Modern Hebrew Names for Children

Part three of a three part series on naming children.  Part one discussed the proper time to name a daughter; part two talked about the momentous spiritual significance of the parents' naming their child.  

This post is longer than usual.  The length results from dialogue with readers that I incorporated into the post.  As far as basic structure, it is very simple, as follows:
1. Are modern Hebrew names acceptable to our Gedolim.   (It goes without saying that Modern Orthodox authorities are in favor of these names.  I am focusing the group I consider myself part of, the Old world Yeshiva Orthodox, or what the  booboisie calls Hareidim or Ultra-Orthodox.)
2. The difference between modern Hebrew names and non-Jewish names.
3.  Harav Kanievsky's opinion
   a. Three explanations for this opinion
4.  Rav Moshe Feinstein's opinion
5.  English and Hebrew lists of Hebrew names, both traditional and modern.

*********************

May a parent give a child a modern Hebrew name, a name that has not been used before?  Or are we obliged to choose a name from Tanach or other long standing tradition?

This post does not address non-Hebrew names.  We discussed that here, where we reproduced and commented upon an article written by Dr. Steven Oppenheimer.  There is an obvious difference between modern Hebrew names which are clearly associated with the Jewish people, and non-Jewish names, which might be a sign of assimilation.  Right now we're focusing on non-traditional Hebrew names.

I titled this piece "Modern names for children" because I'm thinking of the name parents give a child- the name you use when you get an aliyah or the first name with which you identify yourself in a document.  Of course one can choose for himself a different name for other purposes.  Many people acquire or give themselves a name that is entirely unrelated to the name they were given at the bris/aliyah, even Jewish names that are different than their given name.  As the Medrash (קהלת רבה פ"ז) says, every person has three names; one that his parents give him, one that his associates give him, and one that is written in Heaven in his book of creation.
  "שלשה שמות נקראו לאדם. אחד שיקראו לו אביו ואמו אחד שקראו לו אחרים  ואחד שקרוי לו בספר תולדות ברייתו". 
But I am talking about what we think of as the "official" name.

Harav Chaim Kanievsky's opinion

Rav Chaim Kanievsky famously refuses to give a bracha to a person with a non-traditional name.  His adamant and strongly expressed opinion is documented in several books, including ויקרא שמו בישראל, and  שמות בארץ, and שמא גרים.  One very well known example of his position is his reaction to the name Shira.  When asked to give a bracha to a person with that name, his reaction is always the same- Shira is not a name, and the real name is Sarah.  Not only does he deny the validity of such names, but he says that names of modern coinage are null and void, and don't need to be changed to a proper name.  They don't exist.  All you need to do it choose an appropriate name.  He has told Shiras that their name is Sarah, he has told an Eliran that his name is Elchanan Eliahu, and he told a Zohar that his name is Meir.

This is how the author of Sheimos Ba'aretz quotes Reb Chaim.

האם נראה לכם שכדאי שבפרשת מצורע, נקרא לבננו בשם 'מצורע'? או שבפרשת  פרה נקרא לבת בשם 'פרה' ?", תהה מרן הגר"ח קניבסקי שליט"א, "ואם כן, מדוע בשבת שירה קוראים לבת 'שירה'?"ה... 

If you had a boy in the week of Parshas Metzora, would you name him "Metzora?" If you had a girl during Parshas Parah, would you name her "Parah?"  So why would someone call a girl born during the week of  Shabbas Shira "Shira?"
Rav Chaim holds that the only names that are valid are the names in Tanach or in Even Ezer siman 129.

Again from Reb Chaim: the gist of it is, as he is quoted saying, ' "והנה שמות שהמשוגעים המציאו, יש לבטלם לגמרי" which means that he disapproves of neologisms and wishes they would be completely eliminated.

 שאלו את הגר"ח מהו ההבדל בין השמות המודרניים, מכל השמות של האמוראים שנקראו בארמית, וכל נשות ישראל בכל הדורות נקראו בשמות באידיש, ומה ההבדל בין אידיש לעברית? וזאת ועוד, שהגמרא (יומא יא, ב) אומרת ששמותיהם של רוב היהודים בחו"ל הם משמות גויים, ורק על שמו של רשע מצאנו בגמרא (יומא לח, ב) שאין ראוי לקרוא על שמו? והשיב ע"כ הגר"ח קניבסקי: "שמות שמצאנו שכתוב בגמרא, שהתנאים והאמוראים נקראו בהם, אפשר לקוראם. אבל להוציא שמות חדשים, כמו שיש היום זה לא ראוי", והגר"ח הצביע על דברי המדרש שהבאנו לעיל. ועדיין דעתם של השואלים לא היתה נוחה מהענין והצביעו על כך שבדורות התנאים והאמוראים התחדשו כל הזמן שמות חדשים ובערי אשכנז היו קוראים תמיד בשמות חדשים, לפי השפה המדוברת, וגם בערי ארצות המזרח קראו היהודים לילדיהם בשמות מקומיים.  ועל כך השיב הגר"ח שליט"א: "מה שמצינו בדורות הקודמים שקראו מדעת עצמם, כנראה היה להם סיבות שקראו, ועל זה אין קושיה. אבל מה שבזמנינו קוראים שמות מדעת עצמם, אין לה ראוי לעשות. חז"ל אומרים לקרוא על שם אבותינו, ומה שהם קראו שמות אחרים, היתה להם סיבה אחרת. אבל סתם להמציא שמות, זה לא היה אף פעם ותמיד היה טעם לזה. כל השמות היו מאבותינו או מאבות אבותיהם, אבל לא מהגויים. היו שמות שהתחלפו מהגויים, אבל חלילה להמציא שמות". 

The first question everyone asks is "What about Rav Kanievsky's name, "Chaim?" Where do we find in Tanach or Shas that someone was named Chaim?

Reb Chaim was asked this question, and he answered that we find this name in a Teimani Medrash.  כמדומה באיזה ממדרשי תימן הקטנים .

However, we don't really know anything about the provenance of these Teimani Medrashim.  As Eli put it,

.....some of these Midrashim are actually compilations, ~1000 or less years old, so this could be as old as R. Chayim the Tosafist, or maybe even Rabbeinu Vidal of Toulouse (a.k.a. מגיד משנה).
Saint Vivian was a French bishop who lived during the Visigoth invasion of the 5th century. Around the same time, Flavius Vivianus was a consul of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Eli mentioned Rabbeinu Vidal and, lehavdil, Saint Vivian, because the names Vidal and Vivian both mean life, as does Chaim.  There are many names for Life- for women, this includes Chaya, Chava, Vita, Vida, and Zoe.

But Eli later wrote that he found a reliable source for the name "Chaim."

I found an earlier use of Chayim: the Sura Gaon Rav Tzamach bar Rav Chayim (d. 895 approx), probably pre-dates the unnamed midrash from Teiman.

I don't know for a fact why Rav Kanievsky feels so strongly about this issue.  When a parent names a child, the name is the product of love and deep emotion (especially the mother's,) and if he denies a parent's right to give voice to such intimate and deep feelings, I am sure that he has a good reason.   Nothing in this article should be misconstrued as disrespectful to Harav Kanievsky.  Anything he says would be at home in the Beis Medrash of Ravina and Rav Ashi.  I can only speculate and suggest possible explanations.

1.  The Medrash (Breishis 37:7) says that those generations that had Ruach HaKodesh would give their child a name that was informed by their destiny.  We, that do not have Ruach HaKodesh, just give names of our ancestors to our children.

"ולעבר יולד שני בנים שם האחד פלג כי בימיו נפלגה הארץ"    רבי יוסי ורשב"ג רבי יוסי אומר הראשונים על ידי שהיו מכירים את ייחוסיהם היו מוציאין שמן לשם המאורע אבל אנו שאין אנו מכירים את ייחוסינו אנו מוציאין לשם אבותינו רשב"ג אומר הראשונים על ידי שהיו משתמשין ברוח הקודש היו מוציאין לשם המאורע אבל אנו שאין אנו משתמשין ברוח הקודש אנו מוציאין לשם אבותינו א"ר יוסי בן חלפתא נביא גדול היה עבר שהוציא לשם המאורע הה"ד ולעבר יולד שני בנים וגו'

Perhaps, based on that Medrash, there are only those two options.  Either you have ruach hakodesh or you name after an ancestor.  No other option is valid.

2.  The Zohar and the Gemara in Yoma and the Rogotchover I've mentioned in the parts one and two of this series can be read to imply that a name influences a person's personality.  If so, one cannot risk making up a name, because he has no way of knowing what kind of influence this name will have.

3.  Perhaps HaRav Kanievsky holds like that because he feels that such names are a symptom of cultural anomie, like Latisha and Shaniqua and Shonda, and that he holds that the symptom aggravates the underlying problem, and that fighting the symptom will mitigate the problem.

Eli's comments here responding to these explanations need to be in the main body of the post:

1. I don't think the late 9th century Chayim is much more of a source than the 12th century R. Chayim. It only pre-dates the invention of the name (actually, the adoption of a Goyische name).
2. R.Ch.K saying modern coinages are null and void, and don't need to be changed is really nothing but strong rhetoric, as there is no formal process for changing a name, proper or not. The real test for his position would be if he would ignore a Get with a "null and void" name, or better, approve a Get with the "correct" Sara instead of the "null and void" Shira, before waiting 30 days as one should do for a regular name change. 
3. R. Yossi in Medrash cannot be used to support R.Ch.K. position, as we know for a fact names were invented much after R. Yossi's generation. All the sources for names affecting destiny are not strong enough against our Mesorah to invent names, and adopt Goyische names if they sound right. Ask Rabbi Bon.
4. Naming your son Shakil is not the same, in terms of Jewish identity, as naming him Tal or Zohar. I can see reasons to oppose the latter names, but based solely on לא שינו את שמם, using Zohar is much more distinctive than Yaacov (to be changed to Jacob in the workplace).

