Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

What level of kedushah does the Tetragrammaton-substitution "yod-yod" have? Can it go in the garbage? Must it be geniza'ed? Let's assume that the word is used in a song or other non-Torah sentence.

(related: Double Yud as G-ds Name)

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Just recently (22 Cheshvan, 5774) a letter from the Lubavitcher Rebbe discussing the Yud-Yud spelling was published in a leaflet - page 22. In that letter he mentions the opinion of Rabbi Yaakov Meir Garadenski from Minsk that a siddur should be specifically printed with the Yud-Yud, and that the source siddur for the printing of Tehilas Hashem followed this opinion. That opinion holds that it makes it less problematic when children mishandle the siddur. (The letter continues that Chabad tradition does not hold that way - as in it is not concerned about the mishandling by children, just that there was no time to change it for that printing. Alex discussed some that history here).

So from this we see it has a lower level of kedusha. However, it is a letter of Hashem's name which is referencing Hashem. The discussion of the requirements to treat such a usage respectfully in a non-sefer is discussed around the preference of using ב"ה vs. בס"ד. It would seem that that in this case, the same discussion applies (basically it is a Machlokes Achronim). Specifically in the case of the two yuds, there is more place to be stringent (thanks @fred).

share|improve this answer
1  
Re. the link in your last paragraph, it says that the vast majority of opinions agree with the Rama that the two yuds may be erased for a purpose. The Rama is based on the T'rumas HaDeshen (P'sak 171), who was concerned that maybe, since the two yuds reference the shem havaya and begin with the same letter as does the shem havaya, we should be extra stringent. The T'rumas HaDeshen writes that, even though there's a good chance that the second yud that is not from the name makes it permissible to erase the two yuds, "if there's no great need, why should we permit erasing it?" –  Fred Nov 7 '13 at 17:52
    
@Fred - thanks. –  Yishai Nov 7 '13 at 19:40
    
@Efraim, ping ^^^^ –  Yishai Nov 7 '13 at 20:16
    
@Yishai groise shkoyach! –  Efraim Nov 7 '13 at 22:44

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.