lifting up of sparks, and lighting of the lamp—how do you interpret these?

jupiterboy,

> So this lifting up of sparks, and lighting of the lamp—how do you interpret these?

They are two distinct things.

The "lifting of sparks" is a kabbalistic concept. Basically, the world which know fell down, like all the other worlds above ours (kabbalistic literature describes our physical world the lowest one, of three other non-physical worlds above it), causing "holy vessels" to be shattered. Hence, there are sparks or pieces of these broken vessels which need to be raised, so they ascend back to the place from whence they came. When we do "mitzvahs", various good acts, we cause these sparks to be raised. As a result, the ordinary physical objects we use are transformed into sacred objects.

A lighting of a lamp is to illuminate the darkness. When this lighting is done for a sacred purpose, like to light the Sabbath candles, or to kindle the Chanukah lights, then those ordinary physical objects are transformed into sacred objects.

I hope that this is clear.

Even though the Hebrew letters illuminate and contain sparks, I don't think these discussions can be considered about the meaning of the shapes and design of the Hebrew letters.

Ah yes, this is your blog, and I’ve taken things off in another direction. I was thinking of a particular author that refers to the lifting of the sparks as the lighting of the lamp, but his take on it is that of a physical process where the lighting of the lamp is a culmination of the raising of the sparks—an metaphorical illumination.

I’ll tune in as you continue and try to learn something.

1> ... it can not happen sooner for all the evil Nasrallahs in the world to die a painful death and be gone forever.
2> ... thee ultimate strength of a human being is not to destroy one’s enemy, but to change him or her into a trusted friend.

GoHebrew, (1) or (2)? How?

> I truly think the ultimate weapon of peace is that which disables weapons of destruction.

Peacefully or by more destructive WMD?!

I suspect there is some difference between yanking a plant out by its roots and neglecting to water or feed it.

The Tantrists focus on the worship of Kali. She is a manifestation of time, and her purpose is to destroy so that creation can begin again. Part of the mythology includes the idea that to unleash her power you must accept the lack of discernment in the destruction process. To begin the process of creation, Shiva offers himself, in a way, as a sacrifice by laying down in front of Kali.

This is the Kali Yuga. Maybe the reverent way to endure it is to be ready to lose everything, even one’s religion.

> A lighting of a lamp is to illuminate the darkness. When this lighting is done for a sacred purpose, ... then those ordinary physical objects are transformed into sacred objects.

Thus GoHebrew+Hebrew letters reflect that sacred Light.
But if a mirror is transformed into a sacred object by that light,
will it reflect sacred sunlight? Or the (sun)light is sacred in origin?

jupiterboy,

> Ah yes, this is your blog, and I’ve taken things off in another direction.

It was only because someone made an issue of this did I say that. Sort of a politically correct statenent.

>...a culmination of the raising of the sparks

A purely physical act devoid of purpose or G-dly intent remains only another physical act and not a culmination of the raising of the sparks, to the best of my understanding. I think that it's simply understood by everyone in this way.

Aziz,

> ... it can not happen sooner for all the evil Nasrallahs in the world to die a painful death and be gone forever.

After 9/11 and the war in Lebanon, any sane human being would agree with me. Only a mentally ill humam being would think these acts are just and good.

Azizm

> > I truly think the ultimate weapon of peace is that which disables weapons of destruction.

> Peacefully or by more destructive WMD?!

I think pacifism doesn't work. Judaism rejects the notion to turn the cheek, but rather to kill first he who attacks you.

A weapon which disables a country's missile defemse system is not a weapon of mass destruction. It simply leaves an aggressor impotent to defend itself against counter-attack.

I think it's a brilliant solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis.

jupiterboy,

> The Tantrists focus on the worship of Kali. She is a manifestation of time, and her purpose is to destroy so that creation can begin again. Part of the mythology includes the idea that to unleash her power you must accept the lack of discernment in the destruction process.

There us a somewhat similar idea expressed in Jewish mysticism. The world we live in is one of a series of worlds. Each world had to be destroyed to make room for the creation of another. I believe that this is the sixth world, before the last Sabbatical world.

Aziz,

> Thus GoHebrew+Hebrew letters reflect that sacred Light.
But if a mirror is transformed into a sacred object by that light,
will it reflect sacred sunlight? Or the (sun)light is sacred in origin?

Actually the name, GoHebrew, was selected because it was catchy, easy to remember, and available as a domain name.

Most light is not sacred, like lighting a match for a cigarette, or staying out too long in the sun and getting burned.

Light becomes sacred if it serves a good purpose, like to light a stove to prepare a pot of soup for an expectant mother, or to do a mitzvah (as mentioned earlier).

If the person blinded by the darkness can see because of the light, this is sacred light too.

A purely physical act devoid of purpose or G-dly intent remains only another physical act and not a culmination of the raising of the sparks, to the best of my understanding. I think that it’s simply understood by everyone in this way.

Well this is another discussion. From a naturalist perspective, everything is purely physical. I’ve always appreciated those systems of teaching that didn’t banish the body to the backyard like a dirty dog.

> If the person blinded by the darkness can see because of the light,
this is sacred light too.

Even if he/she is your enemy?!
What about the moving shadow (no light) that is created by the light+body?! Which one is sacred? One of them, none, or both?!
By the way, one needs light+mirror+open (eye)s to see one's own face,
what does it take him/her to see Divine/Heaven and Devil?!

Flowers 4 Profound Typophiles

> Judaism rejects the notion to turn the cheek, but rather to kill first he who attacks you.

Regardless of the attacker's Religion or Race?! Or Judaism = infallibility?!

> ... simply leaves an aggressor impotent to defend itself against counter-attack.
I think it’s a brilliant solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis.

Or simply leaves an aggressor impotent to attack.
I think it’s a brilliant policy by the Iranians to their invented nuclear crisis.

Interesting information; having Jewish heritage on my father's side, Hebrew has always fascinated me.

I think, though, that you really need to worry about *not* worshiping the created rather than the Creator. Creation is great, but the Creator is greater. Regardless of how you feel, I hardly think it necessary to view Hebrew as a primitive in God's creation; after all, He excels in taking what man has made and using it to work His divine plan. God's Word doesn't need to be limited by human language, which is so provably fallible and mutable (I mean no respect to any language, least of all Hebrew - I love the system of consonantal roots).

Also, as a linguist, you're not going to get me to buy your origin of the Hebrew aleph-bet; the relation to other alphabetic forms is too strong, and in any case the Hebrew people weren't chosen until God spoke to a man of Ur named Abra(ha)m.

Another thing you might want to watch is your claims about Christianity. I'm a Christian, and you offended me when you claimed/insinuated that we Christians believe in a devil who is God's equal or in some way diminishing to His power. We do not, or at least I and those of my faith do not; that is known as dualism and is rather antithetical to Christianity.

In any case, very interesting information about how Judaism perceives it's writing system. Please post more; my interest is piqued :D

Oh, and if there's no direction in heaven, then there can't be any right, can there? Right is defined in opposition to left. Limitation of human language, I guess. Just had to say something about that, as a left-handed person (who admires Ehud).

Peace,
JT

Just a couple of points of clarification.

Jewish mysticism is not adhered to by all Jews, including Orthodox Jews. I am not Orthodox, but you can be Orthodox and reject Jewish mysticism, and also the distinctive doctrines of Chassidic Judaism.

Israel here is portraying one variety of Judaism, which is genuine and authentic, but in fact most Jews do not agree with it.

JT, putting the Devil equal to God is indeed a heresy in Christianity, the Manichean heresy. But it remains true that in Christianity the Devil is a personal, active force in the world opposing God. And this is quite different from Judaism, which sees good and bad tendencies within every individual, but does not see them as centrally directed and supported by a supernatural figure who opposes God. I haven't read it, but I believe that Elaine Pagel's book http://Satan goes into depth on the history.

Also if you want to take offense at rejection of Christian views, you are going to be offended a lot if you talk to non-Christians. Christianity has the most adherents of any religion, but it remains true that most people in the world know about Christianity and reject it for what they think are good reasons.

@william: Christianity sees good and bad in individuals as well - it is the bad (sin) which makes us human, mortal, and in need of salvation (not to change this discussion too much into a theological debate). The Old Testament books of the Bible mention an actual devil on more than one occasion (need I mention the book of Job?), even if you reject the New Testament (where satan is discussed by name).

In any case, I said "offended" in a bit of a lighter way than you may have taken it; Christians these days are often told to avoid offending those of other religions. And I'd be willing to bet that you're wrong about most people knowing enough about Christianity to reject it for reasons other than other-ness.

Peace,
JT

JT, "satan" in the book of Job plays the role of a prosecuting attorney, and is not a malevolent supernatural force promoting evil in the world. Christians read Christian doctrine into the book of Job, but it's not there. If you are interested you can read Pagels on this.

The Jewish concept of the "yetzer hara", or "bad inclination" and Christian concept of original sin are critically different. In Judaism each person has the power to make the choice between good and bad inclinations. In traditional Christianity people need Jesus to remove the stain of inborn "original sin" and further need Jesus to keep them on the right path against their innate corruption due to original sin. In Judaism there is no original sin and hence no need for a special savior.

As to the beliefs of others, I don't think you're right, but I haven't made a survey. Speaking for myself I am pretty familiar with Christian doctrine and reject it for what I think are good reasons.

Boy, although I do like it, this is not sounding like Modern Typography 1, but Comparative Religion.

Actually, when I went to college, I attended a Comparative Religion course, given by a Southern Baptist minister at Marlboro College in Malboro, Vermont - one of the smallest accredited liberal arts colleges in the world. He proudly declared that he was gay, and the Spiritual Counselor for Linda Ronstadt, who called him every few weeks.

jupiterboy,

> From a naturalist perspective, everything is purely physical. I’ve always appreciated those systems of teaching that didn’t banish the body to the backyard like a dirty dog.

Jewish mysticism attributes as the ultimate status to achieve the union of body and soul, not the denial or destruction of body. However, the goal is supremacy of soul over body, and not how western culture often glorifies the body and mocks the soul.

Aziz,

> Even if he/she is your enemy?!

The ultimate strength is to overpower your enemy and transform him or her into a devoted friend.

Instead of diminishing your strength, you are strengthened by joining forces.

I think if the Israelis and the Arab nations became united as "devoted friends", a new kind of culture would emerge and eventually become the dominant civilization. Those peoples are Abraham's descendants, and Western Culture is the product of Esau's and Canaan's descendants.

It is unclear who Yafeth's descendants are.

Aziz,

> What about the moving shadow (no light) that is created by the light+body?! Which one is sacred? One of them, none, or both?!

This is a good question, but I think none.

Actually, this refers to a profound discussion in Jewish Mysticism about the status of darkness.

Is darkness simply the lack of light, or an entity of itself, like evil?

An answer from the sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Jzoseh Isaac, suggests that both are true, darkness is the potential of light.

This is somewhat similar to the Jewish concept of what Chistians call the "Devil".

The inclination of doing evil is intended to bring out our strengths to do good. In Talmudic lingo, this is called: "very good".

To let this topic go on its intended course, final comment relating to Christianity (although feel free to ask me outside of this thread): (a) In reference to satan in Job: yes, prosecutor, and in fact accuser, but no less tempter and deceiver. (b) If the curses at the end of the story of Adam and Eve don't speak to original sin, I don't know what does.

Back on the original topic: So if linguistic sound changes mean Hebrew spoken now isn't the same as Hebrew spoken in Abraham's day (if the term applies), does the message stay the same? Is the fault in humans? What's your opinion?

Peace,
JT

Aziz,

> > Judaism rejects the notion to turn the cheek, but rather to kill first he who attacks you.

> Regardless of the attacker’s Religion or Race?! Or Judaism = infallibility?!

Yes. A basic rule from the Bible is that self-defence is an undesired second choice. The desired first choice is never to allow your enemy to even attack. Rather, destroy him first.

In military terms, it's called a "preemtive strike". According to Jewish law, today there would be no nuclear threat from Iran. Rather, a simple choice would be given: "Stop your threats, give up your arms, or be destroyed." Free choice, very democratic.

The Israelis did this during the Six Day War, and saw miraculous success.

>the curses at the end of the story of Adam and Eve don’t speak to original sin, I don’t know what does.

The curses are of work, death, and pain of child birth. There is no curse of inherited sin, which has to be removed--that is the distinctive thing in Christianity. That is Saint Paul. It's not overtly in the story; it's Saint Paul's interpretation--or rather misinterpretation.

As the Encyclopedia Judaica says, in the Hebrew Bible "Satan", in so far as he becomes an individual personality, is "in no sense a rival to God." In Christianity he is a rival to God, though not a fully equal one. This is decisively different. Before you go on telling me and other Jews more about how we don't understand our Hebrew Bible (which many of us can read in the original), I suggest you read something other than the Christian interpretations.

Abraham probably didn't speak Hebrew, but Aramaic, as he came from present day Iraq, not further West, where Canaanite--the ancestor of Hebrew, I believe--was spoken. These are all related semitic languages (including Arabic) but are somewhat different. (I saw on TV that there are still Aramaic speaking villages in Iraq.)

By the way, with regard to Israel's comment that the Dead Sea Scrolls are in script similar to modern Hebrew, that is true. However, that is 1200-1300 years after Moses, and 500-600 years after the exile in (Aramaic speaking) Babylonia. So what script was written on the Tablets of the Ten Commandments is an open question.

jt...,

> I think, though, that you really need to worry about *not* worshiping the created rather than the Creator. Creation is great, but the Creator is greater. Regardless of how you feel, I hardly think it necessary to view Hebrew as a primitive in God’s creation; after all, He excels in taking what man has made and using it to work His divine plan.

Nobody is permitted to worhip the created, but only the Creator.

Nevertheless, divine attributes are endowed in created beings.

Actually, idol worship originated from this, explains Maimonides. Divinity was attributed to created beings that displayed divine attributes, and were worshiped as a result.

However, just as caution is required in order that we not stumble where people have fell before, we also have to be as cautious to ignore G-dly truths or to recognize holiness in people or things in our zealousness to relate only to the Creator.

I think the mistaken backlash against Jewish mysticism, Chaaasidic teachings, and the holiness of tzaddikim (outstanding Torah leaders), is a good example of this error.

jt,

> Also, as a linguist, you’re not going to get me to buy your origin of the Hebrew aleph-bet; the relation to other alphabetic forms is too strong, and in any case the Hebrew people weren’t chosen until God spoke to a man of Ur named Abra(ha)m.

I would be interested to why you think as a linguist that the origin of Hebrew is like other languages: the product of human thinking and mutual agreement of a certain people and culture.

Btw, the status of "chosen" (chosen to devote their lives to doing G-d's will) was not given to the Hebrews until much later than to the man from Ur Kasdim. Abraham and his adherents, and later his descendants, constituted a tribe. After Abraham taught Isaac, and Isaac taught Jacob, and Jacob taught his childre, only then God saw (actually, G-d foresees everything; so, at that point, it becane clear) that Abraham's descendant were worthy to this special role and title. Only after Sinai, were the Jews a nation with a task.

jt,

> I’m a Christian, and you offended me when you claimed/insinuated that we Christians believe in a devil who is God’s equal or in some way diminishing to His power. We do not, or at least I and those of my faith do not; that is known as dualism and is rather antithetical to Christianity.

I am sorry if I offended you. It is not my intention. I simply am presenting some ideas, based upon my understand.

I learned that Catholicism presents Divinity as a duality, where G-d's dominion is sub-divided, with certain G-dly powers allocated to other entities besides to G-d, such as the Devil, Jesus, Mother Mary etc.

This form of Christianity is rejected by traditional Judaism, explains Maimonides, as "avodah zora".

I know Christianity has many sects, and there are nuances between them.

If the form of Christianity which you adhere to rejects dualism, and embraces pure monotheism, great. We have even more in common.

jt,

> Oh, and if there’s no direction in heaven, then there can’t be any right, can there? Right is defined in opposition to left. Limitation of human language, I guess. Just had to say something about that, as a left-handed person (who admires Ehud).

The concept of "Right" here is not defined by the opposite of right. Rather, "Right" here refers to those qualities which are inherent and unique to it.

I'm also a lefty. I found this difficult to swallow at first. It was a little like male chauvinism... But I got over it.

Israel, Christianity tries to have it both ways. God is both three--plus the heavenly powers of the devil, etc.--and one. Thus you will find both dualistic thinking, and stuff that looks very like polytheism to Jewish eyes, and the claim that they are strict monotheists. In the eyes of both Jews and Muslims, Christianity compromised monotheism.

I think early on the Sages thought Christianity was polytheistic. But by the time you get to Nachmanides (Ramban) he simply says that the doctrines are incoherent, which is probably the soundest view.

But my problem with this thread is that I think your comments on the Hebrew letters, such as the midrash about the chet and hey, are really religion, and don't have that much to do with letters.

I ought to resist the temptation to post, but as I am very interested in both letters and religion, it's pretty tempting :)

William B.,

> Jewish mysticism is not adhered to by all Jews, including Orthodox Jews. I am not Orthodox, but you can be Orthodox and reject Jewish mysticism...

Although William you are clearly have a broad base of knowledge, but I beg to very firmly disagree with you.