Regarding Eli's point 2, I should mention that Rabbi Meir Peikus just told me that when his son got married, the mesader kiddushin was Rav Aharon Shechter of Chaim Berlin.  They sat down to write the tna'im, and his mechutan told Rav Shechter that the Kallah's name was Ilana Rus.  Rav Shechter gave him a really hard time- Ilana is not a name!  What kind of name is Ilana?  Rabbi Peikus said that even if it is a taina, it's a taina that is twenty one years late.  They finally got Rav Shechter to move on by noting that at least her second name was Rus.
Regarding his fourth point, of course he's right.  A distinctive Hebrew name separates and identifies us as Jewish more than the common biblical names which are just as often used by non-Jews.  I would say that Reb Chaim views them as a product of Am Yisrael, not of Mesoras Yisrael- nationalistic rather than religious.  More importantly, and I think this is undeniably true, is that the tremendous increase in this kind of neologism since the advent of Zionism can be reasonably interpreted- in most cases- as a rejection of the Galus identity and an emphatic declaration (I would say asseveration) of the identity of "The New Jew."

Eli responded

I understand one can oppose modern names as a way to separate from modern Jews (religious and non-religious alike), or as demonstration of embracing the old-world as a reaction to the idea of the New Jew. לא שינו את שמם cannot be used as a source for that, only an inspiration.

Lest you, the reader, go away thinking that we're grasping at straws in suggesting a "movement" that wishes to recast Jewish identity, here are two illustrations of the idea of the creation of  the "New Jew."   Against this background, Harav Kanievsky's opinion becomes more understandable.

From the World Zionist Organization website:

For some Zionists, especially the East European Jewish intellectuals, Zionism was not only a national movement committed to the establishment of a Jewish homeland. It also wished to create a modern, secular Jewish identity. According to this formulation it was not religion that was to provide the basis for Jewish identity but ethnicity and nationalism. The Hebrew language, the land of Israel, Jewish history, literature, customs, folklore and their interplay were to provide a new more open-ended paradigm for Jewish identity.

From historian Rabbi Ken Spiro's essay on Modern Zionism:

The key factor which shaped their [secular Zionist thinkers] worldview was a nationalism based not only on the notion of creating a physical Jewish homeland, but also of creating a new kind of Jew to build and maintain this homeland. Many of these early Zionist thinkers felt that centuries of ghettoization and persecution had robbed the Jews of their pride and strength. To build a homeland required a proud, self-sufficient Jew: a Jew who could farm, defend himself, and build the land.The pious, poor, ghettoized Jew—who presented a pathetic image of a man stooped-over and always at the mercy of his persecutors—had to be done away with. To build a state required something all-together different—a “Hebrew.” The early Zionists called themselves “Hebrews” and not Jews, and deliberately changed their German or Russian or Yiddish names to sound more Hebraic and nationalistic (for example, David Gruen became David Ben-Gurion. Shimon Persky became Shimon Perez). It was a deliberate attempt to create a totally new Jewish identity and rid themselves of any aspect of the religious, Diaspora Jewish identity…These early Zionist leaders knew of course that religion had preserved Jewish identity in the ghettos and shtetls of Europe, but in the modern Jewish state, they felt there would be no need for it. Of course the Bible would be used as a source of Jewish history and culture but there was no room for religion or ritual in the modern Jewish state.

I would only add that not everyone that names their daughter Shira intends a militant rejection of tradition.  One of my daughters in law is a Shira, and her parents are fine upstanding Lakewood people.  My niece's name is Yonit and her fathers for at least four generations back have been roshei yeshiva.  Rav Gifter named his daughter Shlomis to celebrate the end of WW II, and not after Ms. Divri.  I think this is an Eretz Yisrael thing, a land where everything becomes political and polarized.  If you need a bracha for someone that has a modern name, go to someone other than HaRav Kanievsky.

And let us emphasize

Reb Moshe Feinstein's opinion 

Although we began with Harav Kanievsky's opinion, most communities follow Reb Moshe Feinstein's much milder approach.

His Teshuvos on this issue are in EH 3:35. OC 4:66, and OC 5:10. The gist of what he says is that lechatchila, a name should reflect our Jewish heritage.  Non-Jewish names are very inappropriate and would never be approved of by Gedolei Yisrael.   

 עצם הדבר שמשנים את שמותיהם לשמות נכרים וודאי הוא דבר מגונה מאוד .... אבל איסור ממש לא מצינו בזה   Reb Moshe does not say that it had no validity as a name for the first person that had it, just that it was wrong for the person that named him to give a non-Jewish name.  Furthermore, once a person was given such a name, it becomes kosher for his or her descendants, because that person's children should honor and perpetuate the original bearer of the name.  

He proposes that the value of לא שינו was only when that was the only flag of identity, which wouldn't apply after Mattan Torah, because now the Taryag mitzvos adequately distinguish us, but he says he is not sure that this rationale is reliable le'halacha.  He therefore strongly discourages giving names that are not part of the Jewish heritage.

Reb Moshe does not even address modern Hebrew names.  He only talks about the legitimacy and appropriateness of non-Jewish names, but his criticisms of non-Jewish names would not apply to modern Hebrew names.

On the other hand, when Reb Moshe's daughter in law wanted to name her daughter Aviva, after an Avraham, Reb Moshe said that Aviva doesn't make any sense.  It's not a word- it's either Aviv or it doesn't mean anything.  So he said that if you want to name a girl after an Avraham, you should name her Ahuva, because the Hei is the most important letter.

Along those lines, I also would add that, as I mention in the comments, I have a very hard time with feminized theophoric names.  For example: Gavriel is a compound word comprising Gevura and El, Strength and God.  El is God.  God is expressed in the male gender.  To call someone Gavrielah is a gender change which , in my opinion, is bizarre and grotesque.  I don't buy the explanation that the name is given to remember a person named Gavriel.  One must remember the original source of the name, and not do violence to its meaning.

An Afterword

Finally, I want to put in a comment that someone wrote in when I posted this in an earlier form.  I'm putting it in here mostly because I like the forthright manner and the tone of his comment.  I don't necessarily agree that his point applies to all of our sub-groups, but it's a shrewd observation.  

shimonmatisyahu said...Look, as per some of the past comments, I don't know when the name Shira began being used. But what I do know, such as with my ancestry, while the boys were given regular one or two Hebrew names, the girls were thrown some Yiddish sounding word as a name that really had no meaning to it. Another difference of naming between genders that I have seen is that tons of girls are named Chava, but it is rare to find a guy in the frum world with the name Odom, because "it is not a name of a Yid". So another words, since females aren't looked upon as holy as males, it is OK to call them Chava even if the first Chava wasn't Jewish, but a "Ben Torah" should not be given the "goyishe" name Odom.

Basically, what he saying is that while a boy's name is given serious thought, because he embodies the family's honor and he needs to present a public image of authority and strength, some people name daughters like they name their pets.


Lists of Modern Hebrew Names

A very nice list in English is available here.  This list is a section of a massive collection of names from many cultures and nationalities.  A similar list in Hebrew, which includes and labels both modern and traditional names, is available here.

The Profound Significance of Naming a Child

(This post is the second of a three part series focusing on naming children.   Part one discussed the proper time to name a daughter.  Part three will discuss the debate about modern Hebrew names.)

How important is the moment that a child is given a name?

The best way to begin this discussion is by quoting a remarkable halacha from the Drisha.  (The Drisha is the name of a gloss on the Tur, written by Rav Yehoshua Falk, a student of the Rama and the Maharshal.  He is also the author of the Prisha and the Sma, and was one of the great community leaders of his time, the founding member of the Vaad Arba Ha'aratzos.) 
The Drisha is in YD 360 (easy to remember, it's Shin Samach, Shas.) The halacha there deals with precedence: If a person has several events that he ought to attend, and he has to chose which to attend first, (also, possibly, where he can only do one but not both, which would broaden the discussion to include not only precedence but also priority,) which event has precedence?  The occasions listed include bikkur cholim, attending a funeral, nichum aveilim, accompanying a Chasan or Kallah to the Chupa, attending a Sheva Brachos, and going to a Bris. I'm not going to write the list, because there are many qualifying factors.  But, all things being equal, the halacha is that Bris Milah comes before Chasan and Kallah. The Drisha says that attending the naming of a girl has a status equal to attending a Bris Milah.  The same way that attending a Bris has precedence over attending to simchas chasan v'kallah, so too, attending a girl-naming has precedence over simchas chasan v'kallah. 

Please note that even though I say "the naming of a girl," the gender of the child is irrelevant.  When the Drisha says that the naming ceremony is of equal weight to that of a bris, he is referring to the naming of a child in general.  His assertion only has practical relevance for the naming of a girl, because a boy is usually named at his Bris.  But the rule is gender neutral.  It is the naming of a child that the Drisha highlights.

We all realize the enormous significance of a Bris Milah.  In the Tur and Shulchan Aruch, one siman (YD 260) is entirely dedicated to the statement that the Mitzva of Bris is uniquely important- "מצוות עשה לאב למול את בנו, וגדולה מצווה זו משאר מצוות עשה".  It is so unusually important that one who does not attend the festive celebration of a Bris to which he was invited is viewed as if he were in a state of excommunication (YD 265:12.)   In light of this extraordinary significance, one would think that merely naming a child is far less meaningful.   Thus, the Drisha's statement, made without any citation, is very novel.  In fact, the lack of a citation indicates that the Drisha held its truth to be self evident.

