Rav Ovadia Yosef the spiritual leaders of shas is dead

[muman613]

I'm not going to get into the "what is Islam" debate, but how is the "aspects of God" thing you are referring to here different from the concept of a trinity? Just a question...

The Torah refers to our G-d using two names, the four-letter 'tetragrammaton' name we say as 'Hashem' and the name 'Elokim'. The sages  teach us that the name Elokim represents the aspect of G-d which represents nature and harsh justice (Din/Gevurah). The world was created by the name Elokim... The name which Abraham related to is the name Hashem which represents Mercy and Kindness.

I have heard it said that the peoples of the world related to the middah of Din, thus they would worship what we call Elokim. It was Abraham and the Jews who understood that the same force of Justice and Nature is the very same as the force of Mercy and Kindness.

We say in our prayers 'Hashem Hu HaElokim' or 'Hashem is Elokim' which we meditate on. We use both names in the Shema prayer..

Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokainu, Hashem Echad... Hear O'Israel, the L-rd is our G-d, the L-rd is One...

We do not believe that these two elemental names are different forces, but instead they exist as one G-d but we perceive him through the characteristic of our relationship to him.

We do not address one name in our prayers, always calling him Hashem Elokainu (G-d, our G-d).

I don't know if I did a good job of explaining it but it is essential for a Jew to realize that while we may perceive Hashem acting in the world using various 'middot'/traits he is always a single entity.

[muman613]

The Trinity is much older than Christianity and was not part of the early teachings... Once you apply Jesus to the Trinity he becomes a man/G-d, and once you pray to him to pray to G-d he becomes an idol. You are putting him before G-d. In my opinion Jesus was the son of G-d as we all are the children of HaShem.

The Torah calls the Jewish people his firstborn son.

[muman613]

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/name.htm

The Names of God

The most important of God's Names is the four-letter Name represented by the Hebrew letters Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh (Hashem).  It is often referred to as the Ineffable Name, the Unutterable Name or the Distinctive Name.  Linguistically, it is related to the Hebrew root Heh-Yod-Heh (to be), and reflects the idea that God's existence is eternal.  In scripture, this Name is used when discussing God's relation with human beings, and when emphasizing his qualities of lovingkindness and mercy.  It is frequently shortened to Yah (Yod-Heh), Yahu or Yeho (Yod-Heh-Vav), especially when used in combination with names or phrases, as in Yehoshua (Joshua, meaning the LORD is Salvation), Eliyahu (Elijah, meaning my God is the LORD), and Halleluyah (praise the LORD).

The first Name used for God in scripture is Elohim.  In form, the word is a masculine plural.  The same word (or, according to Maimonides, a homonym of it) is used to refer to princes, judges, other gods, and other powerful beings.  This Name is used in scripture when emphasizing God's might, His creative power, and his attributes of justice and rulership.  Variations on this name include El, Eloah, Elohai (my God), and Eloheynu (our God).

God is also known as El Shaddai.  This Name is usually translated as "God Almighty", however, the derivation of the word "Shaddai" is not known.  According to some views, it is derived from the root meaning to heap benefits.  According to a Midrash, it means, "The One who said 'dai'" ("dai" meaning enough or sufficient) and comes from the idea that when God created the universe, it expanded until He said "DAI!" (perhaps the first recorded theory of an expanding universe?).  The name Shaddai is the one written on the mezuzah scroll.  Some note that Shaddai is an acronym of Shomer Daltot Yisrael, Guardian of the Doors of Israel.

Another significant Name of God is Hashem Tzva'ot.  This Name is normally translated as LORD of Hosts.  The word "tzva'ot" means hosts in the sense of a military grouping or an organized array.  The Name refers to God's leadership and sovereignty.  Interestingly, this Name is rarely used in scripture.  It never appears in the Torah (i.e., the first five books).  It appears primarily in the prophetic books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, as well as many times in the Psalms.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't ROY also state that Arabs are brothers of the Jews and that their lives should be spared if possible?

 I don't think soo. A lot of people are complaining that he called the Arabs evil and snakes that can't be trusted. That is at least how some are complaining about. And against him.

[muman613]

http://www.aish.com/sp/pr/The_Names_of_God.html

The two most important of these names, taught to us by God in the Torah, are the names mentioned in the first verse of the Shema – Elokim and YudHeyVavHey, or the Shem.

Elokim: The Name of Power

When we call God “the Almighty,” it is the English translation of the name Elokim, says the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim, 5). But we must put in a little work into what the name Almighty implies to benefit in relationship terms. Let us first state what we mean by Almighty and then proceed to explain it. Through this name, we acknowledge that God is not only the Creator, but the Master of all the power and energy in the universe.

What does this mean in plain English? In his book Nefesh Hachaim, Rav Chaim of Volozhin explains how to understand God’s power in relation to our own: Human beings can be creators. For instance, man can create a massive edifice. Once he finishes his creation, though, the creation can exist without its creator. The building – barring unusual circumstances – will stand long after its architects and construction crew have faded from the world. Even a child, once created and borne by his parents, can exist independent of them.