The most basic belief of Judaism is in the absolute unity of G-d with one Torah, one People, and one Land.

This means that the teachings of the Torah (not the Torah scroll, but the entire body of Torah knowledge) can not be divided into: "this part I fathom, I accept", and the esoteric part "this part I can not fathom, I reject".

No Orthodox Jew, or even an intelligent less-observant Jew, can reject Jewish mysticism. The Vilna Gaon is universally accepted leader of non-Chassidic Orthodox Jewry. He himself was a great kabbalist. He rules for all generations that one could not be a rabbi who rules on matters of halacha without having a thoriygh understanding of the kabbalistic implications of his rulings. If non-Chassidic Jews rejected Jewish mysticism, then there would be no way to fulfill the Vilna Gaon's ruling.

> and also the distinctive doctrines of Chassidic Judaism.

All Chassidic sects follow the teachings of Jewish mysticism, known as Chassidus, or in particular Chabad Chassidus.

The Chassidus developed in depth by the Lubavitcher Rebbes are not on a plane by themselves, subject to be accepted or rejected, like flavors of ice cream.

For example, among the Satmar branch of Chassidism, Chabad Chassidus is regularly studies. The Kausenberger Rebbes, like most other Chassidic leaders, learn it too, though not as in depth as the Satmar Chassidim. I can cite many examples.

Among non-Orthodox or non-observant Jews, there is a very high rate (99.9%) lacking in background in knowing well Torah observances and lifestyles.

I think that this is why Chabad Houses have had unbelievable success in reaching out to many non-Orthodox or non-observant Jews, and even to non-Jews, and after calmly and presenting Judaism is a positive limelight, the response is not rejection, but acceptance. All people relate to kindness, good deeds, morality, and decency. (Chabad's secret formula for success.)

WB,

> Christianity has the most adherents of any religion, but it remains true that most people in the world know about Christianity and reject it for what they think are good reasons.

I believe Islam is the largest, Christianity is in the middle, and poor little Judaism is in last place, puffing, with aching legs, and thirsty.

> I am not Orthodox, but you can be Orthodox and reject Jewish mysticism, and also the distinctive doctrines of Chassidic Judaism.

With all due respect, this is untrue. No Torah giant would advance this idea. Jewish mysticism was never banished from mainstream Judaism. There were times it was discouraged from study, except by those well versed in Jewish law, married, with children, and of a certain age.

I'm sorry to say there is not a single statement that hints of this. It is merely a view of some non-Orthodox Jews based on misunderstanding, like the notion that Chaasidic Jews make love through holes in sheets to avoid physical contact between husband and wife. When you know little, anything is believable!

WB,

> but in fact most Jews do not agree with it.

This really is not your fault, but this statement is untrue.

There are many Jews who feel very uncomfortable about certain beliefs of Lubavitchers. This is a "political" or "theocratic" issue, but has nothing at all to do with the body of Jewish mysticsm which the leaders of Lubavitch advanced.

When Lubavitchers introduced the "Tefillin Campaign" in the late sixties there was a similar upheaval. How could you urge another non-religious Jew to wrap Tefillin if he didn't do the ritual washing beforehand?

Lubavitchers have never been phased by controversy. The use it to generate greater publicity.

WB and JT,

> The Jewish concept of the “yetzer hara”, or “bad inclination” and Christian concept of original sin are critically different.

I think that there is a subtle point that it being ignire. According to Jewish mysticsm, this bad inclination is actually a hidden form of good. When we overcome the bad inclination, we bring out an inner strength. As a result, our inclination to good is greater. As a result, we desire to good to a greater degree.

Hence, the subjection of this evil force has a good intent. It wants us to fail in its call, and do what's right instead.

JT,

> If the curses at the end of the story of Adam and Eve don’t speak to original sin, I don’t know what does.

Again, original sin is a Christian concept; it has no place in Judaism.

Judaism considers procreation and marital relations as beautiful, purposeful, and even holy.

How many people are screwed up because of this false belief. How many sins have been generated out of quilt for basic human emotions.

If Christianity would reform itself again, it would just shuck this one out.

JT,

> So if linguistic sound changes mean Hebrew spoken now isn’t the same as Hebrew spoken in Abraham’s day (if the term applies), does the message stay the same? Is the fault in humans? What’s your opinion?

First, the main discussion is design, not sound: the share of Hebrew letters, not the Hebrew language.

Second, I unaware that Abraham spoke Hebrew then.

Third, do you refer to modern Hebrew spoken by Israelis and others, or Yeshiva Hebrew, spoken and/oe learned from the siddur, Jewish prayerbook, chaters of Mishna, Psalms, or Bible?

Sound is related to the meaning of the shapes of Hebrew letters, as discussed in Jewish mystical literature. The shape and movement of the mouth is the basis for particular shapes and sounds of Hebrew letters.

Does this exist is other languages as well?

> he becomes an individual personality

There is a concept or two of a non-internal "yetzer hora", where certain acts in nature are attributed to the samech-mehm, or Satan, this powerfil angel, accusers, judge etc.

For example, mainly Sephardic Jews say certain good things, like many children, good health, or much wealth, should not be spoken about at length, "al tiftach peh lesatan" - not to open up Satan's mouth (to accuse and awaken G-d to test us).

There is a famous tale about how Rabbi Israel the holy Baal Shem Tov was born. The Satan dressed as a tramp, carrying a bag of personal belongings, visit the Baal Shem Tov's father on the Sabbath, when carrying articles is forbidden. G-d wanted to test his hospitality with this guest, the Satan dressed as a tramp. This guest was rude and obnoxious, but his father still welcomed him kindly and patiently, no matter how the tramp tried to rile him. In the end, Satan blessed his father to have a special son, who turned out to be the Baal Shem Tov.

> like the notion that Chaasidic Jews make love...

Better to ask Dr. Ruth Westheimer about this notion :^) :^)

Israel, according to the Wikipedia article on major religions Christianity is by a wide margin the religion with the most adherents, not Islam.

You can read an extensive list of Orthodox who criticize Jewish mysticism, some of whom reject the authority of the Zohar, including today, here in the wikipedia article on Kabbalah.

I won't comment further, as these matters are so complicated, and it would be out of place here. Also I'm saving my efforts for my blog over at RJ.org .

William,

> But my problem with this thread is that I think your comments on the Hebrew letters, such as the midrash about the chet and hey, are really religion, and don’t have that much to do with letters.

My view is that the religion element can not be separated from design issues when discussions of Hebrew shapes are made.

I think that there is a strong artistic validity to analyzing the shapes of Hebrew letters, such as the openings in the chet and hei. I think that you do not relate because of your non-traditional leanings, and that these concepts are rooted in Medrash or Kabballah. I don't think that you can be truly objective.

When I show links between how we say the Hebrew letters and their shapes, you really will protest.

The truth is that this is a fascinating topic, even though we have digressed to issues of religion a lot. Its against my better sense, but I am more against censorship.

> Israel, according to the Wikipedia article on major religions Christianity is by a wide margin the religion with the most adherents, not Islam.

I'll check it out. It won't be the first time I'm incorrect.

> You can read an extensive list of Orthodox who criticize Jewish mysticism, some of whom reject the authority of the Zohar, including today, here in the wikipedia article on Kabbalah.

I'll check it out too. This sounds unbelievable. If they quote some rabbi in Denver, and people who reject cholav yisroel, I just say: nebach. (poor shnook)

> I won’t comment further, as these matters are so complicated, and it would be out of place here. Also I’m saving my efforts for my blog over at RJ.org .

What's that?

David,

> > like the notion that Chaasidic Jews make love...

> Better to ask Dr. Ruth Westheimer about this notion :^) :^)

Do you have a web address or link?

Maybe, she says that it's just "projection", because reform jews have such sad sex lives, they project such things on the chassidim to try to prevent their people from checking out chassidism.

This reminds me of when this chassidic rabbi had a feminist as a guest for the Sabbath. She ranted and raved all through the meal about how women are equal to men. The rabbi just looked at her and commented very calmly: "I know men had a circumcision where a small piece was cut off; but you insisted to get a circumcision too, and that a very big piece get cut off."

She blushed, and was quiet for the rest of the meal.

I would like to suggest that gohebrew and guiyong are the same person, part of a viral extension of the "Punkt" concept for TypeCon this year. Regardless, it's really entertaining, keep it coming. Maybe the next character could be one of those handwriting personality analyst types? Perhaps there could also be a Murder Mystery style competition to find out who the man/woman behind the curtain is: I suggest Matthew Carter with a butter knife.

William,

> You can read an extensive list of Orthodox who criticize Jewish mysticism, some of whom reject the authority of the Zohar, including today, here in the wikipedia article on Kabbalah.

I checked it out. Thank you for the embedded links. A real time saver.

Only a few rabbis from long ago opposed Jewish mysticism, but this opposition subsided together with non-Lurianic kabballah.

Only one well-known Modern Orthodox rabbi expressed his opposition; his opinion was never taken seriously.

Everyone includes Jewish mysticism in traditional Judaism. In fact, our concept of G-d and the purpose of fulfilling the Torah is derived from Jewish mysticism. Without it, we sound as if we just don't know.

Feetthekern,

I am not guiyong, although we were seen together on THAT day sharing a peanut butter sandwich in Battery Park. She ate most of it, so I went to a nearby kosher restaurant afterwards. Good fries!

It was actually Thomas Pinney, holding the meat-cleaver. If you noticed, Carter's butter knife had butter on ot, and he crumbs on his upper lip. The meat-cleaver had blood on it! And he had a guilty look on his face.

Can you guess which day it was?

Wow, a lot of posts in a row.

So I'm not Catholic; I'm Christian. And original sin has nothing to do with sex unless you're Constantine. But we're off that subject, so let's get back to letterforms.

It's actually pretty easy to trace the lineage from pictoral-initial systems like hieroglyphics to the Hebrew characters. The general idea is that, as an outgrowth of ideographic/logographic systems, characters came to stand for the initial sound of the words they depicted. Aleph, for instance, and not to pick on this thread, is believed to come from a depiction of an ox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph
Of course, the exact histories are obscure and uncertain, but historical records give linguists good clues as to the origin of writing systems where the language is known.

This goes back to my point about God being greater than physical limitations; if He wants to put special meaning behind writing, He'll work it out. There's nowhere in Scripture where God teaches Moses the aleph-bet for writing the Torah; it's the message that counts. That's what makes hidden meanings all the more miraculous.

On another note, gohebrew, you said the following:
"Sound is related to the meaning of the shapes of Hebrew letters, as discussed in Jewish mystical literature. The shape and movement of the mouth is the basis for particular shapes and sounds of Hebrew letters. Does this exist is other languages as well?"

Yes, it is known to happen, although I don't really think Hebrew falls into this category. Writing systems where letterforms are based on phonetics are called featural codes. The prime example here is the Korean writing system, Hangeul (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangeul). Each character that represents a sound does so based on phonetic criteria, or so they say.

Of course, this story is contested as well, but that's another story. In any case, Hangeul is hardly Hebrew.

By the way, have you read about the possibility that the numerical values of Hebrew letters given for a description of a vessel (For us, it's I Kings 7:24) shows that the ancient Israelites actually had a very close approximation of the value of pi, the ratio of a circle's diameter to it's circumference? I find that incredibly cool.

Peace,
JT

> I think if the Israelis and the Arab nations became united as “devoted friends”, a new kind of culture would emerge and eventually become the dominant civilization.

You have to differentiate between Arabs who love the WhiteHouse
and Houses in other Corners of the world from Arabs who love the BlackStone placed at one of the corners of KAABA (the House of Worship)
that was set up by Abraham in Mecca.

Before Islam, when Arab tribes differed as who would put the Black Stone back in its place after rebuilding the House of Worship in Mecca, they agreed to let the first person to enter KAABA to judge between them.

And the grandson of Arbaraham (Mohammed) came in.

Mohammed asked the tribes to bring him a piece of cloth and then step by step:
1. placed the black stone in the mid of that piece of the cloth
2. asked the heads of the tribes to collectively hold that piece of the cloth,
3. took up the black stone and put back it in its place.

That's what+why KisSinger wants them to forget:
http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2008/02/kissinger-on-iraq-afghanistan-ir...

Sadly most Arabs+Mulims — out of ignorance — are after democracy:
http://www.zackvision.com/weblog/2003/02/muslim-population.html

> Free choice, very democratic?!
Haveanly Religions are above ungodly Democracy.

> Stop your threats, give up your arms, or be destroyed.

> Stop your threats, Forget your arms, and Fear the Destroyer,
the All-Compeller, the All-Magnanimous

>... like the notion that Chaasidic Jews make love through holes in sheets to avoid physical contact between husband and wife

GoHebrew, Is there a deeper physical contact between husband and wife than pentration?!

i didn't read the entire thread, i'm sorry, it's too long, but i wanted to say several things.

on the archeological meening of the letter aleph:
first discoveries of hebrew's origin came out of an archeological dig in "Serabit el-Khadim", located at the sinai peninsula. a few "hieroglyphs" written on the walls of a cave belonged to a script we call proto sinaitic or proto canaanitic, which was influenced by the egyptian hierogliphs. the inscription said "to baalat", which meens a kind of sacrificial to "baalat", the feminin version the canaanite god baal.

letter aleph, as we know it, was a representation of a the first syllabel of the word "ox" (or in canaanite and ancient hebrew - "aluf", which also means strength).
the letter "bet" represents the first syllabel of the word "house" (or in hebrew "bait") and it's proto sinaitic origin is really shaped like the floorplan of the Hebrew nomad's tent found in archeological digs.

therefor, by the Jeff Benner's lecture, the hebrew word for father - "av" which is composed of two letters - "aleph" and "bet", have a symbolic meaning. it is the "strength of the house".

i really recommend on jeff benner's site containing a free audio lecture about the ancient hebrew letters, and much more info.

jt_the_ninja said:
"There’s nowhere in Scripture where God teaches Moses the aleph-bet for writing the Torah; it’s the message that counts. That’s what makes hidden meanings all the more miraculous."

i'm an etheist, but it seems very logical to me that the torah or ten comandments were given oraly from god to moses to the people and priests. i've searched in the bible and it says nothing about god giving the entire torah book to moses (and nothing about god dictating it to moses). in Exodus 31:18 god gives the ten commandments and other commandments to moses. by this, he actualy teaches him a "torah", which also means "doctrine". it's reasonable to think that all of the torah books, which has too much errors, was written by scribes and not given to moses by god. think, if you would have a book about your future, wouldn't you make some changes? there are too many evidences of corrupt priests of the temple. they were closest to the book of books and read it (and also read it to the people), and still continued to mess with god. it doesm't make sense.

only when the commandments were given to moses by god, he gives moses "two tablets of testimony made of stone", written in god's "finger". so there is no real depiction what was written in those tablets, and in what language. it may be a simple contract between the people of israel and god, it may be the ten commandments, it may be the entire torah, and it may be "the catcher in the rye" by j.d.salinger.
we just don't know.

we don't know how literate were the people of israel in this time (wether you call it fact, or legend like i do). maybe moses could be literate because he was raised as an egyptian prince. were the tablets written in egyptian hieroglyphs?

Hey I just had a thought that relates to typography too...do you think there should be a way to make Hebrew fonts display lengthened characters that sometimes appear to make lines even length and to preserve traditional line breaking? How does all that figure into the form of the character?

Peace,
JT

Yaronmius-Maximus,

> the torah or ten comandments were given oraly from god to moses to the people and priests. i’ve searched in the bible and it says nothing about god giving the entire torah book to moses (and nothing about god dictating it to moses). in Exodus 31:18 god gives the ten commandments and other commandments to moses.

According to Jewish tradition (I guess that its recorded then un the Midrash), Moses transcribed the second set of the Ten Commandments in Heaven before he descended down a second time Mt. Sinai. The first set of the Ten Commandments were also transcribed and miraculously engraved in Heaven prior to Moses' first descent down Mt. Sinai.

According to Jewish tradition (I guess that its recorded then in the Midrash), Moses transcribed the orally-given instructions of the Torah in thirteen copies of scrolls, given to each tribe, and one copy was preserved in the portable ark.

The entire Torah existed only in the form of oral discussions. Many of them existed before the times of Mt. Sinai, among the Levites and the scholars of the various tribes. Josepf for example studied these oral discussions with his father, Jacob. Similarly, even earlier, Isaac went to study in the Shem and Aver's school. Likewise, certain kabbalistic-like teachings were given in book-like form to Abraham from an angel. Even much earlier, Adam was given a text in a book-like form from another angel.

Many generations later, much od this was transcribed first in the Mishnah, and later in the Talmud and other post Talmudic hand-written books, as detailed by Maimonides. Kabbalistic literature was first transcribed in the the very unclear Zohar, but most explanations remained unwritten.

So, clearly the origins of Hebrew preceded the scholarly discoveries mentioned earlier.

Although these are great discoveries and fascinating theories, in the end these ancient statements from Jewish tradition always prove to be accurate, although it sometimes takes some time.

Like Darwinism, the end of these non-traditional theories is just a chapter in history.

According to this account in the old Jewish Encyclopedia, the pen-written Aramaic script didn't exist until the fourth or fifth century BCE. Hence it couldn't have been used, with understanding, on the tablets that Moshe got at Mt. Sinai.

