(c) Apr 18 2001 RashiYomi Inc. MY COLLECTED & INDEXED MAIL JEWISH POSTINGS-Ver #1
Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@mcs.drexel.edu>
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 19:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: Advisability of Using Elokim in translations

There have been alot of discussions on names of God (Thus Scott (v29n01)
asked about SHLOMO in Song of Songs and KING in Megilath ester which was
answered by Joseph (v29n05). Similarly we have Etan's question from a
bell lab computer person on whether it is preferable to change Gods name
in computer translations (v28n96 and Harvey's response v29n03).

A relevant source for all these questions is a minor tractate called the
tractate of SOFRIM. (It can be found in many Gmarrahs after the tractate
on Idolatry or Horayoth). This tractace lists many laws about writing
Sefer Torahs and related customs. This tractate is also cited by many
Rishonim. As an example Joseph Geretz's (correct) explanation of
Shavuoth 35b--that Shlomo MEANS God according to the Pshat in Song of
Songs while KING means Achashvayrosh in Ester--is more or less mentioned
in Sofrim.

Returning to the question from the computer programmer: The tractate of
Sofrim is clear that the word denoting God should sometimes be
translated in a secular fashion.  Thus Exodus 22:27 should be translated
as "Don't curse a Judge (Elohim) and don't curse a King".

It would therefore be a mistake to translate this as ELOKIM. The proper
translation is ELOHIM and this word is not sacred (and may be
erased!!!).  The Tractate Sofrim (or the Rambam, or the Shulchan Aruch)
has a complete list of such secular usages of God

However the idea of translating the tetragrammaton as HASHEM appears to
be a nice idea.

Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA
rjhendel@juno.com
http://www.shamash.org/rashi
Moderator Rashi Is Simple