How are we to understand the profound significance the Drisha attaches to the naming of a child?


1. The Giving of a Name reflects significance and a meaningful destiny.   Being Called a name means that you have a Calling. 

          A.  The Rashba
The Rashba (Teshuvos 4:30) was asked why the Torah lists the names of the predecessors of Avraham Avinu in a form that is different from the one used elsewhere in the Torah.  In most places, the Torah says "a child was born and he was given a name."  Here, most of the names are listed, but it does not say "was born to X and he called him/gave him the name Y."  
He answers that a name relates to permanence, to firm establishment.  Something that is ephemeral and insubstantial does not really have a name.  Therefore, until Sheis was born to Adam, none of the children are introduced with the "and he called him...." form.  Only when Sheis, who was the progenitor of all mankind, was named, does it use that form.  His son, Enosh, also was of such a significance as to merit this usage.  But the descendants of Enosh, till Noach, where utterly without significance.  Noach, who survived the Mabul and was the progenitor of all that lived after the Mabul, also is "given a name."  After Noach, in that the permanence of the world was guaranteed, there was no need to use the phrase "gave him a name." 

 שו"ת הרשב"א חלק ד סימן ל

שאלת: למה אמר הכתוב, בכל אותם הדורות שהיו מאדם עד אברהם אבינו ע"ה, בענין התולדות: ויולד פלוני לפלוני, ולא אמר: ויולד לפלוני בן, ויקרא את שמו פלוני.

תשובה: דע, כי קריאת השם, יורה על הקיום. ובדבר המתפסד, ואין לו קיום, אין ראוי לקרות לו שם.
 ויורה ע"ז: 'שם רשעים ירקב', 'ולא שם לו על פני חוץ'. וההפך: 'ונתתי להם בבתי ובחומותי יד ושם', 'לפני שמש ינון שמו'. ועל כן, תמצא דקדוק הכתוב כל התולדות שנולדו מאדם ועד שת, שנמחו כולם, ולא נשאר להם שורש, לא הזכיר בא' מהם: ויקרא את שמו, עד שנולד שת. ומפני שנשתת ממנו העולם, כתוב בו: וידע אדם עוד את אשתו, ותלד בן. ותקרא את שמו שת: כי שת לי אלהים זרע אחר. וכתב הטעם בצדו: כי שת לי אלהים זרע אחר תחת הבל. שזה זרע אחר שיש לו קיום, תחת הבל, כי הרגו קין, ואין לו קיום, ולא נשתת זרעו. וללמד: כי מזה נשתת העולם, ולתולדותיו יהיה קיום. והוא שאמר: ולשת גם הוא יולד בן, ויקרא את שמו אנוש. אח"כ חזר והזכיר התולדות עד נח. ומפני שאף תולדות אלו גם כן נמחו במבול, ולא נשאר מהם רק נח, חזר שלא להזכיר בהם קריאת שם. ונח, שנשאר ונתקיים ממנו העולם, חזר ואמר בו קריאת שם. דכתיב: ויחי למך וגו', ויולד בן. ויקרא את שמו נח לאמר: זה ינחמנו. ואחרי שהיה לעולם קיום, ולא נשחתו הדורות אח"כ, אלא שנחלקו לאומות, לא הקפיד בקריאת השם.

The lesson of the Rashba is that not the name, but the act of giving a name, is associated with a significant life and a lasting legacy.  One might say that the Rashba holds that קריאת שם, calling a name, means that this child has a calling.  If the child has no "calling," there's no point in calling him anything.

With the Rashba we understand precisely the tefilla said at a bris, a tefilla quoted by the Rishonim ר"ש מגרמייזא and ר"י ב"ר יקר.  When we name the child, we say 

קיים את הילד הזה לאביו ולאמו ויקרא שמו בישראל כך. 

Hashem, firmly establish the child to his parents, and his name will be called, in the nation of Israel, .....  What does this introduction mean?  With the Rashba, it becomes crystal clear.  קיום- permanence and significance- is strongly related to the act of giving a name.  (Similarly, the Gemara in Nedarim 32a says that the act of the Bris Milah gives "Kiyum", permanence, to the Heaven and Earth.)  Therefore we say קיים את הילד הזה לאביו ולאמו ויקרא שמו- give this child קיום now as we give him his name.  

Getting back to our topic:  This Rashba might explain why the naming of a child is so meaningful.  Before the act of naming, the child was, in some spiritual sense, ephemeral and not a significant and lasting part of the fabric of our world.  With the naming of a child, the world has changed.

          B.  The Rogotchover.

The Rogotchover, in Breishis 2:19-20 says that the true name of a thing is the quality that distinguishes it from whatever is not it. When a thing loses its particular quality or specific function it loses its name. (He also discussed this in Bechukosai on vehishbati chaya raa, where there is a machlokes Reb Yehuda and Reb Shimon whether this means physical elimination or that the animals will remain, but, for example,  the lion will no longer be a predator; and that Reb Yehuda is leshitaso that ein biur chametz ella sreifa.) I believe that the naming of a child is the moment when that neshama's true tafkid/yiud/purpose is determined. That unique purpose is a vital component of God's plan and it can be achieved only by this person. This primal occasion, when a person's part in the world is established, is a moment of significance shared by every fellow human being.

          C.  The Maharal

The Maharal in Gevuros Hashem says, similarly, that a name is related to the essence of a thing or person.  It's interesting to see how the Maharal echoes the Rashba; he says that a true name, such as Moshe Rabbeinu's, is so deep and spiritual as to be undiminished by time and unaffected by tribulation.
We find this idea expressed almost exactly the same way in Reb Chaim Volozhiner's Ruach Chaim in the beginning of the first perek of Avos.
Similarly, Rav Shamshon Raphael Hirsch (Breishis 2:19) says the word Shem (name) comes from the word Sham (place). A person's name (Shem) indicates his place in the world. When someone is given a name, that name has a profound effect on that person's essence. 

          D.  Reb Meir

The Gemara in Yoma 83b says that Reb Meir knew the hidden soul of a person just by knowing his name.  (His fellow students from Reb Akiva's yeshiva, Reb Yosi and Reb Yehuda, did not do any such thing.)  They once had some involvement with a man named Kidor, and Reb Meir saw in that name a wickedness, and he was on guard against him.  Reb Yosi and Reb Yehuda disregarded this omen, and it almost caused them a great loss.  This relates to the idea of a name being a manifestation of a person's spiritual essence.

רבי מאיר ורבי יהודה ורבי יוסי הוו קא אזלי באורחא, רבי מאיר הוה דייק בשמא רבי יהודה ורבי יוסי לא הוו דייקו בשמא. כי מטו לההוא דוכתא בעו אושפיזא, יהבו להו. אמרו לו: מה שמך? - אמר להו: כידור. - אמר: שמע מינה אדם רשע הוא, שנאמר 'כִּי דוֹר תַּהְפֻּכֹת הֵמָּה בָּנִים לֹא אֵמֻן בָּם'. רבי יהודה ורבי יוסי אשלימו ליה כיסייהו רבי מאיר לא אשלים ליה כיסיה. אזל אותביה בי קיבריה דאבוה אתחזי ליה בחלמיה: תא שקיל כיסא דמנח ארישא דההוא גברא. למחר אמר להו: הכי אתחזי לי בחלמאי! אמרי ליה: חלמא דבי שמשי לית בהו ממשא. אזל רבי מאיר, ונטריה כולי יומא ואייתיה. למחר אמרו לו: הב לן כיסן! אמר להו: לא היו דברים מעולם. אמר להו רבי מאיר: אמאי לא דייקיתו בשמא? אמרו ליה: אמאי לא אמרת לן מר? אמר להו: אימר דאמרי אנא חששא, אחזוקי מי אמרי? משכוהו ועיילוהו לחנותא, חזו טלפחי אשפמיה, אזלו ויהבו סימנא לדביתהו, ושקלוהו לכיסייהו ואייתו. אזל איהו וקטליה לאיתתיה. היינו דתניא: מים ראשונים האכילו בשר חזיר, מים אחרונים הרגו את הנפש. ולבסוף הוו דייקי בשמא, כי מטו לההוא ביתא דשמיה בלה, לא עיילו לגביה. אמרי: שמע מינה רשע הוא, דכתיב "וָאֹמַר לַבָּלָה נִאוּפִים" (יחזקאל כג).

          E.  The Medrash Rabba

The Medrash Rabba (Breishis 37:25) says that those generations that had Ruach HaKodesh would give their child a name that was informed by their destiny.  We, who do not have Ruach HaKodesh, just give names of our ancestors to our children.

"ולעבר יולד שני בנים שם האחד פלג כי בימיו נפלגה הארץ" ר' יוסי אומר: הראשונים על ידי שהיו מכירים יחסיהם היו מוציאים לשם המאורע, אבל אנו שאין אנו יודעין את יחסינו אנו מוציאין לשם אבותינו. רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר: הראשונים על ידי שהיו משתמשין ברוח הקודש היו מוציאין לשם המאורע אבל אנו שאין אנו משתמשין ברוח הקודש אנו מוציאין לשם אבותינו. אמר ר' יוסי בר' חלפתא נביא גדול היה עבר שהוציא לשם המאורע.