Further, the article cites the fact that the Talmud itself (San. 21a) ascribes the introduction of the Aramaic (called Ashurit, Assyrian) script for writing the Torah to Ezra, seven or eight hundred years after Moshe. Hence it is very unlikely that the quotation from Avot 5 that I mentioned earlier, which says that God created 'the script, the stylus, the tablets' was referring specifically to the square script you are discussing. The Sages were quite aware that the original Hebrew script was quite different from the then-used square script, which we still use today.

In addition you say that the Kabbalistic sources are "ancient". But according to the Encyclopedia Judaica, scholarly opinion is pretty much unanimous that the Zohar, at least, was written in the middle ages, in the 13th century, and only pseudonymously ascribed to Shimon bar Yochai of the first century. And Isaac Luria, the great Kabbalist whom you refer to, lived in the 16th century.

Your views here thus seem to be contradicted by both the Talmud and modern scholarship.

Now you are of course perfectly entitled to accept Kabbalist explanations, and say that Moses de Leon, thought to be an author of the Zohar, was channeling Shimon bar Yochai or whatever. But I am surprised that you think people here will simply accept these views of Hebrew script without discussing alternative views. If you want to convince us, you will need to address the historical record.

Also, I must say your dreadful anti-feminist story doesn't help your case.

However, in any case I would be happy to read the Kabbalistic accounts of the Hebrew letters. Can you cite the references, so we can look them up?

gohebrew said:
"According to Jewish tradition (I guess that its recorded then un the Midrash), Moses transcribed the second set of the Ten Commandments in Heaven before he descended down a second time Mt. Sinai. The first set of the Ten Commandments were also transcribed and miraculously engraved in Heaven prior to Moses’ first descent down Mt. Sinai."

honorable israel:
this claim is a bit unclear to me.
if i go with your belief of the divinity of the torah (that meens - given by god), then how can midrash, mishna, and jewish traditions (which were obviously written by people) can be a religious fact?
wasn't the mishna an addition to the torah, written by people, and how can everything that is written by men be equal to the devine?
isn't believing to the mishna's man made legends more or equaly to the torah, a heresy? isn't that "worshiping the created rather than the Creator"?

It took this to mean that even G needs blueline proofs.

Yaron, traditionally in Judaism the Oral Torah also has sacred status, divinely inspired though written by people.

Just checking, I see that the story that God wrote the Torah first and used it as a blueprint to create the world is already in Midrash Rabba 1:1, so it is very old, probably second century or something.

However, traditionally any such "aggadah" or legend does not have to be taken literally and believed. Traditionally, only decisions on 'halacha' the legal decisions need to be followed.

The question of the Zohar, and Jewish Mysticism, I found this link which gives an orthodox, non -Chassidic take on Kabbala.

I am Reform, so I come to it with an even more critical eye, though with curiosity and openness to learning.

Let's clarify a basic truth unlining historical dating.

There two aspects to consider:
1) The ideas and concepts of a certain account, teaching, or belief;
2) The transciption of ideas and concepts etc.

These will likely have two dates of origin.

There are ideas and concepts of a certain account, teaching, or belief that preceded their transcription, which occurred many decades or centuries later.

When I refer to kabbalistic though, I refer not to the Zohar.

Similarly, Rabbi Judah the Prince is attributed to transcribing the Mishnah. This was first main attempt to transcribe many teachings of the Oral Law. Nobody suggests that the ideas and concepts recorded in the Mishnah are original. Nobody suggests that the ideas and concepts recorded in the Mishnah did not exist prior to this composition.

Jewish tradition suggests that the Oral Law existed at the time the Torah (the Written Law) was transmitted by G-d to Moses, as I mentioned earlier regarding Joseph reminding his father Jacob that he didn't forget the last lesson they learned together, and symbolized this by sending the specific gifts prior to their meeting.

Actually, the Oral Law existed even before this, as the Fifth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Shalom DovBer of Lubavitch, explains in his pamphlet "Kuntres Eitz Chayim" (recently translated in English by Kehot Publication Society www.kehotonline.com) that the Mishnah in a condensed version of older version of the Talmud (the names were obviously different, but the discussion are the same). The older Talmud is a oral explanation of an older Mishnah, a collection of laws about what to do in specific situations.

Eventhough Kumran was much later than this (the old Mishnah and old Talmud), among the Dead Sea Scrolls were found a somewhat different composition of practical laws, mimicking many of the decisions presented in the Mishnah and Talmud.

Although I am a Chassidic Jew and obviously Orthodox, I grew up with a Reform background.

Many (not all) educated Reform Jews are narrow-minded, and refuse to learn a different perspective than their own. In Orthodoxy, we learn that the more you learn, the greater you realize that you know so little, compared to the enormity of what there is to learn. Only when one accepts that there is much more to learn, can one learn more.

William, I found the story of the feminist at the Rabbi's Shabbat table not anti-feminist; maybe off-color. Clearly, it was not politically correct.

William,

> Further, the article cites the fact that the Talmud itself (San. 21a) ascribes the introduction of the Aramaic (called Ashurit, Assyrian) script for writing the Torah to Ezra, seven or eight hundred years after Moshe.

There is a difference of opinion what "Ashurit" refers to. It is not clear that block script is Ashurit. At that time, the composition of a Torah Scroll could be done in a form of Ancient Greek as well.

> Hence it is very unlikely that the quotation from Avot 5 that I mentioned earlier, which says that God created ’the script, the stylus, the tablets’

"the script" refers to the Hebrew transcribed by Moses on the second set of Tablets;
"the stylus" refers to the egraving by G-d Himself in the first Tablets;
"the tablets" refers to the very Tablets themselves.

> was referring specifically to the square script you are discussing.

I am unsure of this. I don't think if we date their being used much later, preclides them being used now. Until we are forced to conclude thusly, we can logically presume that this square script was used before hand.

> The Sages were quite aware that the original Hebrew script was quite different from the then-used square script, which we still use today.

There is a discussion that a certain script for everyday use, and another script was reserved for sacred texts. You say that the square script was used for everyday use.

Perhaps, the sacred script was that which we use today in our Torah Scrolls.

The difficulty with this view, is that mosy kabbalistic analysis that I've seen presents the traditional square script.

Rabbi Yitchok Ginsburgh of the Gal Einai Institute (www.inner.org) has a fascinating book on the kabbalistic significance of the Hebrew letters, called "Hebrew Letters". He portrays the Hebrew lettersusing the script we are familiar to see in the Torah Scroll.

Others do this as well in very recent books.

Perhaps, these letter forms are in deed ancient, but were not used in books from earlier generations, because these letter forms are not supposed to made into a typeface and used for mundane or profane purposes, due to the holiness of the "taggim", the decorative symbols attached to the tops of certain Hebrew letters.

There is a great significance to these "taggim" symbols, that Moses cried when he saw Rabbi Akiva give a lesson about their significance, which he failed to comprehend. Only after G-d consoled him, that Rabbi Akiva derived these teachings from the Torah which Moses taught, did Moses stop crying.

William

Step away from the ledge, now!!!!

Michael

Let's look at a different letter form design of the shapes of two Hebrew letters, the hei and the chet, now in the popular design we see in the Torah Scroll.

Here, too, the difference between their openings are clear.

The letter on the left, the chet, has only one opening, and open towards the bottom, indicating narrow-mindedness.

The letter on the right, the hei, has two openings, both on the bottom, like the chet, and also upward, near the top, indicating open-mindedness and the desire to accept G-dliness.

Let's look at another Hebrew word for falsehood or a lie, called "Sheker".

Sheker is made up of three letters, from right to left: 1) Shin, 2) Kuf, and 3) Reish.

These letters are for the most part "unsteady" and not solid in their design. Shin is the first unsteady letter, showing its falsehood at the beginning. Kuf is somewhat sturdy in its design, for every falsehood has some truth behind which to hide. Reish is a false-like letter, not having a solid foundation, like most lies with are clearly false at the end.

The opposite word in meaning to "Sheker" is the Hebrew word, "Emet". Emet means truth. Like Sheker, the Hebrew word, Emet, is also made of three Hebrew letters, 1) Aleph (the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet), 2) Mehm (the middle letter of the Hebrew alphabet), and 3) Taf (the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet).

Each letter of Emet is sturdy in its design, with a strong foundation, like something truthful and long lasting.

Ley's look carefully at the letters of the word Emet.

We see the very meaning of the word, Emet, truthfulness, in the order of the Hebrew letters.

Aleph is the first Hebrew letter, indicating that truth must show its truthfulness from the beginning.

Mehm is the middle Hebrew letter, indicating that truth must always be true, throughout everything we do.

Taf is the final Hebrew letter, indicating that just as things began with the truth, and were true through and through, they too must end up being true.

I of course do not know many other languages, but I think that these things are unique to Hebrew. Words are spelled out in a way to indicate their meaning.

Can anyone see something like this in another language.

It appears a super-human form of intelligence created the alphabet of Hebrew and its language, because these examples could not be invented by people agreeing among themselves that this word should mean this, and that word should mean that.

The I Ching might be one example of and elegant set of characters that hold inherent meaning based on the relationship of positive and negative space. Actually, there is a long list of magical alphabets that, to some degree, work this way. Few, I would guess, work as well for standard communication as Hebrew. You might have a look at some attempts over time and consider how well a highly motivated individual might do at creating characters that work in symbolic relation to each other.

I have a few very dear friends that spend an unreasonable amount of time creating just such esoteric sets of characters. Although I won’t comment on how successful they are as languages, they do seem to work well for a sort of journaling.

BTW, anytime two minds come together you might, technically, have a super-human intelligence.

Can you cite an example or two of how a man-made magical language, albeit with super-human like qualities, work this way, like the two Hebrew words above, Emet and Sheker?

I don't know a lot about I Ching.

Though attributing male and female forces to words is in deed a part of the Hebrew language. Here it is in a more down-to-earth sense, that certain words are masculine, and other words are feminine. In Jewish mysticism, this is more abstract. Concepts like Chochmah (Wisdom, or the initial stage of the thought process) is masculine, as men are more creative in their thinking; while Binah (Understanding, or the analytical stage of of the thought process) is feminine, as women are more pragmatic, seeing the practical implication of a matter.

Similarly, male and female aspects of creation play an important role in understanding its dynamics. For example, the flow of influence from G-d is manly, for obvious reasons, and the ability to receive and accept it is feminine - in the sexual sense.

I believe I Ching has this form of abstract analysis, but not in the down-to-earth sense, as above.

Aziz,

> Rewording: Does Hebrew have Synonyms?
BTW: Arabic virtually has not.

Actually, Hebrew has no synonyms.

Depending upon your definition of a synonym, words which have similar meanings, in Hebrew each word is unigue in meaning.

Although the word in Hebrew for a man has four types: such as, adam, eesh, ehnosh etc. Each word is special, both in its etymology and its significance.

Adam refers to his source, being created from adamah, earth, or aleph-dam, the mixture of a G-dly soul and blood, for a person is a combination of G-dly spirit and flesh & blood. The significance of this word in particular is to the intellect, as the term adam is in reference to man's loftiest state.

Eesh, on the other hand, refers to the emotions, and not to the intellect.

So, we see that even words which seem like synonyms are very different from each other.

I think that this is due to the make up of all Hebrew word roots, where the first letter dominates its meaning, combined by the second letter which modifies it, and the third letter further pinpoints its meaning.

Therefore, since words with similar meanings are spelled differently, it follows that the deeper meaning of each word is different from another. Hence, there can be no synonyms.

> as Lott offered his daughters to appease an angry mob.
I am also troubled by this. Why did he do it?
Are guests to more considered than one’s own children?
Did anyone here any explanations?

CrownPomegranate, As God's Messenger, Lott was a Reformer. So:
1. guiding people to the right path was more important to him than sacrificing his own daughters for that sake.
2. by doing that, he would leave no excuse as males+females share
what the angry mob were after.
Flowers for all Typophiles (Males+Females)

Aziz,

> 1. guiding people to the right path was more important to him than sacrificing his own daughters for that sake.

I think the underlying assumption of this statement is the main cause of the moral turmoil.

We assume that Lott was "sacrificing his own daughters".

If we review the context, and the nature of the society, we conclude clearly that Lott was not sacrificing anything.

The reason the western mind is perturbed by Lott's conduct is because we are judging this act on our terms, with our moral standards, and in the context of our society. Then, it is Lott "sacrificing his own daughters".

> I think the underlying assumption of this statement is the main cause of the moral turmoil.

Well, were the angry mob responsive to the Offer, then Lott's mission would have been half-accomplished. It was the first step in bringing them intelligently to apply reason. But since they declined to be drawn by his questioning offer, they were destroyed.

I see no difference between eastern and western minds, but to reform is to love first.

Aziz,

> I see no difference between eastern and western minds

In that time period of Abraham, all minds were backwards; eastern and western minds did not yet exist.

All people had a set of personal man-made stone gods. People did not think of 'love first'. It was something like the Beatle song: "I me mine".

Perhaps, Lott knew that his offer would be rejected, as those who shouted to sodomize the 'male' guests would not be satisfied with the young women. So, he knew that he could offer his daughters.

Btw, in those days, guests were often sodomized, tried on false charges, and murdered. As they say, it was worst than the wild west.

====

On a different track, I was acquainted with Arab friends when I lived in Jerusalem and attended Hebrew University.

Although they enjoyed both Western culture, such as its dress and music, and endeared aspects of Eastern culture, such as its food, music, and high regard for parents and guests, these highly educated Israeli Arabs rejected aspects of Islamic culture, such as hatred towards some Jews and Americans.

They argued that they could reject that which they feel is wrong among those Jews and Americans, but they are not enpowered to hate anyone, or to condone their murder.

How do you feel about this? Were they wrong or right?

Crown Pomegranate,

What is the significance of the three shins on top of the your name?

In general, the shin itself has three stems with a head on top of each one. Usually, they symbolize the first three fathers of the Jewish people, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In Jewish mystical literature, the three heads symbolize the initial three intellectual stages, called Hochmah, Binah, and Daat - conception (wisdom), analysis (understanding), and application (knowledge).

>.. these highly educated Israeli Arabs rejected aspects of Islamic culture..
> Were they wrong or right?

Elaborated here:
http://www.typophile.com/node/30209#comment-175230
Reluctantly with Flowers

Shalom GoHebrew,

You said:
[Is ’pomegranite’ an allusion to the Talmud’s praise of the rimon, pomegranite? The Talmud compares even the simplest most unlearned Jew to a pomegranite. The pomegranite is packed full of seeds like even the simplest most unlearned Jew is packed fulled of merits and good deeds, mitvahs.

Even if he or she knows very little about the 613 mitzvahs, or the details about the messiah, nevertheless G-d views him or her in a cherished way.

As we have seen throughout thousands of years of challenge, and even pain and death, at the hands of other religion’s zealots, these simple Jews stay true to their faith, and reject other avodah-zarahs.]

What you shared is beautiful. I remember the fist time I opened a pomegranate. I was stuck with the beauty of the hundereds of little jewels. Little riches. Humm.

Have you ever experienced a time or a season when G-d is teaching you or showing you something and it keeps coming to mind, showing up in the oddest ways and you are so compelled to search it out? That happened to me three years ago with the pomegranate. I hope you have time for this?

I was unemployed and needed a job. Having this new found free time on my hands I was creating patterns, and doing drawings that I made cards with. One was of a pomegranate with the seeds spilling out. A friend of mine said I should go into business.

When I listen to people talk I usually visually picture what is being said. I was at shul and our Rabbi was talking about G-d. In his talk awesome messages were developing in my minds eye. He was talking about the clouds when they are full and heavy and dark and very close to earth.

Well, it is like G-d is even closer to us at those times and it can be a very intimate time with HaShem, like we are being invited in to His chambers into the private rooms of His home. (The chambers reminded me of the pomegranate again.)

Our Rabbi also shared a dream where he was fishing and the fish were so large he was scared. (He doesn’t fish.)

So the things that stood out in my mind that day were: Water…Heavy…Big…fish……door….intimacy ….room.

When I got home ‘pomegranate’ would not leave my mind and had to find out more about the pomegranate and what it meant in a Hebraic way.

First I found out how it was spelled in Hebrew: Rimmon is what I came up with online.

Then I needed to know what each of the letters meant:
Reysh – a person – the head – the highest – Literal meaning: Head of man
Mem – Liquid – massive – chaos – Literal meaning: Water there are two mems
Noon – Activity – life – Literal meaning: fish dart through the water

I knew this finding was important and G-d was showing me something…..I didn’t know quite what but my heart had picked up the pace with anticipation and feeling near to HaShem. I knew it also had to do with what the Rabbi had spoke of???

So with further study on line I found this:

1. The pomegranate is given the unique distinction of being closely linked to the House of G-d – not once, but twice. The first time is when the Tabernacle is set up under Moses’ direction in the wilderness and secondly at the building of Solomon’s Temple

When Moses is given instructions in the wilderness on how to prepare the vestments of the High Priest, he is told to decorate them with pomegranates

Then, later on, when Solomon builds the first and what most Bible scholars consider to be the most magnificent house of the L-RD ever, the pomegranate once again plays a significant role. The two main pillars at the entrance to G-d’s house, which are named Yachin and Boaz, are heavily decorated with pomegranates.

