What was Jesus' hebrew name
Larry Scholnick
that name did not develop during his lifetime.
My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
Yeshua ben Yosef?
Yeshua ben Hashem?
Abe Kohen
Is your name Luria ben Zona?
mirjam
Why should we know that ? Larry?
In Hebrew that historical person is called Jeshu HaNotzrie, meaning
Jeshu from Natzeret,
Like i am Mirjam haHifait mirjam from Haifa,,,,, And if you are from
New Yorker you will be called Larry HaNew Yorkai ,,,
mirjam
Abe Kohen
He's from New York? Lo aleinu.
Best,
Abe
cindys
> We all (should) know that Jesus never knew the name "Jesus Christ";
> that name did not develop during his lifetime.
>
> My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
What lifetime? Is there any independent historical evidence that he
even existed?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Tiger
It depends on how you look at it. If the Christians are right it
should be: Meschicha Jeschua bar abbas. But if we Jews are right it
should be Jeschua ben Josef according to the "New testament.
I hope this is the answer you are looking for.
I had to look it in my papers in the doctorate I did in history few
years back.
Micha Berger
> My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
> Yeshua ben Yosef?
I don't know if boys named Yeshua in Aramaic went by Yeshua in formal settings,
such as being called up to the Torah, or if they used the Hebrew original,
Yehoshua.
But I'm not sure there was a single historical figure that the Christian
mythos developed around, so I can't discuss the "ben".
The Tosefta (Chullin 2:22-24) has a Yeshua ben Pandera/Panteda/Pantiri,
who was an evil wonder-worker. (Lieberman, in his critical edition of the
Tosefta) concluded Pandera is correct.) In the gemara (AZ 16b-17a) one of
the stories is retold, but there is no father named.
Pantera ("panther") was a Greek surname, possibly the name of the soldier who
raped Mary. Others suggest it was a baudy pun on pethenos (meaning virgin),
as Greeks thought of panthers as erotic predators. Another theory is that
the intended word is Panderos, the traitor in the Iliad. And yet another
possibility is implied by the similarity between the story of Jesus as told
in Toledos Yeishu and the Greek myth of Pandareus.
But IMHO, Yeshua ben Pandera was only one of a number of figures that got
fused into the story of Jesus.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Between stimulus & response, there is a space.
mi...@aishdas.org In that space is our power to choose our
http://www.aishdas.org response. In our response lies our growth
Fax: (270) 514-1507 and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM)
cindys
> Larry Scholnick <larry_scholn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
> > Yeshua ben Yosef?
>
> I don't know if boys named Yeshua in Aramaic went by Yeshua in formal settings,
> such as being called up to the Torah, or if they used the Hebrew original,
> Yehoshua.
>
> But I'm not sure there was a single historical figure that the Christian
> mythos developed around, so I can't discuss the "ben".
>
> The Tosefta (Chullin 2:22-24) has a Yeshua ben Pandera/Panteda/Pantiri,
> who was an evil wonder-worker. (Lieberman, in his critical edition of the
> Tosefta) concluded Pandera is correct.) In the gemara (AZ 16b-17a) one of
> the stories is retold, but there is no father named.
>
> Pantera ("panther") was a Greek surname, possibly the name of the soldier who
> raped Mary. Others suggest it was a baudy pun on pethenos (meaning virgin),
> as Greeks thought of panthers as erotic predators. Another theory is that
> the intended word is Panderos, the traitor in the Iliad. And yet another
> possibility is implied by the similarity between the story of Jesus as told
> in Toledos Yeishu and the Greek myth of Pandareus.
>
> But IMHO, Yeshua ben Pandera was only one of a number of figures that got
> fused into the story of Jesus.
Thank you, Micha, again supporting the assertion I made in the other
thread that there is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that
someone can point to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis were talking
about the man the Christians call 'Jesus'."
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Shmaryahu b. Chanoch
Guess what? During the Messianic Age (christians call it the
Millenium), we will know who was right. But for now, it does not
matter.