.
.
.

The Shem: YudHeyVavHey

But nature has fairly fixed rules. The laws of nature do not seem to be sufficient to account for the flexibility that prayer assumes. After all every prayer is a request to change the world just for me. To account for the assumptions about our relation ship with God implied by prayer we have to learn to relate to God’s other name Hashem.

In Jewish tradition, Y.H.V.H God’s personal name, so to speak, as opposed to Elokim which refers to the Almighty more in terms of the presidential functions of His office. Descriptions of the Almighty’s feelings, character traits and motivations are always associated with the name Hashem, never with the name Elokim. Literally, the Shem identifies the Almighty as independent of time and as the source of all existence. The Shulchan Aruch (ibid) translates this: “He was, is, and will be – the author of all being.” He is the source of everything – past, present and future.

[serbian army]

Never heard about this man until I was reading the Serbian news today...anyway, he must had been someone important

[Mein Koran]

The Trinity is much older than Christianity and was not part of the early teachings... Once you apply Jesus to the Trinity he becomes a man/G-d, and once you pray to him to pray to G-d he becomes an idol. You are putting him before G-d. In my opinion Jesus was the son of G-d as we all are the children of HaShem.

I'm a student of early Christianity. I'll tell you right now the trinity was certainly an early Christian belief. Not by name (the word "trinity" doesn't appear until the second century) but by doctrine. If you read early Christian writings like the Didache (60AD) and the letters of saint Ignatius (90AD) you will see that the doctrine of the trinity was well in place. And Jesus specifically denounced the idea that he is a son of God "like we are all children of God" in John chapter 10. He explicitly makes it clear that he is a divine son "I and my Father are one" John10:30.

[Every Jew AK47]

I'm a student of early Christianity. I'll tell you right now the trinity was certainly an early Christian belief. Not by name (the word "trinity" doesn't appear until the second century) but by doctrine. If you read early Christian writings like the Didache (60AD) and the letters of saint Ignatius (90AD) you will see that the doctrine of the trinity was well in place. And Jesus specifically denounced the idea that he is a son of God "like we are all children of God" in John chapter 10. He explicitly makes it clear that he is a divine son "I and my Father are one" John10:30.

Oy vey.. Speaking of getting off topic... Even though I am not a great fan of this Rabbi, I still think we should not stray too far off topic and keep it related to the Rabbi, his views and how he affected the Jewish people, Israel, world, etc..

Obviously, a debate about Jesus, Christianity and the Trinity can be left for another thread.

[serbian army]

I'm a student of early Christianity. I'll tell you right now the trinity was certainly an early Christian belief. Not by name (the word "trinity" doesn't appear until the second century) but by doctrine. If you read early Christian writings like the Didache (60AD) and the letters of saint Ignatius (90AD) you will see that the doctrine of the trinity was well in place. And Jesus specifically denounced the idea that he is a son of God "like we are all children of God" in John chapter 10. He explicitly makes it clear that he is a divine son "I and my Father are one" John10:30.

oh no, trinity was established long before Christ...look at major religions of the East

[muman613]

Oy vey.. Speaking of getting off topic... Even though I am not a great fan of this Rabbi, I still think we should not stray too far off topic and keep it related to the Rabbi, his views and how he affected the Jewish people, Israel, world, etc..

Obviously, a debate about Jesus, Christianity and the Trinity can be left for another thread.

Agree... It was never my intention that this thread drift off in this direction.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

He was against the disengagement (from Gazza) . But held that in the prospect of a real (and lasting) peace treaty it would be possible to give up land if in the long run it would save Jewish lives (Pikuah Nefesh), and it should be a decision for the country to make (people in charge of the defense). According to him Pikuah Nefesh is the most important and he quoted the Shulhan Aruch saying that in the case of saving a person's life everything can be violated except 3 things (idolatry, sexual sins and murder). In our opinion he made a critical mistake because the Shulhan Aruch isn't a complete work on Jewish law and it is dealing with the individual and not the nation as a whole.

But it's worse than that, and you should know better.  There was never any proof, any evidence, orany other reason to irrationally believe that giving money, weapons, and our own land away to our enemies would somehow weaken them and bring about peace when they make their intentions of nazi genocide clear.  More than thatis also wrong with citing this halacha that you did.  I will get into it later.  For now, I second Dan Ben Noah's comment.

[muman613]

But it's worse than that, and you should know better.  There was never any proof, any evidence, orany other reason to irrationally believe that giving money, weapons, and our own land away to our enemies would somehow weaken them and bring about peace when they make their intentions of nazi genocide clear.  More than thatis also wrong with citing this halacha that you did.  I will get into it later.  For now, I second Dan Ben Noah's comment.