Furthermore, whenever His blessings are upon Israel, they are always manifested by fruitfulness and abundance. Our G-d is a G-d of ever expanding life and the pomegranate is the symbol He has chosen to represent this.

2. And in Song of Songs Rabbah (6:11) it is written, "Children sitting in a row studying Torah are compared to the compact kernels of a pomegranate." Thus, the pomegranate seems like the perfect adornment for the hem of the High Priest's robe. It is as though the sound of the bells would be alerting the congregation to the blessings that the pomegranate signifies.

Since the Middle Ages, this popular pomegranate design continues to be used for ornaments covering the staves on which the Torah scroll is rolled. Usually made of silver, these ornaments are called rimmonim or pomegranates, even when they have different designs, such as towers with bells. These silver rimmonim connote remembrance as well as mitzvoth, Torah, study, beauty, and fertility.

Why Frames? Because they teach us to quest for what we need. Because they serve as a trigger for us to recall what is inside. The heart of the matter is that frames create borders that we must transform into open doors.

Frames cause us to remember, just as the gold-framed stones of remembrance, upon which were engraved the names of the sons of Israel, link us to recall our continuity to the children of Israel, our ancestors, and with a sacred remembrance of our one G-d. So, too, the silver forms of the pomegranate on top of the Torah rollers serve as a memorial.

TORAH! I LOVE TORAH. This is what G-d Himself, Bless His Holy Name, was showing me! I was so excited. It wasn’t about me getting a business or anything it was about His Torah!

See our shul had been praying for a Torah for about four months……we were very small and didn’t have the funds to buy one. BUT after reading about the pomegranate I KNEW we truly were going to get our Torah! G-d was showing me.

And guess what. Within one month we did get our Torah……some people that did not go to our shul died (two of them) and somehow money was given to us because of them!

Baruch HaShem!

I will always love the pomegranate and when the opportunity came for me to really have my own business I had to have the pomegranate for a name.

Crown is a play on words as this is what the pomegranate is for the Torah. In my business I try to always point to G-d in wording and product.

I hope you are still awake!?………..;o)

Thank you for letting me share with you. I hadn’t thought of these things for awhile and this has blessed me all over again.

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

Shalom GoHebrew,

You asked:

[What is the significance of the three shins on top of the your name?

In general, the shin itself has three stems with a head on top of each one. Usually, they symbolize the first three fathers of the Jewish people, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In Jewish mystical literature, the three heads symbolize the initial three intellectual stages, called Hochmah, Binah, and Daat - conception (wisdom), analysis (understanding), and application (knowledge).]

As you read in my last post…..sometimes things are important but I may not know why at the time.

See, just what you shared above gives even more light and significance to me. Thank you for that.

As you know the Shin on the mezuzah case reminds the people who they serve and who the one true G-d is. El Shaddi, G-d Almighty.

So for me I like the Shin because I think of Him and I hope it makes other think of him too.

And as a kind of visual play on words, so to speak, they look like crowns and that is the pomegranate.

Pretty much if something reminds me of G-d I like it and like to share it with others………..;o)

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

"What is an alef?

... Every aspect of the alef’s construction has been Divinely designed to teach us something. Contrast this with a child learning to read English for the first time. He is never taught why a capital “A” looks like a teepee and a small “a” looks like a soap bubble stuck to a wall."

Bless your religious hierarchy for making mystical the formation of the letter. I think though that, for lack of a better word, you are being ethnocentric.

Sadly most in the West are not interested in the genesis of the A or any other letter. It is purely a calligraphic yearning. But I have never heard the tee-pee or bubble junk. Is that something contrived by you? It is almost as if you are demeaning Latin forms to elevate your own.

As I teach children the origin of the Latin Alphabet, I explain to them it is the contortions of the East/West "ductus shift" that brought the Latin A from a "Phonecian oxen" (aleph [a pictogram]) to a Latin phonogram. There is a reason for its shape, form and stance! As substantial and significant as yours.

There are those who maintain the Latin was divinely inspired. Cut away the bottom half of the Trajan caps and find any letter that is duplicated in its top form. O and Q maybe, but put them in word text and it is obvious which they are. Minute differences differentiate letterforms. Even now with the J incorporated it has a longer serif on the left that the I, the L longer on the right... etc. Pretty G-dly in my estimation. Is that not divinity shining through?

Michael

Michael,

On one hand, seemingly you objected to the condescending tone of the post with your "ethnocentric" observation, but judging from your interest, your overall response, and profile (your quote in particular), you seem attracted to the notion that the shape of letters and their meanings are related to the ways they are used in words. This is an idea unique to Hebrew, as far as I know.

> I've never heard the tee-pee or bubble junk. Is that something contrived by you? It is almost as if you are demeaning Latin forms to elevate your own.

Actually, I never heard them either before I read them from the book, "Letters of Light", by Rabbi Aaron Raskin, posted on the Internet at http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-of-light/02.htm.

Statements about the origins and outstanding significance of the Hebrew language and its letters appear to demean Latin and other forms just to elevate the status of Hebrew. This ia shallow observation, ignoring the greater perception to behold.

Throughout history, animosity towards the Jewish people and our status as the "Chosen People" has been misconstrued for arrogance, condescendence, and an attempt to demean other peoples.

The Talmud even observes that "hatred was created at Mt. Sinai". This is a play on words between the Hebrew word for hatred, "seen'nah", and between the name of the mountain where the Torah teachings were given by G-d to the Jewish people, Sinai.

The basis of those teachings are that the role of the Jews is different than those of other peoples. The Jews are a "chosen people". Unlike the way that most people misconceive, the purpose of this title is not to degrade other non-Jewish people. Rather, the purpose is to emphasize the responsibility of Jewish people who were chosen to follow the 613 directives or mitzvahs of the Torah. Other non-Jewish peoples must follow the seven Noahide laws.

So, too, here. By stating the Divine origins of the Hebrew language and significance of its letters, the listener can either focus his or her attention positively or negatively.

Saying this is ethnocentric, arrogant, condescending, and demeaning, is negative. It misses the more important point.

Instead, one should focus upon the ideas behind what's being said, and learn from them.

Regarding the Aleph and A, the link to the form of the ox is a popular notion. Jewish tradition rejects this being the source for the Aleph. Instead, we learn that the Aleph like all other Hebrew letters is actually linked to the Yuhd, the tenth letter, as explain in that blog.

Israel

I will not call him a Rabbi, Aaron Raskin, because I think he has written something divisive!

Shallow observation and an animous toward the Jew is ludicrous. You can ask William about our conversations about my upbringing.

I will be back, but for now I am celebrating my son's 10th birthday.

Michael

> Reysh – a person – the head – the highest – Literal meaning: Head of man

Reysh is the name of the twentieth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Its gematria or numerical equivalent is 200. There are 22 letters (chaf-beit ohti'yot), plus 4 final letter forms. There are also 4 more letters which have "dotted" forms, indicating a different pronounciation. In addition, the 21st letter has a left-dotted and right-dotted form.

Reysh also alludes to the Hebrew word for head, "rosh". The rosh or head is the highest part of the human body, housing the loftiest part, the brain.

Rosh is also used in Hebrew to describe the beginning of the year, known as the High Holy Days of Rosh Hashana, the "head of the year" (literally).

For this reason, a great significance is attributed to the reysh, as Crown Pomegranate demonstrates.

Different designs of the reysh from various different Hebrew fonts.

> Mem – Liquid – massive – chaos – Literal meaning: Water there are two mems

(Questions: how is mem related to massive and chaos?)

This is a novel interpretation of the Hebrew letter, mem, the thirteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Its gematria or numerical equivalent is 40.

Mem is suggestive of the Hebrew word for water, mayim, for the name of this letter, mem, has two letters, just like mayim.

This also alludes to the two kinds of water which existing when the world was created, as described briefly in the book of Genesis.

When the 'fimament' was created in the sky, the waters were separated into two parts, the upper waters above the firmament, and the lower waters below the firmament. Therefore, the word in Hebrew for waters, mayim, has two mems.

Much is discussed in Jewish mystical writings about this topic of the significance of the two mems and the relationship between the upper and lower waters.

First, there was only a single body of water, for the waters were separated later by the creation and placement in the sky of the fimament (whatever that is). As a result, the lower waters cried many tears after becoming apart from the upper waters.

Our ancient Jewish sages explain this is an analogy of a huband and a wife. They were originally a single entity, and later separated into two different bodies. Then, at the time of their wedding, they are reunited admidst great happiness, celebration, and dancing. So, too, this reoccurs each time during intimacy.

Three kinds of the letter mem, from 3 different popular Hebrew fonts.

Isn't the shape of the mem unusual? It is unlike the shapes of the other Hebrew letters?

Michael,

> for now I am celebrating my son’s 10th birthday.

Mazal tov! Sh'nat Hatzlachah.

The Chassidic custom is to extend good wishes at the news of a birthday with the blessing of: "Sh'nat Hatzlachah!" This means: "A year of success".

10 is a very special number.

Many things come in ten. There are Ten Commantments which G-d articulated at Mt. Sinai. There are the Ten Utterances which G-d spoke at the creation of the world. See the Talmud's Chapters of our Fathers, 5:1-6, for more examples.

In Jewish mystical writings, all Hebrew letters originate from the yud, the tenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. There are ten powers of the soul. The Talmud reports that the study of Mishnah begins at the age of ten.

The letter yud, which equals ten in gematria, from the Hebrew font called, Torah Scipt, based upon the traditional script found in the Torah scroll.

Michael,

Why don't you post samples of the two typeface designs that you created and names after your children?

If wishes were real, I would like to sit and read everything you know about the Hebrew letters. Your knowledge is extensive!

I find it fascinating and you know, I think the letters are elevated to a higher stature. How could a human being begin to care about letters? I never did before until I was introduced to the Hebrew letters.

The Hebrew letters are of G-d and I think they are like love letters to be read over and over again.

When I am immersed in them I find spirit elevated and I feel closer to G-d.

I have never felt that with the alpha bet. Pretty as Chinese writing is I still am not drawn to the letters like the Hebrew.

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

Michael,

> I will not call him a Rabbi, Aaron Raskin, because I think he has written something divisive!

A rabbi simply means 'my teacher'. If you learn something from everyone, then everyone is your teacher. For this reason, King David even called his bitter enemies, "rabbi" (Avot).

So, peace-making is not criteria to call a person, "rabbi". No one called Henry Kissinger when he tried to broker peach.

Similarly, being divisive is not criteria for annulling a person from being called "rabbi". For example, many people hold Jesus as a 'rabbi', as he learned in yeshiva and was a teacher to the masses. But his followers have murdered millions of Jewish people in his name in the past 2,000 years. Isn't this an extreme of being divisive?

R. A. Raskin killed no one with his words about the aleph. He graduated from a yeshiva with smicha, rabbinic ordination. In today's terminology, this is a "rabbi", to all opinions.

It's unlikely that Jesus had smicha.

I just got back. Thought about slogging through this with you for hours and it is not worth it.

Go to MyFonts. They are there. Pouty, Katytude, Frenzy, Pooper Black, Sweepy etc., if you are so doubtful.
Beside the point. You overlooked my points, accused me of things that are not true and once again came across as better than thou by misconstruing to your advantage and quoting kooks!

I sat quietly in the dining room for years listening to my father and both his Reform and Orthodox friends banter. Not once did I ever hear 1/1000th of the arrogance I read in your words.

You talk over instead of to or with so don't bother because I won't.

Michael

Michael,

> Shallow observation and an animous toward the Jew is ludicrous. You can ask William about our conversations about my upbringing.

You seem to allude to something - but I am unclear what it is.

What does upbriging have to with perception?

There is a saying about how a person can not see beyond the bulk of the trees in the forest.

I was trying to say that there is a valuable lesson in the shapes of the Hebrew letters, or in what G-d was trying to show everyone by singling out the Jewish people, as I compared the two earlier.

Instead, some people focus on whether pointing how the Hebrew letters are sacred, or Jews are the 'chosen people', is being devisive or promoting jealously and hatred.

I consider this shallow and superficial. No offense.

I see from your choice of words, the expressions of your ideas, that you are deeper and more intelligent than that.

Instead of focusing upon how this view of the significance of the Hebrew letters, you are focusing how this implies a detraction of Latin letters. You are missing the point.

William

> William [can explain] about our conversations about [Michael's] upbringing

What can you tell me?

William

> William [can explain] about our conversations about [Michael's] upbringing

What can you tell me?

I explained more than enough in the last post.

Leave it Israel. I said I was done!

Michael

With all due respect to my Jewish brothers -- Abraham, 'our father in faith' -- a great many peoples have ascribed divine origins to their writing systems. I take this as evidence of the extraordinary, culture-changing nature of writing, which has seemed miraculous to so many. Recently, I had a good chuckle over a book that proposed to reveal the mystic significance of the English alphabet.

Note that not all the cultures who ascribed divine origin to writing did so unambivalently. The ancient Egyptians believed writing was an invention of the ibis-headed god Thoth, who is always depicted as a scribe. When he presented his invention as a gift to King Thutmose, the ruler responded that writing would encourage people to be forgetful because they would write stuff down instead of exercising their memories. Socrates relates this story in Plato's Phaedrus, in which he goes on to liken the carefully prepared speeches of the Sophists to written texts and contrasts these with dialogue.

[PS. Greek mythology associates the pomegranate with the fruit that Persephone ate in the underworld, which obliged her there to spend a third of each year, hence winter.]

Hi John,

Funny meeting you here... :)

> a great many peoples have ascribed divine origins to their writing systems

It is not logical to conclude that since this claim is untruthful elsewhere, it must also be untruthful here.

Let me illustrate my point with the following episode, as a logical proof to my argument, and even more.

The Roman elite enjoyed engaging the wise Jewish sages, relates the Talmud, in dialogues to prove their points of view.

Later, the early Catholic priests, write the early redactors of Jewish law, known as the Rishonim, that Christianity must be the true religion, and Judaism should be rejected, because most human beings accept the teachings of Jesus, and relatively very few accept the teachings of Torah.

They argued that even the Torah concludes that the majority rules. Hence, the teachings of Jesus are true, and the teachings of Torah are false.

Similarly, you argue (or 'chuckle') that Hebrew can not have divine orgins, because many other scripts claimed divinity and were proven non-holy. Hence, Hebrew too can not be holy. After all, majority rules.

The Rishonim answered this simply. See the sun, moon, and sky. They are in the heavens. If you, and most of the people in the world claim that the sun, moon, and sky, are not in the heavens; they are on the earth below, then the Torah concludes the majority doesn't rule. Because I see the truth.

So, too, a little over 3,200 years ago, we Jews saw G-d give us the teachings of Torah. We heard thunderous His voice. It was an experience that we relive every year.

====

Once, Maimonides was asked how he could know for certain that G-d created the world. The person asked, and left the return, only to return in a short time.

In the meanwhile, Maimonides took a nearby quill, ink well, and piece of parchment, and drew a beatiful scene. He then tipped the ink well on its side, and placed the quill beside it. The person returned.

The person asked: "Who made the beautiful picture? Was it you?"

Maimonides answered, "Oh, the ink-well must have fell over, and created it by accident."

"Nonsense," said the peson, "things don't happen by chance."

"Ah, hah," exclaimed Maimonides. "So, too, it is with this beautiful world that we live in. It wasn't created by chance."

I believe," answered Maimonides, "that G-d created the world, and its creation did not happen by chance."

===

The same thing here, John. It is G-d, creator of heaven and earth, who gives us the teachings of Torah each year, it is He that taught us Hebrew. Not some ox, golden cow, or descendants of apes... :)

Michael,

You have to realize that your post preceded my posts, so I was unaware of your desire to be done etc.

You sounded kinda (!) nasty and upset at me.

Was it something that I said. People think that I'm a nice guy.

It must be my breath? :)

typeerror,

> You overlooked my points...

Which points?

> accused me of things that are not true...

Like what?

> came across as better than thou

Who, me?

> by misconstruing to your advantage and quoting kooks

Who are the "kooks"?

.. then the Torah concludes the majority doesn’t rule.

Anti-Democracy?!

Aziz,

Actually, the Torahs teachings are not anti-democratic. Rather, democracy does not exist in the teachings of Torah.

The political system espoused by the Torah is theocratic, like in Islam. Democracy is a relatively recent invention.

The act of voting, and electing leadership by votings was practiced a long time before democracy was popularized by the Western nations.

I think that is the main reason that democracy has failed to be accepted in the Eastern nations. It's really a poor PR campaign. If the Eastern mind didn't associate democracy with Western values and corruption, but rather as the will of Allah, then democracy would be embraced like a long lost brother, and kissed on both cheeks.