I hope that you noticed that the Reb Yosi that says that the early generations used to give a name that was informed by Ruach Hakodesh, but that we just name for our ancestors, is the same Reb Yosi in Yoma 83b who initially ignored Reb Meir's warning that a person's name reflects their personality.  Apparently, Reb Yosi holds that because we no longer have Ruach Hakodesh, the names we give our children don't show anything about them, and Reb Meir holds that for some reason it still does.  Alternatively, everyone agrees that a name does say something about the person, but Reb Yosi holds that the predilections a person was born with do not determine what he will be when he matures, and Reb Meir was a Determinist (at least as far as taking risks was concerned.  Reb Meir certainly didn't deny that Bechira enables a person to change, but, as Damon Runyon said, “The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's how the smart money bets.”  Or, in Reb Meir's own words, ?אימר דאמרי אנא חששא, אחזוקי מי אמרי)  In the end, though, the Gemara in Yoma does say that Reb Yosi did pay attention to the implications of a person's name.  It's hard to know whether the Medrash is the pre-Kidor Reb Yosi or the post-Kidor Reb  Yosi.

Furthermore, we need to mention that although the Medrash says that the Ruach Hakodesh of naming a child no longer pertains, the Arizal held that it does.

האר"י ז"ל כותב ב"שער הגילגולים" (פנ"ט) ש"השם שקוראים לו אביו ואמו בעת שנימול, הוא נכתב למעלה בכסא הכבוד וכך הוא נקרא באקראי, כי הקב"ה מזמין אותו השם בפי אביו ואמו שיקראוהו כן,  ולכן רבי מאיר ורבי יהושע בדקו בשמא".

See also ספר הגלגולים הקדמה כ"ג,

 ונמצא כי  כאשר נולד האדם, וקוראים לו אביו ואמו שם אחד העולה בדעתם, אינו באקראי ובהזדמן, כי אם הקב״ה משים בפיו השם ההוא המוכרח אל הנשמה ההיא, כמש״ה אשר שם שמות בארץ, כפי מקום האבר שבאדם העליון, אשר ממנו חוצב, והשם הזה נרשם למעלה בכסא הכבוד כגודע, ולכן ארז״ ל  שמא גרים. נם זהו טעם  של ר׳ יהושע ן׳ קרחה ור״מ  דהוו בדקי בשמא.

and the אור החיים דברים כ"ט י"ז kind of says it-

 ואומרו ומחה הי את שמו מתחת השמים . דע כי שורש נשמות האדם יסודותם בהררי קודש תחת השמים בסוד השמים כסאי והנשמות הם חצובות מתחת כסא כבודו יתברך והבן . וכבר ידעת סוד השם כי היא הנשמה וכמו שהארכנו במקומות אחרים ואמר הכתוכ על המשתרר בלבבו ומחה ה׳ שמו שהיא נשמתו משרשה שהיא תחת השמים וזו היא כריתות הנפש משרשה :

and עמק המלך שער א' סוף פרק ד, but I didn't see that one inside, so don't blame me if he doesn't say it.

Who knows?  Maybe it's worth coming to a naming of a child simply to be in the presence of a person that is being touched by Ruach Hakodesh, as the Arizal says he is.

          F.  The Yalkut 
The Yalkut Shimoni in Yeshayahu 449 (in Perek 41) says that if mankind would only have merited it, Hashem would give every person a name, and from that name his character and his behavioral traits would be known.

מי פעל ועשה קורא הדורת מראש -

אלו זכו הדורות היה הקב"ה קורא שמותם, כשם שקרא לאדם ולחוה, שנאמר: ויקרא את שמם אדם. וכן אתה מוצא, כשהיה הקב"ה רואה צדיק נולד, הוא בכבודו היה קורא שמו. קרא לאברהם: והיה שמך אברהם.וכן ליצחק: וקראת את שמו יצחק. וכן ליעקב: והיה שמך ישראל. 

וכן לשלמה: כי שלמה יהיה שמו.וכן ליאשיה: הנה בן נולד לבית דוד יאשיהו שמו. 

ואלו זכו הדורות היה הקב"ה קורא שם לכל אחד ואחד ומשמו היו יודעים את טיבו ואת מעשיו

וכן אתה מוצא במצרים: אלה משפחות לוי משפחת הלבני - על שם טיט ולבנים.משפחת השמעי ששמע הקב"ה את תפלתם.משפחת החברוני - שנתחברה להם שכינה. 

אמרו רבותינו: כשהיה רבי מאיר רואה אדם היה למד שמו ומשמו היה יודע את מעשיו. פעם אחת באו אצלו שני תלמידים והיה שם אחד מהם כידור. אמר רבי מאיר לתלמידיו: הזהרו מכידור זה!אמרו לו: רבי, בן תורה הוא. אמר להם: אעפ"כ הזהרו ממנו. אחר ימים הלכו למרחץ והפקידו בגדיהם אצל כידור ונכנסו למרחץ. מה עשה אותו כידור? נטל בגדיהם והלך לו, יצאו ולא מצאוהו הלכו לבתיהם ולבשו בגדים אחרים. באו לפני ר' מאיר, א"ל: מה ראיתם להחליף בגדיכם? ספרו לו המאורע. א"ל: לא אמרתי לכם הזהרו עצמכם מכידור זה!אמרו לו: בבקשה ממך רבינו, מנין היית יודע? אמר: משמו שנקרא כידור, שנאמר: כי דור תהפוכות המה. 

NOTE: 
It is important to realize that there might be two disparate approaches in these Medrashim.  One is that the Ruach Hakodesh of giving a name enables a person to identify the essential personality and life-purpose of the child.  The other approach is that the name alludes to what the future holds for that child-  of Ruach HaKodesh gives a person an omniscient awareness which enables him to "remember" the child in the context of his life experience, even before that experience has taken place.  For example, this is the opinion of the Tiferes Yisrael in Shekalim 6:1, where he says that many kings' names reflected their life experience, and they were named to reflect that which was later to come.

ועל שם כך נקרא יאשיהו, רוצה לומר, כבר נתייאש הקב"ה מהם. וכמו כן רוב המלכים כשתדקדק בהם תמצא ששמם מורה על פי מה שאירע בימיהם. שאול, ע"ש ששאלו העם מלך, והוא היה רק נשאל להם משבט אחר, כי לא הבשילו אשכלות שבט יהודה עדיין, ופרשת 'אשימה עלי מלך' אכלוהו ישראל פגה, כי קודם לזמן הראוי שאלוהו. דוד ע"ש דודיו ואהבתו לעמו, כאמרו "תהי ידך בי ובבית אבי" לא כשאול שהתאכזר להרוג עיר ואם בישראל מנער ועד זקן. שלמה על שם השלום שהיה בימיו. ירבעם ירב עם, שעשו ריב ומרידה על ידו. רחבעם רע חב עם, או רחב עם, שנתרחבו מתחת צמצום אחדות מלכות בית דוד. אסא על שם הרופאים אשר דרש. יהושפט על שם משפט ה' אשר העמיד בכל עיר, ויאמר להשופטים אשר העמיד ראו מה אתם עושים כי לה' תשפוטו. אחזיהו, אחזו יהוא, כי נשבה מיהוא. יואש, שכבר היה מיואש זרע בית דוד, וסברו כולם כי השמידה אותם עתליה. אמציהו, כי אמצו ה' נגד אדום. עזריה, על שם שעזרו א-לוקים. ונקרא ג"כ עוזיהו, על שם עוז ה' כי היה הרעש בימיו. חזקיהו, על שם שחזקהו ה' נגד סנחריב ומחליו. מנשה, כי נשה ממקומו לשוב. יהויקים, כי הקים ה' אויבו עליו להשחית. צדקיהו כי צדיק היה, והצדיק דין שמים עליו לומר צדיק הוא ה' כי פיהו מריתי. וכפי הנראה נקרא שם המלכים ביום לידתם על פי נביא. והארכתי קצת זה כאן אף שאינו מקומו, לבעבור כי פלא הוא 

The Tiferes Yisrael says that the events that inform the names stem from occurrences that are entirely extraneous to the personality or character of the person.

On the other hand, it is equally possible that the Medrashim do not disagree at all.  They mean to say that the person's essential character and life-purpose inexorably and inevitably lead to a life-experience that expresses that character and purpose.  The Yalkut in Yeshayahu that says that the Livni family got their name because they worked with bricks (הלבני - על שם טיט ולבנים) might mean that they gravitated to that work because of an inherent predisposition.

2.  Naming a child is a Meta-Mitzva

          A.  Reb Moshe

Reb Moshe, (Igros vol 7, EH 4:102) says that perhaps our naming of a child is a sort of Mitzva that is related to Hashem telling Adam Harishon to name all the creatures.

אגר"מ אה"ע ח"ד קב

קריאת שם לבת היא כשם הבנים שהוא רצון השי"ת שיקראו שמות אע"פ שאין על זה ציווי, ויתכן אף דהוא בכלל הציווי לאדה"ר שיקרא שמות, ולדורות נשאר רצון וציווי זה. ולכן הנהיגו אבותינו ורבותינו מדורות הראשונים שיקראו שם הבנות ג"כ בקדושה בשעת קרה"ת ובבקשת רחמים עליה. 

...naming a daughter is like naming a son, it is the will of Hashem names should be given, even though there is no specific commandment to do so.  It is reasonable to say that this is included in the commandment to Adam to give names, and for all generations this will of Hashem and commandment remained.  This is why our forefathers and teachers from the early times led us to give names to daughters in a time of holiness, when we read from the Torah, and while asking that Hashem be merciful with her.

The idea that this is the will of Hashem makes it what I think of as a super-Mitzva- something that is not listed among the Taryag, but might be so fundamental that it is more meaningful than and stands above the Taryag mitzvos in general.  Another example of a Meta-Mitzva is tikun hamidos, which might be the whole tachlis of man's existence (See Reb Itzaleh Volozhiner's intro to his father's Ruach Chaim,) but is not the subject of any particular mitzva.
If so, this approach might validate the parity the Drisha gives to attending a Bris Milah and attending the naming of a child.