Can anyone show any proof that he supported Oslo. The articles I have come across say he was supporting giving land for peace in the case of giving the Sinai to Egypt but when it came to oslo it looks like the story I read said he did not support it...

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Can anyone show any proof that he supported Oslo. The articles I have come across say he was supporting giving land for peace in the case of giving the Sinai to Egypt but when it came to oslo it looks like the story I read said he did not support it...

Without shas's signatures the vote for oslo didn't pass.  This is common knowledge, so please locate the source yourself.

[Lisa]

Now getting back to Muman's posts about the names Jews use to describe G-d...Hashem literally translates in English as "the name." 

And Elohim translates as (roughly) the Almighty. 

So to respond to Lewinsky/Brennan, we're basically using an adjective, or adjectives to describe the one G-d of Abraham.  It's not separate entities. 

[Ephraim Ben Noach]

I'm a student of early Christianity. I'll tell you right now the trinity was certainly an early Christian belief. Not by name (the word "trinity" doesn't appear until the second century) but by doctrine. If you read early Christian writings like the Didache (60AD) and the letters of saint Ignatius (90AD) you will see that the doctrine of the trinity was well in place. And Jesus specifically denounced the idea that he is a son of God "like we are all children of God" in John chapter 10. He explicitly makes it clear that he is a divine son "I and my Father are one" John10:30.

I do not wish to continue this in this thread, maybe some where else... Saint Ignatius was a pagan that converted to Christianity, his father worked for the Romans and his mother was a Jew. The Romans had control and influence over his life and his beliefs. Do you not think it had an impact on his writings? That is one persons writings, there are others that go against the Trinity(Jesus was G-d) that were not included in the Canon. There were other followers that believed Jesus was " The Messiah",  but was not divine, because it go's against Torah...

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Now getting back to Muman's posts about the names Jews use to describe G-d...Hashem literally translates in English as "the name." 

And Elohim translates as (roughly) the Almighty. 

So to respond to Lewinsky/Brennan, we're basically using an adjective, or adjectives to describe the one G-d of Abraham.  It's not separate entities.

Thanks for clarifying that. I understand that, but I was referring to Muman's use of the term "aspects", not just the fact that G-d has different names (which Christianity also affirms).

[Lisa]

Thanks for clarifying that. I understand that, but I was referring to Muman's use of the term "aspects", not just the fact that G-d has different names (which Christianity also affirms).

Obviously, I'm not Muman, but perhaps he meant to say "attribute" In the context of what he previously posted, that how it appears to me.

[muman613]

I use the term Middot/Traits (Character Traits)...

The tetragrammaton (YudHey...) is the attribute of Chesed/Rachamim.... Elokim is the attribute of Din/Gevurah (Justice/Restraint)...

There are other middot we discuss also, but these are the two main ones used in Chumash.

Shaddai is actually translated as 'Almighty'... Elokim is translated as 'G-d'...

In prayer we say 'Adonai' (My master) rather than pronounce the word for Hashem.

[Lisa]

I use the term Middot/Traits (Character Traits)...

The tetragrammaton (YudHey...) is the aspect of Chesed/Rachamim.... Elokim is the aspect of Din/Gevurah (Justice/Restraint)...

There are other middot we discuss also, but these are the two main ones used in Chumash.

Shaddai is actually translated as 'Almighty'... Elokim is translated as 'G-d'...

Isn't a character trait synonymous with an attribute?

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I use the term Middot/Traits (Character Traits)...

The tetragrammaton (YudHey...) is the attribute of Chesed/Rachamim.... Elokim is the attribute of Din/Gevurah (Justice/Restraint)...

There are other middot we discuss also, but these are the two main ones used in Chumash.

Shaddai is actually translated as 'Almighty'... Elokim is translated as 'G-d'...

OK thanks!

[muman613]

Isn't a character trait synonymous with an attribute?

Yes.

[muman613]

We recite Hashems 13 'attributes' of Mercy on Yom Kippur many times..

http://www.tanach.org/special/13mid1.htm

Our recitation of the thirteen 'middot ha-rachamim' [God's thirteen attributes of mercy] is certainly the focal point of the 'selichot' prayers and the highlight of 'ne'ila' on Yom Kippur. But how are we to understand this recitation? Is it a 'hokus pokus' type magic formula through which one can achieve automatic atonement?

In the following shiur, we attempt to prove quite the opposite. By undertaking a comprehensive analysis of when and why God first declared these middot (in the aftermath of 'chet ha-egel'), we will show how their recitation relates to the very essence of 'tefilla' [prayer] and our special relationship with God.

Our conclusions will also help us appreciate the transition from Rosh Ha'shana to Yom Kippur; as the focus of our prayers shifts from 'din' [judgement] to 'rachamim' [mercy].

[Lisa]

Yes.

Thanks.  I though so.

[muman613]

Some video of the leviah...

[muman613]