Christians only turn the other cheek, but Muslims kiss both of them. :)

> but rather as the will of Allah, then democracy would be embraced like a long lost brother, ... and Muslims kiss both of them. :)

Gohebrew, Islam does not allow Democracy as Allah prohibits it in many places (verses) in the Glorious Quran.
_____________________1____________________
* Say," He is able to send upon you a punishment from above you or from under your feet, or confound you as (hostile) factions, and make you taste one another violence." Look, how We paraphrase the signs variously so that they may understand!
Chapter_06/Verse_65
And that's what the Iraqis are tasting under US occupation.
_____________________2____________________
* Indeed this community of yours is one community, and I am your Lord, so be wary of Me. But they fragmented their religion among themselves, each party exulting in what it had *
Chapter_23/Verses_51+52
_____________________3____________________
* Indeed Pharaoh tyrannized over the land, reducing its people to factions, abasing one group of them, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women. Indeed He was one of the agents of corruption*
Chapter_28/Verse_4
Applicable to Bush's wrongdoings in Iraq and elsewhere.
_____________________4____________________
* Indeed those who split up their religion and became sects, you will not have anything to do with them. Their matter rests only with Allah; then He will inform them concerning what they used to do*
Chapter_30/Verse_31+32
Applicable to all Islamic Parties everywhere with exception!
_____________________5____________________
.. and do not be among the polytheists. Of those who split up their religion and became sects: each faction exulting in what it possessed.
Chapter_30/Verses_52+53
____________________________________________________
Or Gohebrew has better interpretation to the Glorious Quran?!

This argument is guaranteed to go nowhere, because if different folks take different, contradictory texts--Jewish, Christian, and Islamic--as the authoritative answer, then each ends with their own belief, end of story.

Aziz, there is no direct reference to democracy in the portions you quote, and I know other Muslims think that democracy is compatible with the Quran. And there are many Muslim countries explicitly devoted to ideals of democracy. And Googling, here is one such discussion of the issue: www.4islamicschools.org/images/Democracy%20in%20Islam%20Final-Yasmeen%20...

As I indicated earlier, even within Jewish tradition, I think that claim that the letter shapes of the current Hebrew script is sacred is problematic. The statement in the Mishna (Pirkei Avot, chapter 5) is that God made the stylus, the script, and the tablets (of the Ten Commandments). It does not say what script, and I believe the sages of the Talmud somewhere discuss that the script on the tablets would not have been the current square, pen written script. The sages were well aware that it was not the original Hebrew script, and the tablets may well have been inscribed with an Egyptian script, which Moses and other Israelites who were literate would have understood at that time.

The point of the Talmud 'word play' discussions is to make a moral or theological point, and not that the form of the script is sacred. The message that the text is giving is what is supposed to be sacred, not the form of the script itself.

The midrashim on the letter shapes that Israel cites are I believe relatively late. One of the links given by Israel quotes the founder of Chabad Chassidism, which Israel is a follower of. And he is late 18th century. The Zohar, the basic Jewish mystical work, is 13th century. These are recent inventions, as Jewish history goes, being 2000 or more years after Moses.

Also, in the view of almost all scholars, the Zohar is pseudepigrapha, meaning it is falsely attributed to someone else, in this case a sage who lived a thousand years before it was written. For a rationalist like myself, this seriously undermines its credibility.

I want to learn from the mystical tradition, but I take it with a huge amount of salt, because as an historian of ideas, I know that it is a mish-mash of eclectic sources. A primary source of the ideas about God in the Zohar is Plotinus, the Neo-Platonic Greek philosopher. He, not the Torah, is the source of ideas about 'emanations' of God creating the world. Isaac Luria, in what is the most original idea in Jewish mysticism that I know about, reversed this and said that God created the world by withdrawing from part of it.

This is all interesting, but much of Kabbala to me is capricious and even heretical by older standards in Judaism. And there are many others who are of the same opinion.

Aziz,

Ignoring wise old William's advice, I engage in minor debate with you. Please do not take any offense, as I am speaking both civily and highly respectfully. As you know, the Quran directs Muslims to heed Torah-practicing Jews and give them unprecedented respect and tolerance, lest Allah's wrath be invoked upon them.

Not a single passage that you quoted from the Quran support your rejection of certain aspects of democracy. Exclamation mark.

You are going on a tangent, citing Islam's disapproval of headenistic societies and their peoples.

I am refering not to a hedonistic society, nor to a immoral people, for Orthodox Judaism too disapproves of them, and rejects them. But Orthodox Judaism also rejects "living by the sword" and promotes tolerance. This is cultural tolerance in the sense that we believe our faith is superior and will conquer not by physical force or the threat of murderous harm, but by the "word of G-d" and living in accord with G-d's directives, to set a good and living example for others to keep. As they say, "yad hachassidim al haelyona".

Rather, I am refering to the just and righteous aspects of democracy, which is based in the teachings of Torah. Such as the respect and value for human life, the superiority of women over men (the Western mind only tries to offer women equality), the importance and empowerment of voting etc.

These are values (except for the notion that women are superior to men) which are embraced by Islam.

In conclusion, the Quran which you quote does not contradict my supposition that Allah wants us to be somewhat democratic.

> Aziz, there is no direct reference to democracy in the portions you quote,

Very interesting, non-Muslim + no-Arab teaches me my Mother tongue + my Religion??!!

.. and I know other Muslims think that democracy is compatible with the Quran.

Well, those are the Muslims trained by CIA. Just to name few:
1. Siniora: PM of Lebanon
2. Mohammed Abbas: PLO RRRRRevolutionary Leader.
3. Noori Maliki: PM of Iraq + Head of Islamic Da3wa Party

William! please, I do not like to start another debate:
http://www.typophile.com/node/30209#comment-175230

William,

> ... The statement in the Mishna (Pirkei Avot, chapter 5) is that God made the stylus, the script, and the tablets (of the Ten Commandments)...

You are such an astute scholar, but sadly you lack knowledge of basic Hebrew.

The phrase in Pirkei Avot refers not to any style of Hebrew letter forms. A more recent square letter or an older script in the Torah scroll. Rather, these words refer to the engraved writing in the Second Tablets by Moses, and the miraculous carved out letter forms by G-d Himself in the First later broken Tablets.

Your interpretation is based simply upon the words in English, not in the original Hebrew, nor is it enlightened by the words of the sages of Israel which were transcribed a long, long time ago.

Please do not take offense by the following comparision.

The Christians have long explained that the concept of immaculate conception, that Mary was a virgin, is actually based on a word from the Bible.

They argue that the Hebrew word for a young girl actually means a "virgin". But the Hebrew word for a virgin is not this word, but a different word.

This centuries old error is based upon a mistranslation, and is a foundational concept in Catholicism. What a mistake?

[I won't say what the Talmud says about Mary. :) ]

So, William, we see that it is going down a very trecherous path to base one's thoughts and beliefs upon faulty translations.

Aziz,

> Very interesting, non-Muslim + no-Arab teaches me my Language + Religion??!!

Our Torah teaches us that one can find wisdom everywhere. So, don't reject it.

The Talmud relates a similar instruction, which the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe suggests has a profound and universal lesson.

"ho is wise? One who is able to learn something from everybody."

The Rebbe explains, "Since G-d made everybody, then everybody must have a certain quality lacking in the other people.

"Hence, every person has something unique to teach the other person. In fact, one is less complete until he or she receives that special quality or teaching.

"Therefore, who is really wise? It is the person who realizes that he or she has everything to gain by receiving from another."

William,

> The sages were well aware that it was not the original Hebrew script, and the tablets may well have been inscribed with an Egyptian script, which Moses and other Israelites who were literate would have understood at that time.

Come on. Who says this? Did you make it up?

First, the original Tablets which Moses shattered were carved out miraculously in stone. Do you want is written about the final mehm, which is shaped like a square and has a center part hanging in the air.

You'll say, quoting Michael, that there wasn't an aleph in the first letter of the First Commantment, it was a picture of an ox!

Boy, these Reform Jews get more and more Christian and secular in their thinking as time goes on. :)

Aziz,

> Well, those are the Muslims trained by CIA.
Just to name few:
1. Siniora: PM of Lebanon
2. Mohammed Abbas: PLO RRRRRevolutionary Leader.
3. Noori Maliki: PM of Iraq + Head of Islamic Da3wa Party

These are political leaders.

I'm am speaking about democratic concepts in Islam. You are speaking about politics.

Democrats, Republicans. Liberals, Conservatives. Obama, McCain. Chocolate, Vanilla. Protestain, Catholic.

Arafat, Bin Laden. Saddam Hussein, Hussein Obama.

You know, true type designers and enthusiasts don't get caught up in politics.

I guarantee that after Nassaralah dies from his own missile landing on his head and the heads of his family, an aleph will remain an aleph, the American flag will still wave in the air, and the sun will set in the west.

Politics is just politics, and some things will last forever.

William,

> The message that the text is giving is what is supposed to be sacred, not the form of the script itself.

This is like what Jesus said when he was caught eating something not kosher: "It's not important what goes in your mouth, rather it's more important what goes out of your mouth."

Boy, and people made a religion around this guy!?

Your statement is not consistent with the teachings of forming Hebrew script in composing a Sefer Torah scroll, Tefillin, or a Mezuzah.

Unbelieveable statements are made in the form of halachahs, rules governing how to correctly scribe a Sefer Torah scroll, Tefillin, or a Mezuzah.

Maimonides even goes to great length in his Mishnah Torah code of Jewish Laws to explain that not only the formation of Hebrew characters must be precisely executed, but the very line spacing, and letter and word spacing must adhere to certain limitations, which today we would say is excellent and effective typography and typesetting.

Hence, both things are important: the message and the way the message is presented.

Similarly, Jesus the Jew should realize that both what you consume, and what you speak, is governed by the teachings of Torah.

Likewise, many Reform Jews mistakenly think that "they can have their cake", but they can't "eat it too". They like moral lessons of their religion, realizing that it is truly great, but err and consume a life of treif falsehood - they don't "eat it too".

My name did not belong in that post. Once again you are contriving things. Stand tall in your congregation as a forthright man and not a provocateur.

I told you to drop it!

Michael

the-error,

> My name did not belong in that post

Which post? The one about the depiction of an aleph as a ox? That wasn't derogatory.

> a provocateur

I think that you suffer from paranoia. See a doctor.

> I told you to drop it!

Don't engage me in conversation then, if you want to just fade from the scene.

Do you know Tim Reid Conway? He lives near you.

Don't you know, Michael, that frum Jews have to get the last word in?

>You are such an astute scholar, but sadly you lack knowledge of basic Hebrew.

>The phrase in Pirkei Avot refers not to any style of Hebrew letter forms.

Sadly, you can't take the trouble to read what I wrote. And your rudeness is breathtaking. I just take comfort that here you belittle everyone who disagrees with you; it's not just me.

My point was exactly that Avot doesn't refer to any specific letter forms, Hebrew or otherwise. What you are accusing me of being ignorant of is exactly the point I was trying to make.

On the translation. The phrase in Avot is "haketav, vehamikhtav (or vehamachtav--the original has no nikud), vehaluchot". The classic translation of Hertz has it, "the writing on the tables, the instrument of writing, and the tables of stone." My translation is "the script, the stylus, the tablets." According to Alcalay, "script" is one translation of "ketav". For example, "ketav rashi" is "rashi script". If my translation is a mistake I would like to correct it, but I first have to hear why it is wrong. It has been checked by one who knows Mishnaic Hebrew very well. Perhaps David would have a view.

As to the Rabbis being aware that the square script was not likely to be engraved on the Tablets of the Ten Commandments, I see a reference to a discussion where they considered that they may have been written in ancient Hebrew script. This is in the Jerusalem Talmud: Meg. 1:11, 71c. And as I said the rabbis also do refer to current square Hebrew script as 'assyrian' or 'chaldean', i.e. aramaic.

As you will see by looking at the wikipedia article on the Hebrew alphabet the shape of the original Hebrew script--Paleo Hebrew--is very different. For example the aleph does not have the shape you refer to above, and so the midrash you give would not apply.

So the point is that the your midrashim do not apply to what was written on the Tablets of the Ten Commandments. Clear?

As to the possibility that even other dialects than Hebrew may have been written on the Ten Commandment, I don't remember where I read that, but I did. I would track it down, but my point is made anyway, and I hope I can resist the temptation to post in the future, because your rudeness makes it no fun.

I'm on the way to BIG5 to buy a compass.... I'm lost here.

> According to Alcalay, “script” is one translation of “ketav”.

Yes, you're right Bill. script is ketav (and according to Oxford dictionary -- english-hebrew; the meridian dictionary)

Those are political leaders.
I’m am speaking about democratic concepts in Islam.
You are speaking about politics.

GoHebrew,
Just for you information: Politics + Religion are inseparable in Islam.
That's emphasized throughout the Glorious Quran.
Interestingly, the end of 3 successive verses in Chaper5 of the Glorious Quran read:
__________________________
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down, it is they who are the faithless.44
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down, it is they who are the wrongdoers.45
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down, it is they who are the transgressors.47
__________________________
Which of the political leaders you mentioned did or does judge by what Allah has sent down?!

Aziz,

> Just for you information: Politics + Religion are inseparable in Islam.

In second consideration, I think they are inseparable everywhere.

It's not the tolerance level which is different, I believe strategic restraint is the ultimate "weapon", and much more effective in the long run than a short term violent victory.

The distiction which troubles me about validating the role of politics for serving a role in religion is the stature of true leadership.

The individuals which you cite are mainly power lords in the worst definition of politics, and true leaders. In that poor sense politics is really just an antithesis of the ideals of religion or truth.

True leaders, on the other hand, are very rare, and really are much higher than politics.

So, in the end, I must agree in part with you.

Aziz, of course I am just reading the English of what you quoted, which does not mention democracy. And if you google Islam and Democracy, you will find articles by Muslims arguing that they are compatible. I am not saying I know whether they are are aren't; I'm just saying that there is a diversity of opinion among Muslims.

Your list of Muslim leaders you don't like ignores those Muslim countries outside the Arab world who support democracy, at least in principle, such as Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia.Are they all run by the CIA?

"the-error"

So now Israel you have reduced this to name calling... "O pious one"?

Michael

Mee-kah-kahl,

You appear to be very upset at me. If I change my picture to a middle-aged hippy with earings in my cheek, would you still call me 'pious'.

It sounds like such a Catholic title. Yes, I am really 'Pope Israel the Pious IV'.

In Chassidism, we think of ourselves as a putz (a yiddish term for a fart). Humility goes a long way...to the point that Moses is worried about losing his job as the world's most humble.

I know that this might be an un=American attitude, where each person thinks that he or she is number one. But this is an election year, and if you vote Republican, the Religious Right will forgive you for thinking that you are number two.

Btw, like the term and acronym, Maccabee ("Who is like You among the other gods, G-d"), Michael means "who is like G-d?. Michael is the name of the kind angel.

Your script designs show an aspect of benevolence.

Aziz,

Just because I admit that your equation of politic and religions is accurate in part, does not imply similar amittance regarding my belief equating some of the principles of democracy to the goals of Islam.

Many self-proclaimed Quran experts justify non-Islamic practices which degrade the greatness of Allah (Heaven forfend) with false interpretations of verses of the Quran.

In the end, they will suffer from Alah's wrath.

Here is logic you can not dispute.

If we can establish a correlation between certain aspects of democracy to the truthful teachings of Torah, and the Quran affirms that everything from the prophecy of Moses is true (ie. the truthful teachings of Torah), then it follows logically that these certain aspects of democracy are in deed also affirmed by the Quran.

William,

> Sadly, you can’t take the trouble to read what I wrote.

Apparently, both of us are quilty of flip-flopping, changing horses in mid-stream, or whatever you wanna call it.

Your explanation of the mishna changed from your original citing to your current explanation, based upon the Alcalay dictionary.

My explanation of the type of celestrial lettering also changed with my gaining more knowledge.

Actually, I never suggested that the shapes of letters in Heaven were similar to our block lettering, nor did I suggest the Ten Commantments had such lettering.

Even my graphic examples changed from the square letter, the style used in most Jewish books, to the Torah scroll style of lettering a long time ago.

Rather, the design of the square letters is actually very old, and not modern as you suggest.

William, Democracy means 2 or more sects = parties = factions
Mentioned in the above-mentioned verses or not?

In US, Democracy means 2 : Republican <> Democratic
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/obama

In Iraq, Democracy means hundreds:
Islamic Democratic party
Democratic Islamic Party
Islamic Da3wa party of PM Noori Maliki
Islamic Da3wa movement
...
...
...
multiplied by Kurd, Arab, Suni, Shiite +++

Whereas in the Glorious Quran, Muslims are commanded:
_________________________________________________________________________
Hold fast, all together, to Allah's cord, and do not be divided into sects.
And remember Allah's blessing upon you when you were enemies,
then He brought your hearts together, so you became brothers with His blessing.
And you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, whereat He saved you from it.
Thus does Allah clarify His signs for you so that you may be guided.3:103

There has to be a nation among you summoning to the good,
bidding what is right, and forbidding what is wrong.
It is they who are the felicitous.3:104

Do not be like those who became divided into sects and differed after manifest signs had come to them.
For such there will be a great punishment. 3:105

Indeed the requital of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and try to cause corruption on the earth, is that they shall be slain or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides or be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter there is a great punishment for them. 5:33
________________________________________________________

> Are they all run by the CIA?

Yes, directly or indirectly. More:
http://typophile.com/node/29708#comment-171569

In my view, a certain style letter G-d uses above (although it is left-to-right), and perhaps the same lettering He used in the first set of Ten Commandments.