3.  Naming a child concretizes the bond with the parents and Klal Yisrael.

             A.   Rabbeinu Nachshon Gaon
The Rosh, (פ״ג דמ״ק ס״ס פח)  and other Rishonim (see Ramban in Toras Ha'Adam,) bring a minhag from the Gaon Rabbeinu Nachshon:

ינוקא דאיתילד והוא בר תרן או תלתא או ארבעה יומין רגילין וגמירי כי נח נפשיה מהלין ליה על קבריה ולא מברכין על המילה ומסקי ליה שמא דכי מרחמין מן שמיא והוי תחית המתים ליהוי ידיע ינוקא ומבחן ליה לאבוה, וכן הביא גם הרא"ש פ"ג דמו"ק סי' קל"ה בשם רב נחשון ע״כ.

He says that in the tragic event of a child's death after a few days, the minhag is to make a bris at the cemetery and name the child there before the burial.  More interesting, he says that it is this naming that will enable the child and the parents to recognize each other at Techiyas Hameishim.
See also here, especially in notes 222 and 224.
This is brought lehalacha in YD 263:8.

תינוק שמת קודם שיגיע להיות בן ח' מלין אותו על קברו בצור או בקנה ואין מברכין על המילה אבל משימים לו שם לזכר שירחמוהו מן השמים ויחיה בתחיית המתים: 

What would the minhag be with a girl?  It should be obvious that the naming would take place for a girl as well.  It is not the bris itself that creates a permanent bond, it is the act of naming and making a part of the family.  For a boy, that requires two actions, both giving a name and making a bris, because the bris milah is a part of enfolding a male child into the nation of Israel.  For a girl, it is giving a name alone that creates that permanent bond.  The act of giving a name concretizes the relationship of that child to its family and to Klal Yisrael.  This explains the Drisha as well.  Giving a name accomplishes precisely that which a bris accomplishes.

I don't want it to sound like saying that a child that never got a name is meaningless.  What I understand them to be saying is that a child that was never named is pure neshama without any meaningful bond to this physical world.  Naming bonds the neshama to the physical world.  Only after such a bond is created does a relationship with the parents have meaning.

4.  Having a name makes receiving Bracha possible; the name is a window to the soul.

          A.  The Ramban 
The Ramban (Bamidbar 1:32) says

 ועוד כי הבא לפני אב הנביאים ואחיו קדוש ה' והוא נודע אליהם בשמו יהיה לו בדבר הזה זכות וחיים, כי בא בסוד העם ובכתב בני ישראל וזכות הרבים במספרם, וכן לכולם זכות במספר שימנו לפני משה ואהרן כי ישימו עליהם עינם לטובה, יבקשו עליהם רחמים

The Ramban discusses why it was necessary for Moshe Rabbeinu to know each person's name when he was counted, as recounted in the beginning of Bamidbar.  He says that it is through knowing the person's name that Moshe and Aharon could know their secret soul and give them a true bracha.

Rav Shamshon Refael Hirsch toward the beginning of Bamidbar discusses the idea that a person's name is a window to his soul, but I don't have the exact MM in front of me.

5.  The Mysterious שבוע הבת

          A.  Eli's suggestion.  
In the original of this post, Eli brought an opinion that the expression שבוע הבת might refer to the naming of a daughter.  This is what he said:

Ramban in Torat Ha'adam (p.109 in Shevvel's edition) brings a Beraita that could have been the Drish'a source. In there it says "שבוע הבן ושבוע הבת, שבוע הבן קודם". We have no clue what שבוע הבת is, but some speculate that it's a Naming occasion (If one so wishes, it can be argued that based on this Naming should be delayed to the eighth day, or to the next Shabbat), and we see it is comparable to שבוע הבן, which some Rishonim explain as Mila.

6.  The Nusach of the Mi Shebeirach when naming a daughter.

Reb Moshe has his own nusach for this mi shebeirach, as follows: Please note, this is all one nusach, and he goes straight from the mi shebeirach for the health of the mother to the naming of the daughter.

,מי שברך אבותינו אברהם יצחק ויעקב משה אהרן דוד ושלמה הוא יברך את האשה היולדת פלונית בת פלונית עם בתה הנולדה לה למזל טוב בעבור שבעלה עלה לתורה בשכר וה הקב"ה ימלא רחמים עליה להחלימה ולרפאותה ולהחזיקה ולהחיותה וישלח לה מהרה רפואה שלימה מן השמים לכל אבריה וגידיה בתוך שאר חולי ישראל רפואת הנפש ורפיאת הגוף השתא בעגלא ובזמן קריב.     ואת בתה הנולדה לה למזל טוב לאורך ימים ושנים יקרא שמה בישראל פלונית בת פלוני ויזכו אביה ואמה לגדלה לחופה ולמעשים טובים ונאמר אמן. 

He adds that one may change the nusach from "l'gadla l'chupa u'l'maasim tovim" to "legadla l'Torah u'l'ven Torah u'l'maasim tovim.

והרוצה יוכל להוסיף ויזכו אביה ואמה לגדלה לתורה ולבן תורה לחופה ולמעשים טובים

When You Should Name Your Daughter

This was part of another post, but then I realized that it required division into several parts, as follow: 
When one should name a daughter; 
Why some gedolim insist on traditional names; 
Why the naming is such an important ocassion, and others.  

Here is part one.  

When should you name your daughter?

a.  A Lubavitcher Journal brings a minhag from the sefer Bris Avos to name her immediately, no need to wait for K'rias HaTorah, no need to wait for Shabbos, just do it the day she's born.
b.  The Minchas Yitzchak brings from the author of the Darkei Teshuva that the parent should name the daughter at the very first K'rias HaTorah after she is born.
c.  Reb Moshe Feinstein held that the naming should not be within the first three days after the birth, and then named at a mi shebeirach at a K'rias HaTorah.  That is the minhag of the Feinstein family, with the exception of a certain Moshe Eisenberg, (named after his Great Grandfather Reb Moshe), who named his daughter the day after she was born.  Another Feinstein Hanhaga is to know the difference between big things and little things, and not to lose any sleep over little things.  I think this is a relatively little thing, around the same level as breaking a plate at the T'naim or whether you stand or sit when you say Lecha Dodi (and when you turn around for Bo'i b'shalom)  I know that some people are obsessive about "their minhag" no matter what.  I remember a bachur that came over to me in yeshiva with a terrible problem.  His minhag is to stand for Lecha Dodi, and the yeshiva sits.  He was faced with a terrible dilemma.  What should he do????  I told him that he doesn't need to be mattir neder, and while he's in yeshiva, he should do what everyone else does.
d.  Some say no sooner than the fifth day, unless the fifth day is preceded by a Shabbos, in which case you can name her on Shabbos.
e.  Bostoner and Karliner Chasidim name only on the second Shabbos, based on the Medrash (brought by the  Taz in YD 265 SK 13) that Kedusha cannot be imparted to a living thing before it experiences a Shabbos- before it appears before the Matron.
f.  The Ya'avetz, in his Siddur, says that the name should be given on the first Shabbos that the mother comes to shul, and he doesn't qualify it by any number of days after the birth.  Alternatively, the father should name her in shul after four weeks (28 days.)
g.  After 30 days.
h.  There's a famous opinion from a forebear of the Chida that you should name a girl no sooner than forty days after her birth (discussed, and in a clearer print, here.)

So, to sum it all up, the first day, the third day, the fifth day, at the first Krias HaTorah, on the second Shabbos, on the first Shabbos the mother comes to shul, after 28 days, after 30 days, and after 40 days.  I'm glad I was able to clear this up for you.

More seriously: Please don't assume parity among the authors of the opinions cited above.  The recorders of these varied minhagim comprise an extremely wide range of authoritativeness, from nobodies to Geonim.  In practice, one should follow the minhag of the place or kehilla to which the parents belong.  The name of a Jewish child is an element of his or her relationship with the community, and one should follow the minhag of the community one is a part of.  As the Ramban says in Bamidbar 1:32,

הבא לפני אב הנביאים ואחיו קדוש ה' והוא נודע אליהם בשמו יהיה לו בדבר הזה זכות וחיים, כי בא בסוד העם ובכתב בני ישראל וזכות הרבים במספרם

Next installment: Why the Naming of a Child is a Profoundly Important Event.   

Hebrew Names, Jewish Names, & Secular Names. A Guest Post, Annotated

This was originally posted here in May 2009.  In June 2013 we posted on three closely related topics:  When one should name a daughter; The profound significance of the naming of a child; and Why some Gedolim insist that we only give our children traditional names.

*****************************************

This is an article that appeared in the "Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society" (Fall 1997.) I referred to it in a post that discussed Jewish names that are abbreviations, and the author kindly sent me a copy. The article is thorough and engaging; Some format static was introduced by my inexpert conversion of the document from pdf to html. I have neither the skill nor the inclination to fiddle around with it, and the errors are inconsequential.

I have added my own remarks in and after the footnotes, and my interpolations, annotations, and addenda are clearly marked as such by being in bold italics.

Secular Names

Steven Oppenheimer, D.D.S.

And G-d formed from the earth every beast of the field and every bird of the sky and brought them to Adam to see what he would call each one; and whatever Adam called each living creature, that remained its name (Hu Sh'mo).¹

Rav Shamshon Raphael Hirsch² says the word Shem (name) comes from the word Sham (place). A person's name (Shem) indicates his place in the world. When someone is given a name, that name has a profound effect on that person's essence. The Besht, the Ba'al Shem Tov, commenting on this verse in Genesis,³ wrote HaShem Hu Ha'Neshama Shel Ha'Adam, one's name is one's very soul. In fact, the middle letters of the word neSHaMa (soul), spell the word Shem (name).

