CORR 120-123

HEBREW LETTERS ON CHAPLAIN’S INSIGNIA

QUESTION:

The lettering for the Ten Commandments on the chaplain’s insignia is Roman lettering. If a request comes to change the letters to Hebrew letters, should this request be encouraged? (Asked bp Rabbi Aryeh Lev, New York)

ANSWER:

YOUR QUESTION as to whether there would be any objection if at some time the letters on the two tablets on the chaplain’s insignia were changed from Roman numerals to the Hebrew letters, can be answered at once. In principle there can be no objection to such a change, but in practice it would be undesirable.

The question which is basic to the entire discussion is whether there is any sanctity in the Hebrew letters per se, i.e., just as letters. That the Hebrew writing in itself is not sacred is evident from the fact that the Talmud says of certain writings in Hebrew that they need not be rescued from burning on the Sabbath. See Shabbas 115b, which speaks of kameyos and berachos: “Even though they contain names of God, they may not be rescued from the fire on the Sabbath, but must be allowed to burn up, including the names of God they contain.” In those days prayers were not permitted to be written; hence if written, the writing was not deemed to be sacred.

Of course, although the Hebrew letters are not sacred per se and the sacredness is dependent entirely upon what is written in them, nevertheless the written name of God, to be fully sacred, must be written in our square Hebrew letters. Thus the Mishnah in Yadaim 4:5 says that the written name of God is not sacred until it is written in our square Hebrew letters on parchment and with ink. In spite of this law, even the name of God so written is not always sacred. A Sefer Torah itself, if it is written by an apostate or a heretic, must be burnt up with all the names of God that it contains {Orah Hayyim 334:21).

This, then, is the law strictly stated. There is no sanctity in the Hebrew writing as such; the sanctity inheres only in the name of God written in Hebrew, and even that under certain circumstances (if written by a heretic) need not be rescued from fire.

However, while the above is strictly correct, there grew up in the passing of the centuries a noticeable sentiment to protect Hebrew writings in general. Perhaps this was due to the Kabbalah which taught that there was a sacredness in every Hebrew letter in the Bible and that all of them can be mystically woven together to form names of God. You will notice, therefore, that while the Talmud says clearly that written kameyos (spells) must be allowed to be burned up and the Sabbath not violated by rescuing them, the Shulchan Aruch in Orah Hayyim 334:14 repeats the Talmudic rule that they should not be rescued, but then adds: Some say that they should be rescued (in this regard it quotes the Tur).

In general there has grown up a feeling against carrying any Hebrew writing into unclean places. An example of this growing sensitiveness occurred with the famous responsa anthology of S’dey Chemed by Chaim Chiskia Medina. Although the title means Pleasant Fields, some rabbis raised the objection that the word S’dey, meaning “fields,” could be misread as “Shaddai,” and therefore the name of God. Hence the title should not be used, lest pages from it be taken into an unclean place. This objection was taken so seriously that there was printed in one of the many in troductions to the anthology a fifty-page collection of defense opinions entitled “Be’er B’S’dey,” “The Explanation of the Word S’dey.” I am sure that people today would object even to a Socialist paper printed in Hebrew letters being left in or taken to unclean places.

Since, therefore, the chaplain’s insignia on the chaplain’s coat is carried around everywhere, there certainly would be feeling against the fact if the chaplain’s insignia had the Hebrew letters of the Ten Commandments instead of the Roman letters.

It is worth mentioning that the Talmud expresses some concern about the king and the Sefer Torah. The Bible says (Deuteronomy 17:19) that the Sefer Torah that is written in behalf of the king, he should read all the days of his life; and the Talmud, Sanhedrin 21b, cautiously says that he must read it in a place that is proper for the Torah to be read in. In other words, it should not be taken to an unclean place. The Talmud says further that he should not go with it into the bathhouse or into the toilet.

But as I said at the beginning, there is no strict law against it, although there would be definite Jewish feelings opposed to a possible desecration.