The source material does not get into the particular style, as that is not the topic of the conversation. But I am certain, it can be derived from a few other sources.

I am unsure what it is at this time.

The Talmud does discuss the style of lettering in a Sefer Torah scroll, and that it could only be either of two kinds: the ornate Hebrew design that we use, or an ornate old Greek design, no longer used or perhaps not even known.

Aziz,

> In US, Democracy means 2 : Republican <> Democratic
> In Iraq, Democracy means hundreds:
> "Hold fast, all together, to Allah’s cord,
and do not be divided into sects." - Quran

Your definition of democracy is purely political, or "being divided into sects".

My defnition is conceptual and not political.

"Being divided unto sects" is not pure democracy. Rather, pure democracy promotes the value of the individual human being.

Not each one is equal and has no special value, and that the true value is the group... like in Socialism, Communism, or even Nationalism.

What Nasrallah, or Bin Laden, try to achieve is to convince the Muslim Arab people into thinking that the glory belongs to the Arab people of Islam by destroying all who behave different that dictated in Islam by Quran.

This is false.

Islam, as depicted by Quran, seeks to glorify only Allah. We are here for a purpose, to give All glory.

This definition shows us that Nasrallah or Bin Laden are wrong, and totally off target.

Since democrcy emphasizes the importance of the individual to fulfill his or her purpose, then this is in tune with the true goals of Islam, as explicitly taught in Quran, to glorify only Allah.

What you dislike and reject in the politics and culture of those who embrace democracy is not the democracy but the politics and culture.

GoHebrew, CIA-created Bin Laden is the enemy of Nasrallah.
Bin Laden is a terrorist created+backed and exaggerated by war-mongers.
Nasrallah is peace for peace-loving Muslims+non-Muslims
but hell for Muslims+non-Muslims who support(ed) Bin Laden.
Nasrallah is translating the Quran into actions.

William,

> My translation is “the script, the stylus, the tablets.” According to Alcalay, “script” is one translation of “ketav”. For example, “ketav rashi” is “rashi script”. If my translation is a mistake I would like to correct it, but I first have to hear why it is wrong.

Don't take this wrong, like in other times in the past.

Jewish people understand the teachings of the Torah, be it Tanach, Talmud, Jewish mysticism, or the words of Chazal (our sages obm) differently than the goyim.

They look only at the meaning of the words.

We consider the meaning of the words, search for explanations, and understand it in accord with the same way our rabbis understood it.

Sometimes, you do this too, as you see that this is the true path that leads to true understanding.

This mishnah are not just a collection of words, which you could simply look up in a dictionary or two, or ask a few friends to affirm whether you understood the words accurately.

Every mishnah teaches us both a series of facts and an important lesson. The words are merely the body, but the true meaning is both the body and the soul, the explanations of our sages, the understanding of our rabbis, and the lesson to apply in our life.

Your dictionaries only suggest the translation of the terms, but do not shares the sage's explanations, nor the rabbi's understanding, nor the practical lesson.

William,

> I just take comfort that here you belittle everyone who disagrees with you; it’s not just me.

I actually think very highly of you, both intellectually and as a mencsh (which I define in terms of behavior and attitude).

I see that you seek to carefully research each topic before you accept it, and appreciate the wisdom and morality contained in Jewish teachings.

These are important qualities to emulate.

It is the Hebrew month of Elul, the last month of the year and time for teshuva.

When we forgive others who hurt us, even if they do not deserve this, and wish them everything good, G-d too forgives us, even if we do not deserve this, and blesses us with everything good.

So, do forgive me if I have hurt you, for this is not my desire at all.

Aziz,

> Nasrallah is peace for peace-loving Muslims+non-Muslims
... Nasrallah is translating the Quran into actions.

You believe that?!? Boy, Nasrallah has done a good job fooling you. I thought that you were smart, educated, cultured etc. etc., and you espouse his acts of mass destruction?

A quarter million people were displaced, the dead were widespread, and south Lebanon was nearly leveled, all because of his utter foolishness - and you call this "translating the Quran into actions"?!?

Nasrallah has done a good job making a fool out of you, and turning you away from the ways of Allah, as described in the Quran.

After the magots eat his brains in his limb-less body in the grave, will you also say this foolishness?

The Meaning of Aleph
====================

The seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe explains that the alef has three different meanings.

One is aluf, which means a master or a chief.

The second is ulfana, a school of learning or teacher.

The third meaning is reached by reading the letters of the word backwards-pela (pronounced peleh)-wondrous.

===

Aluf's definition is "master."

This lets the world know that there is a Creator; that G-d is the Master of the universe, and that there is an Eye that sees, and an Ear that hears. The universe did not simply emerge by itself; there is an omnipotent Force that actually forged the firmaments ex nihilo, from nothing to something. Thus G-d is the Aluf, the Master of the universe.

Ulfana means "school" or "teacher."

Not only do we introduce G-d as the Creator of the universe, but also as the Teacher of all mankind. G-d's role as teacher is revealed with His introduction of Torah to the Jewish people. The Torah, with its 613 mitzvos or laws, teaches us what we should do, and what we shouldn't do. Through the Divine wisdom of His book, G-d establishes Himself in the world on the level of the ultimate Teacher.

Finally, we have the third meaning of alef: peleh, "wondrous."

Peleh represents the esoteric or mystical level of Torah-Kabbalah and the teachings of Chassidic thought. Known as the "teachings of Mashiach," these secrets of Torah comprise its greatest level.

from "Letters of Light" by Rabbi Aaron L. Raskin
http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-of-light/02.htm

The traditional design of the Aleph, from the "Torah Scroll" font - a design dating back over 3,000 years.

> Boy, Nasrallah has done a good job fooling you.

Gohebrew, Nasrallah is an Arab and speaks Arabic.
And I speak Arabic and do understand what he speaks.

Gohebrew, Nasrallah is a Muslim and believes in Quran.
And I am a Muslim and believe in Quran,
and I do understand what he does+says.

Gohebrew is non-Arab and does not speak Arabic.
Gohebrew is a Jew and does not believe in Quran.
Can Gohebrew do a good job fooling me?

Aziz,

I am not trying to fool you.

I am a religious Jew, which your own Quran warns you to treat respectfully, or else. I think it says to "leave them alone". A sharp command for a religion that doesn't tolerate infidels.

I wish the president of Reform Judaism issued such a warning to his members.

Just because Nasrallah believes in Quran, like you, is a muslim, like you, speaks Arabic, like you, is no proof that he is not "pulling the wool over your eyes", or making you into a fool.

Nasrallah = anyone who causes so much human destruction is Allah's enemy, for he was no value for Allah's creation.

You will see that he will die a terrible death. Amen, kayn yehee ratzon - Hopefully soon.

> You will see that he will die a terrible death.

A terrible death in defense of one's homeland + religion is sweet.
Moreover, Nasrallah is the grandson of Prophet Mohammed's grandson
ImamHosyan who was terribly slaughtered with 72 of his companions in
Karbala/Iraq (picture) and their women and children were taken
in chains to Syria.

By the way, GoHebrew,
1. Will you sacrifice yourself for your religion?
2. Where does Man go after death?
3. Does it make difference to die easy or hard?
_____________________________________________
Flowers for All Freedom Fighters

Aziz,

> A terrible death

As is said: "You are a tough cookie."

> 1. Will you sacrifice yourself for your religion?

Rabbi Joseph Isaac Shneersohn obm wrote about difference between the great Rabbi Akiva and our common forefather Abraham

Rabbi Akiva sacrificed himself to the Roman occupiers. He even yearned for this, to finally show G-d that he was ready to set aside his own body to be G-d's servant.

In contrast, Abraham did not yearn for this at all. Rather, Abraham and his wife Sarah, resttled near Beersheva in order to host, feed, and teach travelors about the existance of G-d, and His being the Master of the Universe, in charge of the workings of the world. He was ready to set aside his own soul to be G-d's servant.

Rabbi Shneersohn concludes that Abraham's path to be G-d's servant was greater than Rabbi Akiva.

> 2. Where does Man go after death?

Many people never die at all. Rather, they live in different worlds, as this material world that we know is only a stage in this cycle. This is detailed at length in Jewish mystical literature at length.

Other people are "cut off" due to actions in this material world (although it would seem that this possibility exists also in other worlds). This is called: "koret hanefesh".

Similarly, due to other wrongful things and attitudes, some people's bodies are not resurrected at the "end of days", and experience death forever.

The human body (after the resurrection) in the next world is physical and nourishes the soul, unlike today that the life of the body depends upon its being nourished from the soul. However, the human body of the next world is very unlike our bodies today which age and decay.

> 3. Does it make difference to die easy or hard?

Death for some is a movement from one world to another. Death for others is final,

To die easy for some is a blessing, without pain and with even a smile on the face. Great people knew this event was imminent, and prepared, having no remorse.

Although many great people died painfully, or hard, this sort of sad ending is viewed ordinarily as a curse.

There are exceptions, such as dying "al peeh keedush Hashem", giving up for one's live to show people that the person prefers death to disobeying G-d, such as the Jews of the Inqusition, or to show people that they prefer to remain Jewish, like the Jews of the Holocaust, or to protect the lives of other Jews, such as soldiers of Israel.

In this exceptional case, the victim's souls are automatically forgiven any sins, and enter "gan eden", the world of the soul's reward, directly, with no interuption of punishments.

Nasrallah however will be the kind that dies with a curse. The merit of his anscestors he lost, and now shall only deserve maximum punishment.

As they say in Mexico, "Adios."

So soldiers of Israel go to “gan eden” if killed in defense of Israel.
And soldiers of Lebanon go to hell if killed in defense of Lebanon.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Aziz, please do not take Israel S.'s words as representing Judaism as a whole. He is a member of a small sect and doesn't speak for the rest of us.

Rabbi Akiva (1st to 2nd century) said of God's judgment that "all is according to the majority of [a person's] deeds."

And the Jewish sages also said "the righteous of all nations will have a place in the world to come."

It doesn't say that soldiers of this nation or that are righteous or not righteous. I say let us not presume to say what God will do, and just try to do right in our own lives.

> The righteous of all nations will have a place in the world to come.

True but I leave you to counter GoHebrew
Thanks William with Flowers

Aziz and William,

I was really surprized by your untrue words to Aziz. Infighting is a universal dicease that plagues all people regardless of religion, culture, language or political affiliation.

I am sure that Nasrallah too witnesses infighting among his troops frequently.

I would enjoy responding to William's lashon hora hateful words, but I think that it would be more productive for everyone to adhere to the Talmud's advice "to answer a fool with silence".

Rather, I think that all would gain from an overview describing the composition of the Jewish people instead.

However, it is close to the Sabbath, which for Jews begins at sundown on Friday, and concludes on Saturday after one spots three small stars together in the sky (about 72 minutes after sundown). So, I will refrain from posting until tomorrow evening.

Israel, my words were neither untrue nor hateful, and you should not make such accusations. The Chabad movement is authentically Jewish, and I respect it, but your members constitute a very small part of the Jewish people.

Chabad is one among many threads in the Jewish fabric, and the others are not going to take your word for what is correct in Judaism. Nor do I expect you to agree with me. Let us have respectful disagreement and discussion.

Shabbat Shalom

William,

> Let us have respectful disagreement and discussion.

OK

Shabbat menucha

It is not logical to conclude that since this claim is untruthful elsewhere, it must also be untruthful here.

I didn't make such a conclusion. I wanted only to point out that this claim is far from unique to Judaism, just as the cultural significance of the pomegranate is not one thing but many things. Of course it is possible that one culture's traditions re. the divine origin of writing may be true. The other possibility is that all such beliefs are false. [Obviously the third option, that contradictory beliefs about the same thing can all be true, is not a possibility.]

I think this line of discussion is off-topic, so don't encourage response. But this comment from Israel S. seemed to require comment:

or to show people that they prefer to remain Jewish, like the Jews of the Holocaust

Since the Nazi definition of Jewishness was racial rather than religious or cultural, there was no option for Jews to be anything other than Jewish. There was no issue of 'remaining Jewish' because the Nazis saw no possibility that a Jew could cease to be a Jew. The Nazis were not offering a choice between death and conversion; they were only offering death.

Aziz,

> And soldiers of Lebanon go to hell if killed in defense of Lebanon.

We have never discussed the status of people in an after-life who harm Jews in this world.

First, regarding your inerence which assumes hell is an option.

Remember, in Judaism, unlike most religions that define hell as a form of eternal punishment, hell is not a form of eternal punishment. Rather, it is a cleansing process for the soul, to prepare it for heaven, gan eden, a termporal place too for spiritual reward for the non-physical soul.

Heaven is only a temporary holding place until after the end of days, when the body is revived, or resorrected in a new form. Then, the soul returns to the body, and in many cases lives forever.

About going to hell or heaven, I merely said that people who sacrifice their lives in protect Jews receive a special reward and avoid hell.

We see going to hell is a step to going to hell. Not everyone earns this merit.

Some people are reincarnated in non-human bodies, a rather painful experience. Some people get even worse, such as becoming migrant souls without even physical bodies, like bodies of objects, vegetables, stones, minerals, dirt, and sand - or nothing physical at all.

This is similar to the comment of a friend of mine, who learned this, and said: "It's a zechus (merit) to go to hell".

The famous great commentator, Rabbi Solomon Yitchaki of the Middle Ages, known by the acronym of his name, Rashi, commented on the ill intend some nomads harbored towards him, that they earned Divine retribution from G-d for merely thinking to harm him.

Also, the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe pointed out a simple law in Shulchan (the Codes of Jewish Law) regarding the neighbors bordering Israel who seek to merely steal wheat, as subject of a strong defence, including murder. The justification for this extreme reaction is that if stealing was planned, murder was intended. The defense to those who seek to kill, is to kill them first.

From these statements, it is clear that the Hezzbolah terrorists, like other terrorists, have sealed there own fate by seeking and even actually harming or killing Jews.

This is the harse reality of harming or killing a Jew.

> And the Jewish sages also said “the righteous of all nations will have a place in the world to come.”

There is no free lunch for anyone.

This means that no one is barred from entering into the world to come. The world to come is not an exclusive country club. G-d made room there for everyone, but everyone doesn't make it there.

John,

> I didn’t make such a conclusion.

Sorry. I misunderstood you.

I asked you a key question about OpenType/MS VOLT at the blog on OT Biblical Hebrew about CSUB & multiple diacritic glyphs. Do you prefer me to email you in private?

Regarding adding a CSUB/CMOS feature like for the furtuve patach, for the shvana etc., this Sabbath was a breakthrough. I am certain now it can be done successfully. Let's discuss it.

John,

> Since the Nazi definition of Jewishness was racial...

Like Jews during the threat before the miracle of Purim, the Holocaust left little choices. That's why we wear purple shoes on Purim today. :)

When I posted it, I considered this.

Sadly, the Nazis did bring out the worst in the Jews by appointing 'capos' in concentration camps, and made them believe that by harming other Jews, they could receive favors, like a slice of dried bread.

So, a choice was presented: Die as a Jew, or maybe have it better by becoming a traitor.

> He is a member of a small sect and doesn’t speak for the rest of us.

The Chabad Lubavitch worldwide movement is hardly a small sect. Perhaps, 25 years ago, you could say this and be truthful. Today, the Chabad Lubavitch world movement is growing at a huge pace, while the other mainstream organisations are shrinking. They know it.

No intelligent Jewish leader would make this statement.

> Rabbi Akiva (1st to 2nd century) said of God’s judgment that “all is according to the majority of [a person’s] deeds.”

I don't see the relevance here. What are you trying to say?

The Talmud discusses the status of people who do wrong things in part, but most things are good things. So, Rabbi Akiva concludes that one's bad things are not considered here, rather the majority of ones acts are what counts.

> I say let us not presume to say what God will do, and just try to do right in our own lives.

Boy, what a liberal Jewish ting to say!

Aziz is not asking what you say. He want to know G-d's words, what the Torah says.

Call a spade a spade.

In an Arab country, a liberal non-Observant Jew would be beheaded as an infidel to Islam.

> Chabad is one among many threads in the Jewish fabric

Soon, it will be Rosh Hashana and all the very different holidays of the first Hebrew month of the year, Tishrei.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe decribed the varied holidays as colorful. There is the accepting G-d as our king during Rosh Hashana, the remorse of Tzom Gedaliah, the fasting and repentance of Yom Kippur, the sanctity of G-ht's Tug, the happpiness of Sukkot, the special qualities of Shmini Atzeret, and the joyful celebration and unbridled exurberance of Simchat Torah.

Just like a work of art can not be monotone, explains the Rebbe, the Jewish people are colorful, with different color threads fabric of the Jewish people.

> my words were neither untrue...

Overview of the Composition of Jewry on Earth
=============================================

Jews are divided into two categhories: affiliated and unaffiliated.

Although they are one one people, Jews are different from each other, like every human being is unigue.

There are however differences and groups.

The largest categhory are unaffiliated Jews. If you add up the membership of all groups of affiliated Jews, there are much more unaffiliated Jews.

Among the largest group of affiliated Jews in number in the United States are Reform Jewry. Second are Conservative Jews. In an embarassing third spot are the Orthodoxy.