The Midrash states:

The Jews were redeemed from Egypt through the merit of four things: they didn't change their names, they didn't change their language, they didn't engage in gossip (Lashon HaRa), and they didn't engage in licentious behavior; they didn't change their names, they went down [to Egypt] as Reuven and Shimon and they left [Egypt] as Reuven and Shimon; and they didn't call Reuven, Rufus, and they didn't call Shimon, Luliani, nor Yosef, Listim nor Binyamin, Alexander.⁴

If a person's name is so important, and if the Midrash states that the Jews were redeemed from Egypt because they didn't change their names, how is it that today, secular names are so widespread among Jews? If one can learn from Galut Mitzrayim, the exile in Egypt, and extrapolate from Geulat Mitzrayim, the redemption from Egypt, then it would seem that we should not have secular names, but good Hebrew names! How is it that so many Jews in America today have Hebrew and English names? Could it be that we are holding up the Geulah by having secular names?

Maharam Shick⁵ quotes the Midrash, (that they didn't change their names) and writes that it is a Torah prohibition to have a non-Jewish name. We see this from the verse Hivdalti etchem min Ha'Amim, (and I have separated you from the nations)?⁶ Maharam Shick quotes Rambam⁷, that we see from this verse that one is not permitted to dress like the Gentiles. So, too, says Maharam Shick, we are not allowed to call ourselves by a non-Jewish name. "And don't say", says Maharam Shick, "that I also have a Hebrew name to be called up to the Torah, that is foolish and stupid, and it is still prohibited to have a non-Jewish name."

The Talmud⁸ quotes the verse in Mishle⁹, "and the name of the wicked shall rot," and brings a grim story referred to in a passage from Lamentations.¹⁰ A child was given the name Do'eg (in spite of Do'eg's bad reputation).¹¹ His mother would measure his weight every day and would give the increase in his weight in gold to the Beit HaMikdash. In spite of this, the child died a horrible death. The Talmud states that none should name their children after wicked people and because of the unfortunate choice of name and the deviation from custom, "see what happened to him." The Migdal Oz, Rabbi Ya'akov Emden, writes¹² that just as we are not allowed to name someone after a wicked person as it says in Mishle, "and the name of the wicked shall rot," so too, it is also not permitted to have a non-Jewish name.

Rabbi Yosef Rosen, zt"l, writes¹³ that one is permitted to have a secular name that is a translation of one's Hebrew name.

It interesting that the Chatam Sofer, writes¹⁴ that someone who has two names, shem kodesh and shem chol, a Hebrew name and a secular name, should not be called to the Torah by both names. He was not referring to the Hebrew name and the English name but to the Hebrew name and the Yiddish name. The Yiddish name is the shem chol, the secular name. If your name is Tzvi Hersh you should only be called up by the name Tzvi.

How is it that so many of us have Hebrew and secular names? Not only that, but throughout the ages we see Jews have taken secular names. We find many non-Hebrew names among the zugot mentioned in Pirkei Avot. Antigonos and Avtalyon are some examples. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, zt"l, points out that many Amoraim had non-Hebrew names, such as Mar Kashisha, Rav Z'vid, Mar Zutra, and Rav Papa. Most of the names of the Geonim were Aramaic and not Hebrew. The author of the Maggid Mishnah was Rabbeinu Vidal. The name Maimon, the father of Rambam, appears to be a secular name.¹⁵ Rav Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk was also called Rav Velvele; his grandfather, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, the Bait HaLevi, was called Rav Yoshe Ber, and Rav Yitzchok Dov Bamberger of Wurtzburg was called Rav Seligman Ber.¹⁶ The great thirteenth-century leader of French Jewry was known by the Hebrew name, Rav Yechiel of Paris and by the French, Vivant of Meaux.¹⁷

Doesn't all this seem to be against the Midrash that we spoke of earlier? Rav Moshe Feinstein states¹⁸ that many non-Hebrew names that have gained acceptance in the Jewish community today as Jewish names started out as secular names taken from the countries in which Jews lived. At the time, says Rav Moshe, the rabbis complained about Jews taking these names, but they eventually gained acceptance. Today's secular names are not any worse than the old secular names. The new names just haven't been around as long. Eventually, they, too, will probably be accepted. And, therefore, when one writes a get, a bill of divorce, all secular names are equal, one isn't any holier than another.

Let us address, then, the last two remaining questions: (1) What about the Midrash, (they did not change their names) and, therefore, the Jews merited redemption? And if this is so, (2) Why do so many of us have a secular name? Rabbi Yehuda Loew, zt"l, the Maharal MiPrague, explains our Midrash as a special requirement only for the Jews of Egypt.¹⁹ They had not yet become a nation and needed the strict adherence to retaining their names and their language to serve as a distinction between them and the Egyptians. Rabbi Loew explains that one's name serves as one's personal connection to one's nation. A people's language serves as its connection to its nationhood. Rav Moshe also makes this point, that the requirement not to have a secular name was only for that period in time and is not a law today. While it may not be desirable to give your child a secular name, there is no issur (prohibition) involved.

As for the second question, "Why do so many of us have secular names?", I would like to share a fascinating historical insight. There are, apparently, three categories of names that Jews have had. 1) Shem kodesh – names taken from Tanach (Bible) or Gemara (Talmud). These were given at the Brit and were used for Aliyahs to the Torah, Jewish legal documents, and in prayers for the sick. 2) Shem chol – these were usually Yiddish-German nicknames that were given on the Shabbat that the mother came to Shul during the Cholkreisch (hollekreisch) ceremony. In Eastern Europe, in recent generations, this ceremony has been lost. 3) Shem lo yehudi – during the period of emancipation, these names were adopted by the Jews of Central and Western Europe for the purpose of governmental registration. These names were unrelated to the Cholkreisch ceremony.

The purpose of the Cholkreisch ceremony was to establish the child's nickname, the shem chol, to be used in his everyday life. The Cholkreisch ceremony is about 1,000 years old. Rav Simcha of Vitry²⁰ and Rabbi Yehuda HaChasid both write about this ceremony. The first one to mention it by name and explain the name, however, was the fifteenth-century Rabbi Moshe HaLevi MiMagentza, the Maharam Mintz. He explained that Hol or Chol referred to the secular name and Kreisch referred to the calling out (Tze'a'ka) of that name. ["In German, in the southern region, they call Tze'a'ka, kreisch."]

Rabbi Avraham Moshe Tendlau (1801-1877) wrote that the word "kreisch" used in the sense of "Tze'aka" comes from the old German "kreien", or "kreischen". This is similar to the English word in use today, 'cry']. On the first Shabbat that the mother came to Shul, the children of the community would be invited to the home of the new baby. They would lift up the cradle and call out the nickname, the shem chol, of the new baby. The adults would throw fruit to the children. The sixteenth-century rabbi, Rabbi Yosef Hahn Neuerlingen, author of Yosef Ohmetz, warned about the custom of throwing fruit to the children. The fruit got squashed and this was Bizui Ochlin, a desecration of food. The custom arose to throw candy to the children. This is probably the origin of today's custom to throw candy to the children at joyous occasions in shul. There are those who say that the lifting of the cradle during the naming is the origin of the name Hollekreisch. In French, lifting the cradle is called, "haut la creche" which is similar to the term "hollekreisch".²¹

Rabbeinu Tam²² indicates that Jews would give themselves Hebrew names but the Gentiles would call them other names. When his Aunt Rachel got divorced, she had a secular name given to her by the Gentiles, Belle-Assez which means very pretty. This is the origin of the Yiddish name Bayla. The Rosh also speaks of Gentiles giving Jews names during his time. Zanvil was a nickname for Shmuel, Rechlin for Rachel, Mirush for Miryam, Bunam for Simcha, Seligman for Pinchas, Wolf for Shimon, and Zalman for Shlomo.²³

Historically, there was a distinction between the Shem Kodesh, the Hebrew name, and the Shem Chol, the secular name. The Shem Kodesh served for d'varim she'b'kedusha, holy matters, such as being called to the Torah, prayers, and the writing of Jewish legal documents. The Shem Chol served for secular matters, as a nickname used by the person's family and friends. The Shem Kodesh was given in Shul at the time of the Brit; the Shem Chol was given at the baby's home while he lay in his cradle. We see this from Maharam Mintz who wrote over 500 years ago about a man called Meshulam Zalman. "He is called Meshulam to the Sefer Torah and this is the Shem Kodesh that his father gave him at the Brit, and the secular nickname for Meshulam is Zalman, the name given to him by his father and mother in his cradle on the Shabbat that she went with him to Shul, and this (ceremony) is called 'Hol Kreisch'."²⁴

The student of the Trumat Ha'Deshen (1389-1459) wrote a sefer called Leket Yosher. In the introduction, he introduces himself as follows: "My name is Yuzlan and I am called to the Sefer Torah as Yosef B'Reb Moshe." Concerning his Rebbi he wrote: The Gaon is called to the Sefer Torah as Yisrael B'Reb Petachya, z"l, but the world calls him Rabbi Isserlin ."²⁵ Rabbi Moshe ben Yisrael, zt"l, is known as the Ramo. Ramo is an acronym for Rav Moshe Isserlis. Isserlis means "son of Yisrael."