Outside of America, be it South America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and the Orient, both the Reform and Conservative are very very small, barely significant.

I am reminded of a secular Israeli's comment why he went to an observant synagogue in Israel on Yom Kippur, when he himself was not observant. Why didn't he just drive to then lone Reform temple in Israel? He replied that if he went to the synagogue once a year, he wanted to get it right.

So, in Israel, like in most places of the world, unaffiliated Jews perceive "real" Judaism as the beliefs of those follow in the ways of Torah. The rest is just compromise, or even worst, fake.

Among so-called Orthodoxy, there are many sects, larger and smaller in number, but divided differently in terms of signacance and influence.

Quantity versus quality.

In general, these Jews are divided into the Chassidic Jews (the followers of the Baal Shem Tov), and non-Chassidic Jews. In the last twoi hundred years, the Chassidim are becoming a dominant force in Judaism, and the other groups, whether non-Chassidic, or even non-Orthodox, are dwindling in size.

With the next fifty or 100 years, with the factors of assimilation, population growth, and increased communication, only the group of Chassidic Jews will remain among the affiliated, and the unaffiliated will decrease or assimilate.

That's the harshe reality, William.

Among Chassidic Jews, everyone are followers of the holy Baal Shem Tov. They are divided into two branches: the intellectual of ChaBaD (now only the Lubavitchers remain), and ChaGaT, the other groups of Chassidic Jews.

What does ChaBaD and ChaGaT mean, how are they different?

There are ten spheres in the Divine chemestry of everything created by G-d. They are:

1. Chochmah - literally, wisdom; or the first and highest sphere. Like the human body has intellectual parts in the brain, and emotive parts in the rest of the body (modern science says everthing is located in the brain), in the intellectual process, chochmah is the initial stage of the intellect, conception of an idea.

2. Binah - literally, understanding; or the second and decisive sphere. In the intellectual process, binah is the next stage of the intellect, the break-down and analysis of an idea.

3. Daat - literally, knowledge; or the last and most important sphere. In the intellectual process, daat is the next stage of the intellect, the practical application of an idea.

Chabad then is symbolized by this acronym of the three parts of the intellectual process.

ChaGaT is an acronym for the next three spheres, the first three parts of the emotions.

Basically, they represent two valid manners to live life as G-d desires.

The Chabad way is much more difficult and demanding than Chagat in terms of living life practically. Chabad however is much richer, more rewarding, and has the ability to become integrated into unaffiliated Jewish society, not be influenced (to the amazement of other Orthodox Jews), and rather make amazing inroads.

Thousands of unaffiliated Jews have joined the ranks of Chabad in the last few decades. Chabad Houses have sprung up around the globe in greater number recently, than even during the lifetime of their leader. Chabad is at fore front of disseminating knowledge of Judaism at www.chabad.org, even among non-Jews.

It is not without exaggeration to claim that if we consider the huge numbers of "Friens of Lubavitch" (which now number many hundreds of thousands, including heads of state, unaffiliated Jews, and a growing part of the masses), Chabad is most dynamic force in Judaism today.

As the first Lubavitcher Rebbe prophezed in the days of the Vilna Gaon: "Yad hachassidim al haelyona". In the end, the Chassidim will prevail!

> In an Arab country, a liberal non-Observant Jew
> would be beheaded as an infidel to Islam.

On the contrary and historically, Jews were+are taken top consultants
by Arab Rulers. Read well ((Repeating: Read well) then answer.

http://www.al-islam.org/underattack/6.htm
http://www.al-islam.org/underattack/7.htm

Additionally, the beheading of our prophet Mohammed's grandson
— Hosyan — and 72 of his companions (shrine above) and
the driving of the captives — their women + children —
in a caravan across the desert from Karbala to Damascus/Syria
was carried out by Yazid's army but planned by Yazid's Jew
consultant, SirJohn. Yazid like his father+ most past+present
Arab self-appointing rulers ruled + ruling in the name of Islam.

And histroy repetas itself: we are eye-witnessing non-stop
visits by Jews-supporters to Siniora of Lebanon + Abbas of PLO,
and Maliki of Iraq and Mobarak of Eygpt + others.

So, GoHebrew, do you want us to forget history?
Or to wipe out the shrines of Prophet Mohamed's grandsons from Iraq?
Do you want us to take refuge in democracy?
Or to embrace what you embrace?

Aziz,

I actually agree with you in part.

The golden age (the Western mind calls it "golden") occurred when the Arabs controlled much of the world, and employed Jews as their scribes, artists, doctors, poets, and financiers, because of the high regard they considered them, despite they did not adhere to Islam.

I myself viewed the unparalled tremendous repect Arab-Americans treated Orthodox bearded Jews.

In fact, when the boy, Ari Halberstam was shot and killed by a mad Arab-American in 1992 on the entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge, prompting then-Mayor Guiliani to issue a rewrd for his arrest, another Arab-American from Queens turned him in. He explained, "I only did what any decent human being would. To shoot and kill a boy from a religious school who was visiting his dying rabbi - of course, he should be imprisoned."

The point that I waa trying to make was that an irreligious Jew is perceived as just that, and would be treated like any other infidel in a religious Arab society. He or she can espouse the noblest ideals, but if they appear just like a goy, a star-worshipper, then they will be treated like one.

Aziz,

> the beheading of our prophet Mohammed’s grandson...was planned by Yazid’s Jew consultant, SirJohn.

This very hard to believe.

It sounds like the stuff that fumed blood libels in Europe and Russia, or Christianity's old claim that the Jews killed Jesus (which many Christians still believe today).

I think Nachmonides once showed how this is clearly a lie. Judaism rejects doing anything directly or indirectly to kill another human being. Such action is prohibited. No Observant Jew would risk his or her heavenly reward to commit such a crime. To commit such a crime also evokes eternal punishment.

Until relatively recently, all Jews were observant of the teachings of Torah. Nobody second-guessed G-d. Only since the Reform movement in Germany, or the Maskilim in the Age of Enlightenment in Poland and Russia, did Jews begin to rationalize either avoiding to G-d's instructions in the Torah, or violate His prohibitions.

The old joke is the Reform rabbi in Berlin liked eating pork so much that he justified it by creating his own form of Judaism.

People say that the great Talmud scholar and composer of a very popular lexicon, Marcus, used to smoke a pipe on the Sabbath, while studying Talmud, even though smoking is prohibited on the Sabbath for Jews.

Even his name, Sir John, does not sound Jewish.

1st: .. Ari Halberstam was shot and killed by a mad Arab-American in 1992 on the entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge.

In which Arab country? And across which river?!

2nd: SirJohn (or serjown) not Sir John.

3rd: Ok, you did not kill Prophet Jesus
and you never fought against Mohammed?!

1. Why did your grandfathers not believe in Prophet Jesus + Bible?
2. Why did your grandfathers not believe in Prophet Mohammed + Quran?
3. Why were they so selective in following God Messengers?
4. Why did you take Moses as the seal of the Prophets?
5. Are the Jews chosen by God to rule the World?
6. What is BlackWater + other Jews-controlled companies doing in Iraq?

Aziz,

> 1. Why did your grandfathers not believe in Prophet Jesus + Bible?

This question has been asked repeatedly for nearly two thousand years. It has been articulately addressed completely by scholars to whom by comparison I am less than a toenail.

Nachmonides was challenged to a debate by great Catholic scholars in Spain(?)regarding this very topic. He answered each question more than convincingly and decisively. In fact, hehad to flee his own country to save his life, because the very people he argued against saught to kill cf for his brilliant answers.

Unfortunately, his debates are not published in English. So, I will briefly answer.

Jesus the Jew, the student of Rabbi Yossi's yeshiva, the person who grew up like every "frum" Jewish boy, wearing tzitzis, a kippah, eating only kosher food, washing negel vasser, was rejected as the messiah, then, in the past 2000 years, and to this very day, and forever.

Why was Jesus rejected as the long awaited messiah?

To be qualified to the messiah in potential, according to Judaism, the person must meet specific qualifications. He did not meet any of them.

1. He has to be a descendant of King David. It is unclear who Jesus' father was.

2. He has to be a great Torah scholar, like King David before him. Jesus abandoned his studies in yeshiva, losing out on possibility of great scholarship.

3. He must encourage all humanity to come closer to G-d: Jews to observe Judaism, non-Jews to accept and practice the Seven Noahide rules expected from them by G-d. Jesus has brought strife among peoples, and led many generations of his followers to murder Jews, Muslims, and opponants to Christianity.

4. He shall build the 3rd Holy Temple in Jerusalem, where the Jews will have a place to worship and serv G-d, and the non-Jews will be able to have a direct relationship with G-d. Jesus failed to end the Roman occupation, and even was hung on the cross by the Romans.

5. He will usher in a time of universal peace and brotherhood among mankind. Jesus caused people to hate each other. His followers claim that by believing in him, they are then absolved of their sins. In effect, people become further and further from G-d by hinking that it's OK to sin.

There is not a single compelling reason to accept Jesus.

Aziz,

> 1st: .. Ari Halberstam was shot and killed by a mad Arab-American in 1992 on the entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge.

> In which Arab country? And across which river?!

No, he was an American lunatic from Queens, Brooklyn. It was the East river, between Manhattan and Brooklyn. It was very late at night. The Lubavitcher Rebbe was rushed to the hospital in Manhattan from his office in Crown Heights, Brooklyn in a white van.

The Arab-American went too to the hospital in Manhattan to see which kind of car he was driven in. He saught to kill this powerful leader of the Jews. When a similar white van departed, he raced to his car and followed the van to the Brooklyn Bridge.

Entering the bridge, the crazy Arab-American saw it was filled with young religious students, and became furious for being deceived. He realized that G-d led him away from hius intended target. So, he drove up beside the van, shotting everybody in sight. Most of the boys ducked down, but the driver, another lad, and Ari was struck.

The other two boys recovered in full, one of them miraculously came out of a coma. Ari died.

> To be qualified to the messiah in potential, according to Judaism,
the person must meet specific qualifications.
He did not meet any of them.

Very amazing, Like Moses, Jesus was chosen by God.
Judaism should have no say in that.
Or did you grandfathers want to teach God who to choose???!!!

And the Jew was killed in US not in an Arab Country as you said earlier.

Aziz,

> 2. Why did your grandfathers not believe in Prophet Mohammed + Quran?

The very fact that great Muslim scholars and kings for centuries have accepted Jews for the way they are makes this question somewhat superfluous.

The very great Torah scholar, scientist, and physician, rules that Islam is an acceptable faith for non-Jews, but warns that Catholicism is not. The reason for this is simple. Everybody must believe in the Creator of heaven and earth as One Invisible G-d, unable to be divided into parts, such as the concept of the divinity. According to Judaism, harboring such a belief is a trangression for anyone.

Does this answer your question?

So, you do not believe in Mohammed + Quran.
How do you want to make me understand the Quran as you want??!!
Are you better well-versed in Arabic+Quran than Nasrollah?!
Peace with Flowers

Aziz,

> Like Moses, Jesus was chosen by God.
Judaism should have no say in that.
Or did you grandfathers want to teach God who to choose???!!!

Every person is chosen by G-d to fulfill a special task, a purpose unigue to that person.

Maimonides wrote that the purpose of Jesus' acceptance as the messiah to over a third of the world's population was in order to bring that part of the world to a greater understand about a messiah, and to cause the acceptance of messiah when he actually comes.

Agan, the definition of 'who is he messiah' is not in our hands, in a popularity poal; rather, it is soly a Torah concept. And the Torah is from G-d.

Aziz,

> not in an Arab Country as you said earlier

I did not say this.

Aziz,

> Are you better well-versed in Arabic+Quran than Nasrollah?!

Any logical person understands basic human values better than Nasrallah, who has no regard for human life. He twists the teachings of Quran to serve his needs. He distorts the truth to serve his lies. Even if he knows Arabic is no indication that he understand Quran or speaks the truth. Soon, his falehood will become apparent to you.

> Every person is chosen by G-d to fulfill a special task,
a purpose unigue to that person.

Every person is chosen, including Nasrollah?
And you are also chosen to counter Nasrollah?

If so, then God chooses a Man and his enemy?!
What a Just God have you taken?!

Aziz,

> So, you do not believe in Mohammed + Quran.

You are saying this.

A Jew believe in G-d. He believe that the Torah is true. We have our prophets. They do not include Jesus, Mohammed, Nasrallah, Geoge Bush, or Bob Dylan.

If you ask me personally, each of them are important and influential as human beings. But, as a Jew, I don't make a religion around them.

With all great respect to you as a believing Muslim, who studies the Quran, and seeks the truth.

Nasrallah is not the truth; he is falsehood.

Aziz,

> Every person is chosen, including Nasrollah?

Yes.

Aziz,

> Every person is chosen, including Nasrollah?

Yes.

The game is over.
Peace with Flowers

Aziz,

> If so, then God chooses a Man and his enemy?!
What a Just God have you taken?!

This reminds me of our father Abraham's question when G-d wanted to destroy the evil people of Sedom. Abraham pointed out to G-d that there righteous people living there too. If G-d would destroy Sedom, righteous people would die, too. This would be unjust.

So Abraham asked G-d: "Shall not the Judge of the entire would carry out justice?"

----

Btw, what game?

Shalom GoHebrew,

You said:

I have heard that Jesus, (Yeshua) never broke the Torah. I like knowing the truth about things, so I had to research this and this is what I found:

"Dietary laws" is NOT what Yeshua chastised "them" = P'rushim
("Pharisees") and Torah-teachers ("teachers of the Law") for.
In context of Chapter 7 of Mark, the first 7 verses are
important - JNT (David H. Stern):

-------
(1) The P'rushim and some of the Torah-teachers who had
come from Yerushalayim gathered together with Yeshua
(2) and saw that some of his talmidim ("disciples") ate with
ritually unclean hands, that is, without doing n'tilat-yadayim
("ritual handwashing"). (3) ( For the P'rushim, and indeed
all the Judeans, holding fast to the Tradition of the Elders,
do not eat unless they have given their hands a ceremonial
washing. (4) Also, when they come from the marketplace
they do not eat unless they have rinsed their hands up to
the wrist; and they adhere to many other traditions, such
as washing cups, pots, and bronze vessels.)

(5) The P'rushim and the Torah-teachers asked him, "Why
don't your talmidim live in accordance with the Tradition of
the Elders, but instead eat with ritually unclean hands?"
(6) Yeshua answered them, "Yesha'yahu ("Isaiah") was right
when he prophesied about you hypocrites - as it is written,

"These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far away from me.
(7) Their worship of me is useless, because they teach
man-made rules as if they were doctrines." (Isaiah 29:13)
-------

Obviously, Yeshua's talmidim did not violate kosher laws
since the P'rushim and Torah-teachers would have mentioned
that. The discussion was concerning the Oral Tradition in
relation to n'tilat-yadayim.

Yeshua is chastising the P'rushim and Torah-teachers for
strict adherence to the Oral Torah and misunderstanding the
priority of Torah over tradition ("laws of men").

Here is some of Stern's commentary on Mk 7:19 wherein there
is a parenthetical comment "Thus he declared all foods ritually
clean" ( "food" to a Torah-observing Jew is not equivalent to
food in today's world obviously; it is what is allowed to be
eaten for a Torah-abiding person):

-------
"Thus he declared all foods ritually clean", even if the
participants at the meal have not washed their hands. But
Yeshua did not, as many suppose, abrogate the laws of
kashrut and thus declare ham kosher! Since the beginning of
the chapter the subject has been ritual purity as taught by
the Oral Torah in relation to n'tilat-yadayim (vv.2-4) and not
kashrut at all! There is not the slightest hint anywhere that
foods in this verse can be anything other than what the
Bible allows Jews to eat, in other words, kosher foods.
Neither is kashrut abolished in Ac 10:9-28 or Ga 2:11-16; see
notes there.

Rather, Yeshua is continuing his discussion in spiritual
prioritizing (v.11). He teaches that tohar (purity) is not
primarily ritual or physical, but spiritual (vv.14-23). On this
ground he does not entirely overrule the Pharisaic/rabbinic
elaborations of the laws of purity, but he does demote them to
subsidiary importance. See Jn 7:22-23 on the halakhic process
of assigning ranks to potentially conflicting laws. Yeshua here
is making a Messianic halakhah.
-------

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

Crown Pomegranate,

I really don't want to discuss Jesus' life with anyone.

It is clear that as a Christian your view and my view differ a great deal regarding Jesus' status, role, and stature.

Plus, we live in a benevolent Christian land (although the founding father clearly desired it to be home for all peoples), so I think it unwise to argue the host's faith. Rather, the Jewish attitude is both national pride and patriotism, and to respect adversity.

To clarify one point that you made though, about the status of the Oral Tradition in normative Judaism, now, then, and since Mt. Sinai (and from even earlier), is that all Jews share one single view. The Torah is one, the writings of the Hebrew explanations, the Oral Tradition, later recorded in the Talmud, Medrash, Kabbalistic books, and elsewhere.

Jews do not pick and choose, what parts they accept and believe in, or what parts are too difficult for them to observe, or even accept.

Those who reject parts of the Torah, such as the Oral Tradition are not considered Jews. Thw Karraites are an example of this. (Jesus was not a Karraite.)

Even Conservative and Reform Jews, who reject parts of Halacha in everyday practice, or concepts that they feel are no longer applicable, are not considered rejected or not Jewish. A Jew is always a Jew. Rather, they fall under the heading in Jewish law, known as "tinuk sh'nishba", a Jewish child who abducted and raised non-Jewish. This explains why his or her attitude is not in compliance with the teachings of Torah.

So, no one today opposes Torah anymore. We see that even Muslim and Christians are moving closer to improvement of relationships, limited acceptance, and much greater cooperation.

I truly believe that the more a person learns about the beauty of Judaism, the more they seek to come closer to G-d, and life in accord with the lifestyle that the Torah teaches, be in the life of Torah and mitzvahs, or the Noahide laws.

Israel, just checking over this thread I see you aren't aware of the translation of Nachmanides' account of his disputation with Catholics in the middle ages. There is a wonderful account, including translation, by Hyam Maccoby.

Maccoby also in my opinion has done the best Jewish historical analysis of Christianity from an historical point of view, in his books such as Revolution in Judea and The Mythmaker.

Maccoby also did an excellent play based on Nachmanides' account, called "The Disputation." I saw a wonderful performance of it here in DC starring Theordore Bikel as Nachmanides.

William,

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, your comments, and the link.

I kinda suspected a translation was out there by now, but I think today, people know so little about Yiddishkeit, even most Orthodox Jews, that there is little meaning to a debate. There are no sides anymore.

As we learn more about true Yiddiskeit, opposition falls away, and the desire for observance increases.

But Ramban's (Nachmonides) debate is famous for its brilliance; so thanks you for this link to Amazon - I do want to add it to my list of "gotta read" books.

Was my overview of the Jewish world today accurate?

Israel, your overview I'm assuming is an accurate view of the Jewish world from a Chabad point of view. Probably every non-Haredi Jew would disagree with it, and give a different view. I certainly would give a different overview, but here is not the place to go into all this. You can read my views on Judaism at rj.org.

Also I would just note that neglecting or rejecting parts of Jewish tradition is very different from adopting views that are clearly heretical to Judaism, eg. the Trinity. Even within the Chabad framework I think you can recognize that.

William,

Did I neglect or reject any part of Jewish tradition?

Are you aware of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's purposted view of Reform Judaism?

He said: "I would not be opposed to Reform Judaism [based on the halacha of "hora'at sh'ah", one is permitted to render a ruling in opposed to Shulchan Orech for a given time period due to the prevailing circumstances]; I am opposed to Reform Judaism, becayse they claim that this form of Judaism replaces the Orthodox approach, and is now only valid."

[I really don’t want to discuss Jesus’ life with anyone.]

I will honor this.

[It is clear that as a Christian]

I am not this.

[I truly believe that the more a person learns about the beauty of Judaism, the more they seek to come closer to G-d, and life in accord with the lifestyle that the Torah teaches, be in the life of Torah and mitzvahs, or the Noahide laws.]

I beleive this.

I am wondering if you can help me?
I am looking for a Hebrew font. One that is pretty or feminine, but still easy to read. (HF Hameiri is close, but the bottom lines on some the letters are to long and it is harder for me to read.) Do you know where I might download this type of font?

Also I have about 16-20 HF Hebrew fonts that all of a sudden are all in mirror image. I have had them for a few years and have used them. But now in MS they are all backwards. The only way I can use them is to open them in another type program and save what I am writing as a JEPG. Then if I insert the JEPG I can flip the image and read them. But this is a pain.

Any idea what happened?

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

Crown Pomegranate,

> I am not this. [...a Christian] ...I believe this.

So, you are Jewish, but believe in Jesus? This is called a messianic Jew (but some mj-s are not Jewish, but simply like to imagine that they are Jewish. Maybe, a father was Jewish, or a great-grandparent, or they just "feel" Jewish.

Nowadays, messianic Jews are not rejected from mainstream Judaism, as every Jew is regarded as "having been kidnapped by non-Jews as a child, and not raised as a Jew educated in his religion, culture, and among his people." (Maimonides, Mishna Torah, Laws of Mamerim).

We are instructed to draw them closer to the teachings of Torah, like the students of Aaron, and perhaps, as a result of this kindly approach, traditional Judaism will be accepted.

I originally was raised as a Reform Jew, and knew very little about traditional Judaism, except that one day the messiah would appear, and encourage everyone to become much better people, gentiles would become exceedingly good people, and ordinary Jews would know their heritage well, and conduct their lives according to the teachings of the Torah.

A very good friend of mine became a messianic Jew. I became troubled, and approached Lubavitcher chassidic Jews to learn hoow best to encourage my friend to return to his senses, and his people.

Instead of guiding me as to what to do, I was presented with some compelling logic. I was asked, "how could I convince my friend to return to Judaism when I knew so little myself?" I was encouraged to leave college, and go to a yeshiva and study. I did, and the rest is history.

CP,

> Also I have about 16-20 HF Hebrew fonts...in mirror image...this is a pain.

These are known as "mirror fonts", made to use in Quark XPress. I innovated this approach to Hebrew fonts in the early ninties on the Apple Macintosh, when Quark was not yet popular.

Quark allowed the user to flip the text box. Then, Hebrew text could be entered from left to right, but it would look like right to left, as long as you used mirror fonts. The idea was stolen, as were many Hebrew fonts hacked, flipped in Fontographer and sold by pirates or given away.

I decided to only serve the high end and professional publishers, as there was no income in the low end of everyday users, such as teachers and students.

CP,

You get what you pay for. If you want freeware, most is junk. Stolen is better, but there are some designer's kids that won't drink chocolate milk on Saturday because of you.

If you profess that honor and glory is G-d's, then don't you believe G-d will compensate you a hundred bucks to do what's honest?

Enough preaching.

Consider "Itamar" (designed by the late Itamar David) in the Hebrew Type Designs blog. Maybe, "David Italic". Or "Koren", also known as "Crown". "Diamonds" is a very feminine script.

I really don't know what is freeware out there on the Internet. In general, if you buy, make sure the fonts have Unicode. Old cheap Hebrew fonts don't have them, and you might have a surrize later to use them in a Unicode compliant program (most are these days).

The meaning of the "aleph"
==================

The Lubavitchwer Rebbe explains that the alef has three different meanings. One is aluf, which means a master or a chief. The second is ulfana, a school of learning or teacher. The third meaning is reached by reading the letters of the word backwards-pela (pronounced peleh)-wondrous.

Aluf's definition is "master." This lets the world know that there is a Creator; that G-d is the Master of the universe, and that there is an Eye that sees, and an Ear that hears. The universe did not simply emerge by itself; there is an omnipotent Force that actually forged the firmaments ex nihilo, from nothing to something. Thus G-d is the Aluf, the Master of the universe.

Ulfana means "school" or "teacher." Not only do we introduce G-d as the Creator of the universe, but also as the Teacher of all mankind. G-d's role as teacher is revealed with His introduction of Torah to the Jewish people. The Torah, with its 613 mitzvos or laws, teaches us what we should do, and what we shouldn't do. Through the Divine wisdom of His book, G-d establishes Himself in the world on the level of the ultimate Teacher.

Finally, we have the third meaning of alef: peleh, "wondrous." Peleh represents the esoteric or mystical level of Torah-Kabbalah and the teachings of Chassidic thought. Known as the "teachings of Mashiach," these secrets of Torah comprise its greatest level.

from the book, "Letters of Light", by Rabbi Aaron L. Raskin
See http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-of-light/02.htm

continued

The Baal Shem Tov once entered Mashiach's heavenly chamber and asked, "Mashiach, when are you going to come?"

Mashiach responded, "When the wellsprings of your teachings (i.e., the teachings of Chassidus) spread forth throughout the entire world."

Thus, only when the level of peleh-this level of wondrous esoteric thought-has permeated the world, will the arrival of Mashiach be imminent.

This can also be connected to a fundamental concept in the Talmud.

The Talmud tells us that G-d created the world to exist for 6,000 years. The first two thousand years are called Tohu, or chaos. This is followed by two thousand years of Torah. And the final two thousand are the days of Mashiach.

continued

What does this mean?

Rashi explains that the first two thousand years began with the first man, Adam.

This corresponds to the first meaning of the letter alef: aluf-master-for the Midrash states that Adam caused all the animals and beasts to bow down to G-d, thus acknowledging Him as Master and Creator of the universe. However, that era was qualified as chaos, because the Torah was not yet revealed.

continued

The second two thousand years, Rashi continues, began with Abraham.

Abraham introduced the Torah. As the Talmud states,[26] Abraham both learned and fulfilled the entire Torah long before it was physically given to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai. His embracing of G-d's word inaugurated the era of Torah-and thus the second meaning of the word alef-ulfana, or teaching.

continued

The final two-thousand-year period is considered the days of Mashiach; the concept of peleh.

This wondrous era has the potential to usher in peace and tranquility throughout the entire world. Here, at this final level of alef, a teaching of the Baal Shem Tov illuminates an interesting point.

Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liady suggests that the difference between the words golah (exile) and geulah (redemption), is the presence of the alef.

Thus the final two thousand years of Creation, the era of Mashiach, is represented by the alef. Having been given the alef, the Jewish people are empowered to move from exile to redemption.

The stages of G-d as Master of the universe and as Teacher blossom into the days of Mashiach, when G-d will be revealed on a wondrous level. All of this is contained in the letter alef.

from the book, “Letters of Light”, by Rabbi Aaron L. Raskin
See http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/letters-of-light/02.htm

William,

> You can read my views on Judaism at rj.org.

Where? I looked. Under which topic?

Re: RJ.org Just scroll down. My current post is on "The Idol of Autonomy". If you click on my name and then scroll down you will get all my previous posts. This is a critique of the current state of Reform Judaism, and ideas on how to strengthen it. Most of my posts so far are critique, with the constructive part to come.

Thank you GoHebrew for the info on the fonts.

I do not mind paying for fonts at all. My favorite is SIL Ezra and I paid for this one. The others I found using a search engine looking for Hebrew Fonts. When I found the HF ones it was a pack and it said free..........I thought they were. I didn't know until your post they were stolen. I would not have downloaded them had I known...;o(

I am going to go check out the others that you mentioned. Thanks.

My Grandma's Dad on my Moms side of the family came from Germany with his brother. Their last name was Volk, meaning The People.

When they came to the states he changed it to Folk, (still the people) to 'blend' in and be more American. Him and his brother had a bitter fight because of the name change and they parted ways forever.

Other than the name change they never talked about life before America. So I was raised just like anyone living here. I was not a people that lived apart and separated for G-d.

I am now.

I am learning what I should have known all my life. There is sadness from missing the wonderful beauty of HaShem’s ways as I grew up and yet I am blessed because as an adult I greatly value every nuance of what He is showing me.

Crown Pomegranate
www.crownpomegranate.com

Give honor and glory not to me but
to Adonai, the one true G-d,
the creator of the Heavens and the Earth

CP,

If you liked the SIL, perhaps you'll like John Hudson's SBL-Hebrew font. It's for free, for non-commercial users. It's advanced OpenType. I have a sample posted on the lower part of the blog called "Hebrew Type Designs". Also, check out "David".

Gaining a religious lifestyle later in life helps us contrast the alternative. Many times, aerson appreciates something he or she has after realizing what it's like not to have it.

It's sad that your great-grandfather parted ways with his brother. Are you in contact with his descendants, your cousins?

As you may know, Judaism defines a Jewish person by maternal descent or a valid halachic conversion. To be designated Jewish, your maternal ascent must be born Jewish, or converted according to halacha. That means, your mom, her mom, and her mom. Three generations. If that is certain, then you are certainly Jewish.

If, however, your dad was Jewish, but not your mom, or your maternal grandfather but not his wife, or your maternal grandmother's dad but not her mom, then you are not Jewish in your soul, but you have a lot of "blood" and genes that are Jewish.

Unlike many other religions, Judaism allots great significance to non-Jews who conduct their lives according to what's known as the Seven Noahide Laws, including eternal reward. In fact, to a certain degree, it is of greater significance to be a Noahide than to be Jewish in that the messiah can not arrive until non-Jews have a choice to become Noahides, just as G-d did not give the Jewish people the Torah until Jethro, Moses' non-Jewish father-in-law converted to Judaism.

Sorry, this is completely unrelated.

If David Hamuel is reading this, would you mind getting in touch with me at (peter_at_typotheque_com).
I tried sending you an email, but bounces back.

Peter Bilak

BTW, Israel....

with nikud we don't use the vav e.g -- ulpana; we don't say ulfana, since the peh is with dagesh; the same thing with geulah -- and there you need to add 2 dageshim; golah - 1 dagesh.

David,

About the intentional neglect of use of the vov (and the yud) in words which have nikkud is certainly the custom in most modern Hebrew text. In Jewish liturgy, from the booklet on Birkat Hamazon, the grace after meals, to the Siddur, the traditional prayerbook, inclusion of the vov (shuruk, or holam) always appear.

The exceptions, as I understand it, in intentional, to teach an important lesson, as in Biblical literature.

As the original text was all in English, I was unsure if the word ended in a hei oran aleph.

Regarding the dagesh in the gimmel of geula, you might be right. Although you know, most dagesh is missing in modern Hebrew with nikkud, except for the beit, kaf, peh, and taf. The dagesh in other letters is merely grammatical.

Israel,

I'm talking about your samples: ulpanah, geulah; NOT the whole langauge! And it does not matter if it is modern, liturgy or modern liturgy.

> I figured that perhaps in Aramaic, a dagesh does not appear here

????????????????????????????????????????

> most dagesh is missing in modern Hebrew with nikkud, except for the beit, kaf, peh, and taf. The dagesh in other letters is merely grammatical.

????????????????????????????????????????

BTW, about Kehot — what did you say they have; the custom mark abvoe the sheva na, and what else -- kamats katan?

David,

Shay Lemorah has it all: shva-na, kamatz katan, hataf kamatz katan (because the publisher is in deed a recognized scholar), except for the furtive patach (Koren publishers and Feldhein publishers [recently] has it). The shva-na is a shva with an aterisk above the letter with a circle closely around it.

Kehot usually has only the shva-na, because the original yoshave rosh (the director), the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneersohn, insisted upon its inclusion. The new books since his demise have a very small asterisk only, as the new director wants to scrap it altogether (but since the Rebbe wanted it, it remains). ArtScroll had it, but recently not (perhaps, due to their software and font).

Haven't you seen nikkud text without the dagesh in many of the letters? I am trying to recall where I saw this occur commonly?

About ulpana and geula, let me research samples.

Btw, BestBuy is sending my scanner back to HP, and promises to return it in about a month. Patience...

Israel,

> Kehot usually has only the shva-na

And I guess that you have books published by Kehot, right? And only with shva na, nothing else, right?

> Haven’t you seen nikkud text without the dagesh in many of the letters?

Show a sample.

David,

> And I guess that you have books published by Kehot, right? And only with shva na, nothing else, right?

Most nikkud texts from Kehot have shva-na. Some do not, from over two decades ago.

Ver few publishers in general have kamatz katan. ArtScroll doesn't.

Only Shay Lemorah has kamatz katan, and even hataf kamatz katan.

Feldheim, Koren, and I heard JTS too has the furtive patach.

Who has kamatz katan besides Shay Lemorah?

Who has kamatz katan besides Shay Lemorah?

The ISO10646/Unicode proposal documentation for qamats qatan, submitted by Mark Shoulson & Michael Everson, included scans from three publications displaying this form of qamats in a manner visually distinct from qamats gadol. These were

Riahi, S. M., ed. ספר תהלים סימנים. Jerusalem: Feldheim Press, 2001.

Shiovitz, Jeffrey, ed. B’kol Echad בקול אחד. New York: United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, 2001.

Tal, Shlomo, ed. סדור רנת ישראל: נוסח אשכנז. Jerusalem: Keter Press, 1976.

Thank you, John,

Clearly, these glyphs representing important Hebrew rules are becoming more and more widespread as they become standard parts of encoding standards and Hebrew typefaces.

Feldheim Press of Jerusalem, Israel/Monsey, NY and Keter Press of Jerusalem, Israel are two very large and significant Orthodox Jewish Publishers, third and fourth to ArtScroll/Mesorah Publishers of Boro Park, Brooklyn, NY and Kehot Publication Society of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, NY/Kfar Chabad, Israel.

Keter's prayerbook, סדור רנת ישראל: נוסח אשכנז, is one of the most popular prayerbooks, used by close to a hundred thousand Jews. Maybe much more. Orthodox do not submit to census.

United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism's prayerbook is used by even more Jews.

I was told by Rabbi Sue Ann Wasserman that the appearance of the kamatz katan is a standard part of Reform Judaism's prayerbook as well. She writes: "the [new] Reform Siddur Mishkan Tfilla and the Revised Plaut Torah Commentary differentiate between a kamatz katan and a kamatz gadol".

However, only the smaller Shay Lemorah Publishers of Jerusalem feature also the hataf komatz katan.

The largest Jewish publishers, ArtScroll/Mesorah and Kehot, employ the shva-na symbol, joined also by Shay Lemorah.

Israel, see the new thread.