In Germany, a clear separation was kept between the Shem Kodesh and the Shem Chol. In Eastern Europe, however, over the course of time, this distinction was blurred, most probably as a result of the abandonment of the Cholkreisch ritual. There were some rabbis, such as the student of the Shevet Sofer , (Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Tzoval MiFakash) who attempted to stop the mixing of the two names. He allowed use only of the Shem Kodesh when calling someone to the Torah. In time it became common for people in Eastern Europe to use both the secular name and the Hebrew name for all matters. This created halachic problems in writing Gittin (divorce papers). In the past only the Shem Kodesh had been used. Now, it was uncertain exactly what should be written.²⁶

During the period of Emancipation, there were Jews who wanted to be accepted by the Gentile population and took non-Jewish first names. In Prussia, the government prohibited Jews to change their Jewish names to Christian names. In 1787, an Austrian edict limited the Jews to biblical first names. Nevertheless, the assimilationists managed to take Christian names. In 1836, Leopold Zunz published a book entitled Namen der Juden in which he attempted to prove that throughout the ages Jews had names given to them by the Gentiles. In this way, he hoped to persuade the government to allow Jews to choose any name they wanted.

In the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, the government allowed the Jews to adopt Christian names. The overwhelming response on the part of the Jews to take such names surprised even the Gentiles. When Maharam Shick²⁷ turned over the official list of names of his congregants to the local government official, the official berated him over the fact that so many Jews had non-Jewish names. The official was astounded that they were not proud enough of their Jewish heritage. It was then that Maharam Schick wrote his responsum decrying taking non-Jewish names.²⁸ He explained that following the law making it obligatory for Jews to have surnames, his father took the last name, SHiK, which was the abbreviation for Shem Yisrael Kadosh – a Jew's name is holy. This was done to remind his progeny of the importance of retaining a Jewish name. It is interesting to note that when a controversy arose over a rabbi who preached in the vernacular rather than in a "Jewish language", Maharam Schick came to his defense and justified the rabbi's practice.²⁹

Non-Jewish names were to be found among Jews even during the time of the Tanaim. There is a Braita³⁰ that teaches:

Divorce papers brought from abroad (to Israel) signed by witneses, even if the names are like the names of idolators, [the divorce papers] are valid. [This is] because most of the Jews [who live] outside of Israel have names that resemble the names of idolators.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein writes³¹ that it is impossible to determine when non-Jewish names came to be considered as Jewish names since all these names were originally taken from the Gentiles. In the beginning, the rabbis complained about these names, but they took hold. So, too, the rabbis could complain about the English names that Jews have taken in this country and similar names in other countries, but how much should they complain and how successful would they be? Rav Moshe is telling us that these non-Jewish names have been around for a long time in one form or another.

A number of countries in Central and Western Europe required Jews to register their children's birth in the official registry. Only German names were recognized, and so almost every Jew had a German first name, just as it is common today for Jews in Anglo-Saxon countries to have English names.³²

Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach (1844-1918) wrote that since many Jews had left the ghetto and lived among the Gentiles, they were uncomfortable about calling themselves overtly Jewish names, fearing ridicule by the Gentiles, and so chose German names. Rabbi Carlebach recommended that they adopt a translation of their Hebrew names, i.e. Abraham for Avraham and Moses for Moshe. Social pressure, however, eventually led more and more Jews to take German names.³³

A name determines one's destiny³⁴

Had the generations so merited, G-d would have given each and every person a name, and from that name we would have known that person's nature and deeds.³⁵

One should ever examine names, to give his son a name worthy of him to becoxme a righteous person, for sometimes the name may be a contributory factor for for evil or for good.³⁶

The Talmud³⁷ brings the story of Rabbi Meir who stopped at an inn with his two travelling companions. Rabbi Meir didn't want to leave his money with the innkeeper named Kidor, because Rabbi Meir doubted his honesty. He based his suspicions upon the verse, "they are a generation ( Ki Dor ) given to perverseness."³⁸ In the end, Rabbi Meir turned out to be right and Kidor, the innkeeper, stole his (Rabbi Meir's) companions' money. They complained to Rabbi Meir that he should have warned them. Rabbi Meir answered, " I considered this name a suspicion, not a definite presumption." In other words, a name can only arouse suspicion that a person may have an intrinsic dishonest nature. A name cannot, however, determine this definitively, since a person may overcome this character flaw and control the negative influences of his name.

We see that one should be very careful to select a name for a child that will have a positive effect upon his growth and development. A Hebrew name carefully selected does just that. This is what the Ba'al Shem Tov meant when he wrote that a name can manifest one's very essence. While the practice of using non-Hebrew names has been around for a long time, it is clear that Chazal saw major benefits in having and using a Shem Kodesh – a Hebrew name.

Every time a person engages in the performance of mitzvahs, he acquires a good name (Shem Tov) for himself. A person is called by three names – that which he is called by his father and mother, that which he is called by others, and that which he acquires for himself. The best of all is the name he acquires for himself [by the performance of mitzvahs].³⁹

Let us strive for the ideal approach. Let us choose a Shem Kodesh and pursue a Shem Tov. Let us pursue mitzvot and be proud to be Jews. And may our names and our deeds hasten the final redemption.

1.Genesis 2:19
2. In his commentary to Genesis 2:19
3 P'ninei Ha'Chasidut. (Blog note: this idea is also found in the Ohr Hachaim Devarim 29:19. By the way, the "Likutei He'aros" on the Ohr Hachaim there credits a sefer called "Ohr Habahir" for the oft searched for statement that the father is given divine inspiration, Ru'ach Hakodesh, when he chooses a name for his son. But I'll tell you that in my opinion, and in my personal experience, headstrong and/or stupid always trumps Ruach Hakodesh; when a Brass Band is playing, it's hard to hear the Kol Demama Dakah.)
4 Shir HaShirim Rabah, Chapter 4 (Blog note: Also in Vayikra Rabba in Parshas Emor #32)
5 Responsa Maharam Shick, Y.D., Chap. 169.
6 Based on Leviticus 20:24 (Blog note: The Maharam Shik's opinion on this matter is by no means normative. He tends toward the extremes when dealing with issues that touch upon haskala.)
7 Hilchot Akum 11:1 (Blog note: The Rambam he brings is a weak raya, especially since the Rambam doesn't mention the issue of Jewish names.)8 T.B. Yoma, 38b
9 Mishle, 10:7
10 Lamentations, 2:20
11 Do'eg Ha'Adomi, who lived during the time of Sha'ul HaMelech, was originally a great scholar and head of the Sanhedrin. He engaged in lashon ha'ra (slander) against David HaMelech and helped poison the relationship between Sha'ul and David. Do'eg died at age 34. The Talmud says that he had no share in olam haba (the world to come).
12 Nachal Tet, 14.
13 Tzafnat Pa'ne'ach, No. 275.
14 E.H., No. 21.
15 Iggerot Moshe, Vol. IV, No. 66.
16 Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, by R. Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, B'nei Brak, 5755.
17 Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 12, page 810.
18 Iggerot Moshe, E.H., Vol. 3, No. 35. (Blog note: As the author mentions, Reb Moshe says the same svara as the Maharal, although he says it noncommittally-- he says it is a reasonable pshat, but he is not comfortable stating it as a matter of halachic fact. Also, while the author quotes Reb Moshe as saying "While it may not be desirable to give your child a secular name, there is no issur (prohibition) involved", in fact Reb Moshe calls it "megunah," shameful--unless it is given to honor or memorialize a family member who had a non-Jewish name; see below, Additional notes, #3.)19 G'vurot HaShem, Chap. 43.
20 Rashi's noted student and author of Machzor Vitry.
21 Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, loc. cit.
22 Tshuvot Rabbeinu Tam, No. 25.
23 Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz.
24 Ibid.
25Ibid.
26Ibid.
27 Hungary, 1807 - 1879.
28 Responsa Maharam Shick, Y.D., No. 169. (Blog note: Shick is an old gentile German name. For example, Conrad Shick was a German protestant missionary who lived in Jerusalem in the eighteen hundreds. And see http://www.houseofnames.com/xq/asp.fc/qx/schick-family-crest.htm where it is clear that Shick has a long history as a German gentile name. I don't think the Maharam's father thought he was inventing a name. I think the Maharam's father chose the well known name of Shick because he could invest it with a dual meaning. Among gentiles, it is a common German name. Within his own family, he let it be known that it means "Shem Yisrael Kodesh." It would be like naming a child Mickey and saying it stands for Mi K'amcha Yisrael.)  29 Ibid. O.C. No. 70.
30 T.B. Gittin 11b.
31 Iggerot Moshe, E.H. Vol. 3, No. 35.
32 Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz.
33 Ibid.
34 T. B. Brachot 7b.
35 Midrash Tanchuma.
36 Ibid., Parshat Ha'azinu. (Blog note: R' Eliezer Papo in the Pele Yoeitz, Letter Shin, D'H Shem Tov, says that if one is interested in the benefit the child can derive from the influence of a name, one should give his child a name that commemorates some chesed Hashem did for the father, rather than taking a family name. For example, Rav Gifter's daughter's name is Rebbetzin Shlomis Eisenberg, and Reb Moshe's son's name is Rav Sholom Reuven Feinstein, because they were born either during or immediately after WWII. See also below in Additional Blog Notes #4.)37 T.B. Yoma 83b.
38 Deuteronomy 32:20.
39 Midrash Tanchuma, Parshat VaYak'hel.

Additional Blog notes:

1. See the Comment section, below, for an interesting discussion of the names of Mordechai and Esther, which, are certainly not Hebrew, and which some consider reminiscent of the names of certain pagan deities.

2. An Important Preliminary Analysis:

Three Aspects of the Concept of "Names."

What, exactly, does the word "name" mean? What constitutes a name?

See Even Ha'ezer 129 regarding what names are used in Gittin, and see the Chazon Ish EH 93:15 on these halachos, where he extensively discusses the relative standing of the various names a person has, such as the name given at the bris, when one is ill, by one's friends, and various disparate circumstances. For example, in business, when I'm dealing with a non-Jew, I tell them my name is Gene. I chose Gene because non-Hebrew speakers mangle my name, and Eugene means "born of good parents." It is completely unrelated to the name I usually use, but if you ask my business contacts, they'll tell you it is my name. So, is my name Gene? If you say it isn't, then you have to think about whether Reb Moshe's expression that a non-Jewish name is "megunah," shameful, applies to a person named Yaakov Koppel at his bris who chooses to tell people to call him Kyle or Gene or Steven. On the other hand, one can argue that the name a person is known by is more "his name" than the name that's only used to call him up for an aliyah or to write on his kesuva and gravestone. (As it happens, the Chazon Ish holds that one's name is what people call him, unless they know that he has a 'real' name and the 'real' name is used at formal occassions, such as signing documents or getting an aliyah. Reb Moshe said the same thing-- at a wedding, he was writing the kesuva, and the chasan told him that his kallah's name was Sarah, but she has another name that nobody knows and nobody calls her by because she hates it and is embarrassed by it, and Reb Moshe said "Nishtakei'ah" and didn't write it in the Kesuva.) . After all, Tanach is full of names that were given later in life, and they are called names anyway. I know two young men named Josh whose Aliyah names are not Yehoshua, but completely different. (And, among Chasidim, it so happens that almost every person who is called "Zalmen Leib" in his daily interactions is called to the Torah by "Yekusiel Yehuda.") When they get aliyos, people who are paying attention are surprised, because they always knew them as Josh, and here they're getting aliyos by names like Shmuel or Baruch. According to the Chazon Ish, it is not at all simple whether their 'real' names are Josh or the Aliya names.

It can be argued, however, that the comparison to Gittin is incorrect: what we call a 'name' for Gittin may be totally irrelevant to what is called a name for the purposes of our discussion. The determination of the name in a Get is based exclusively on clarity in identification. The din that Shemo uShemah are de'oraysa by a get doesn't really require names at all. If the people had unique and prominent physical characterisitics, we could write a get with no names at all, but instead just write "the man with three eyes and the woman with the horn in middle of her forehead." On the other hand, the idea discussed in this article, the preference of using Jewish names, involves two entirely different issues: Ethnic pride/Religious affiliation (in other words, that a Jew should use a Jewish name because it shows pride and affiliation with Judaism, while a non-Jewish name shows indifference, as Rashi says in Shemos when Moshe Rabbeinu did not correct the daughters of Yisro when they referred to him as an "Ish Mitzri,", or the Maharam Shik's "chukos ha'amim,") and the spiritual advantage of the inner essence of whatever the Hebrew name signifies, whether it is a trait or a reference to some bygone tzadik, (as we find by Adam, whose naming of the species in Hebrew was a portentous event that reflected and reinforced their essential reality and spirituality.)

Again: Defining 'name' in the context of Gittin, therefore, is a matter of eliminating, as far as possible, potential ambiguity in the mind of the reader, and clarity in publicizing exactly who was divorced. Defining 'name' in the context of the article, being a two-pronged analysis, might not be that simple. If it is a matter of ethnic pride/religious affiliation/chukos ha'amim, then perhaps we should define 'name' as that which one chooses to use in daily life. If it is a question of the connection with and influence of the spiritual elements of the name, the deeper meaning and history of the name, perhaps all that matters is the fact he uses it to be called up for aliyos.

And since when are Surnames names at all? Perhaps "name" in our culture only refers to the individual's given name, not the family name, which, in a sense, is no different than identifying the person by calling him Hirshel Varzhaner to indicate that he's from Varzhan.

So: the following three dinim and purposes in a 'name" are conceptually and analytically discrete; and unless you are careful to focus on which attribute is relevant to your discussion, you will end up ploydering.

a. Identification

b. Ethnic/Religious affiliation

c. Spiritual influence of the name

Once you have decided which of the above aspects of a name you are examining, you have to determine what the person's real name is- because not everything people call you is your name, and what they called you at the bris might not be your name either.

As the Medrash Rabba Koheles 7:3 on Tov sheim mi'shemen tov says, every man has three names: the name his mother and father called him (she'karu lo aviv ve'imo), the name his friends called him (she'karu lo chaveirav), and the name he is given in the heavenly record of his deeds and behavior (she'karui lo be'sefer toldos briyaso).

3. Reb Moshe says that initially, parents who gave their children secular names were strongly decried by the Gedolei Hador, but over time certain names gained acceptance. But, and this is an important 'but', he also says that once a name is in a family, "kevod hamishpacha" is more important than the general preference for a Hebrew name, and therefore one should take the name of the family member even if it is not Jewish.

4. The question of whether to name a child for an event or for a relative is literally antedeluvian: it has been discussed since before Noach. The Medrash in Breishis Rabbah Parshas Noach 37:11 on the naming of Peleg, "Ki beyamav niflegah ha'aretz" says the following:

Reb Yosi: The ancients, who saw ten generations of their living ancestors, named their children "l'sheim ha'me'orah," in the name of an event. We, whose ancestors haven't survived to see us, name our children for them. (Eitz Yosef-- so they should not be forgotten.)

Reb Shimon ben Gamliel: The ancients, who had Ruach Hokodesh, divine inspiration, named their children "l'sheim ha'me'orah," in the name of an event. We, that do not have Ruach Hakodesh, name our children after our ancestors.

So, you see two interesting things in the Medrash; that it is a personal choice whether to name a child after a relative or to commemorate an event, which is slightly different than the Pele Yo'eitz that I brought in the main note section #36. Also, a careful reading shows that Reb Yosi's "ahl sheim ha'me'orah" does not mean the same thing as Reb Shimon ben Gamliel's "ahl sheim ha'me'orah." RSbG means "a future event," which is why he says you need ruach hakodesh to do this; while Reb Yosi does not necessarily mean that, and can mean that they gave the name for an event in the past or the present, or changed the name contemporaneous with some event in the person's lifetime. If he meant the same as RSbG, he would have agreed that naming ahl sheim ha'me'orah would have required ru'ach hakodesh. Since he doesn't say that, he must have not meant the same thing with "ahl sheim ha'me'orah." So: Reb Shimon ben Gamliel is is certainly different than the Pele Yo'eitz, since RSbG is not discussing at all the idea of naming for a past event. Maybe the Pele Yoeitz works with Reb Yosi, maybe not, because the Medrash says that the minhag is to name after relatives, not events.)

5. Reb Moshe, in his Igros YD 3:97 has a fascinating teshuva. The case was that the mother did not tell the father that she gave birth to his child. I assume they were separated for six or seven months, or divorced, or never married. When the boy was born, she arranged the bris without telling her ex about it, and the child was named without the father's input. This sounds weird, but you can see it happening in bitter divorces. where one party leaves town. And, if you know about the battles even happily married couples sometimes have about names, you can be sure that this mother was determined to eliminate her ex's input on this important decision. Obviously, the Millah is valid. But what about the name? Does the father lose the right to name his child?

Reb Moshe says that there are no hard and fast rules about who may name a child. In the case of Moshe Rabbeinu, the name that is used was given him by the daughter of Pharaoh, while his father and mother called him other names, as explained in the Yalkut Shemos Remez 166. Certainly a mother's right to name her child is at least as valid as the father's. The preference of the name given by Yaakov to Binyamin over that given by Rachel, Ben Oni, was pursuant to reasons specific to that particular event. So this child's name will be that which the mother gave him, but his father can call him by a different name. The teshuva clearly indicates that he is called to the Torah by the name given to him by his mother (here, his maternal grandfather as directed by the mother,) at the bris.

6. Naming a child is a very important and auspicious event. There is an amazing Drisha in Yoreh Dei'ah at the end of 360 that states the following: When one has a choice of which of certain events involving mitzvos to attend, there are rules of priority. For example, if there is a choice of attending a levaya, or a wedding, or a bris, the Tur there discusses the order of relative importance. The Drisha states that in those cases where a bris has top priority, attending the naming of a girl has equal status. Although he does not cite his source, this comes from the Eliah Rabba. It is clear that this shittah holds that the importance of attending a bris is not the milah, it is the fact that the child is named at that time. Therefore, he holds, attending the naming of a girl has exactly the same significance and importance.

Steven Oppenheimer is a practicing endodontist in Miami Beach, Florida. This article was dedicated to the memory of his beloved father, Chayim Gershon ben Meir, A"H.

Barzilai is a quasi-functional biped metabolising in Chicago. His notes and comments are the product of a hobby that is, currently, pretty much the only thing keeping him from demonstrating his disagreement with Camus.

Thank you Dr. Oppenheimer for your kind permission to republish the article.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*********************************************************************************************

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lehavdil elef havdalos:

Purely out of bemusement, allow me to direct you to an article called "Holle's Cry: unearthing a birth goddess in a German Jewish naming ceremony.", by Jill Hammer, published in 2005 in a Journal which is dedicated to exploration of feminine spirituality in Judaism named "Nashim". The article's perspective is at odds with Rabbinic Judaism and disdainful towards Orthodox philosophy and traditions, and it helps to have a couple of beers in you before you start to read it. But it does cite many interesting minhagim associated with the Holkreisch ceremony. The fact is that individual feminists occasionally appeared in the Orthodox milieu long before its modern incarnation as a movement, and it is possible that some of the ideas in the article reflect the attitudes and intentions of some ur-feminists. We all have the odd relative or two we prefer to not talk about.   Antiquity is not evidence of legitimacy.  An old fool is still no more than a fool.  You might have to sign up for a free membership to view the entire article.