Micha Berger
> Guess what? During the Messianic Age (christians call it the
> Millenium), we will know who was right. But for now, it does not
> matter.
WADR, I disagree.
Christianity is based on the notion that man needed a first coming.
That we cannot redeem ourselves, and therefore someone had to come that
we could hang our hats on, who would do the saving for us.
Judaism is based on the notion that the process of trying to transcend
is itself transcendent. And thus man, as imperfect as we are, can redeem
ourselves.
This in turn causes a difference in our approaches to ethics and morality.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything.
mi...@aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Shmaryahu b. Chanoch
> Shmaryahu b. Chanoch <omega....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Guess what? During the Messianic Age (christians call it the
> > Millenium), we will know who was right. But for now, it does not
> > matter.
>
> WADR, I disagree.
>
> Christianity is based on the notion that man needed a first coming.
> That we cannot redeem ourselves, and therefore someone had to come that
> we could hang our hats on, who would do the saving for us.
>
> Judaism is based on the notion that the process of trying to transcend
> is itself transcendent. And thus man, as imperfect as we are, can redeem
> ourselves.
>
> This in turn causes a difference in our approaches to ethics and morality.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
Do not disagree. It is just that it does not matter. Both believe
that there will be a "messianic age" and as far as I am concerned this
matter will be dealt with then. For now, it just does not matter.
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> Thank you, Micha, again supporting the assertion I made in the other
> thread that there is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that
> someone can point to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis were talking
> about the man the Christians call 'Jesus'."
The mythical cristian Jesus is undoubtedly a composite figure,
composed long after the time he supposedly lived. But the Yeshu
Hanotzri of the Talmud is one of the ingrediaents that went into the
composition. That he was a disciple of R. Yehoshua be Perachia of the
first pair of zugos, and lived more than a century before the cristian
Jesus was said to have lived, does not refute the notion that Jesus is
in part based on that Yeshu. The authors and composers of the New
Testacle gospels placed placed him a century later either out of
ignorance, or as a deliberate distortion, to place the crucifixion
close to the destruction of the Temple, which fits better into their
theology that without blood of the sacrifices on the altar, there
could be no atonement of sin except by the sacrifice of thier son-god,
whose blood they claim atoned for all sins, present and future,
comited by believers.
GEK
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> In Hebrew that historical person is called Jeshu HaNotzrie, meaning
> Jeshu from Natzeret,
> Like i am Mirjam haHifait mirjam from Haifa,,,,, And if you are from
> New Yorker you will be called Larry HaNew Yorkai ,,,
Actually, his Hebrew name (I prefer "Jewish" name, since many Jews,
and even more commonly, Jewesses, have names that are not Hebrew at
all) was Yehoshua. Yeshu (or Yeshua) is an Aramaic equivalent.
It is not clear exactly what HaNotzri means, but contrary to the
cristian claim and popular misconception, it does NOT mean "from
Nazareth". From Nazareth would be in Hebrew "HaNatzarti" and in
Aramaic, probbably "Natzreisa". The best guess of what HaNotzri means
is that he was a member (or perhaps leader) of a cult called Notzrim,
likely some sort of ascetics akin to the Issiyim.
GEK
cindys
wrote:
----
Everything you have written above is pure conjecture (as I stated
before), and does not refute anything I wrote.
To speculate that a number of real-life individuals mentioned in the
talmud were used to create a composite of the [mythical] Christian
Jesus and to assert that a man who lived 100 years after the Christian
Jesus was allegedly the same guy who the Christians used to invent
their Jesus (and attempt to explain away this inconsistency by saying
his date of birth was deliberately misrepresented in order to mislead
people), is a huge stretch.
This sounds a lot like the technique that Christian missionaries use
to rationalize inconsistencies in their stories, especially when it
comes to proofs based on calculations of time frames. "But according
to Isaiah's prophecy, his name was supposed to be Emmanuel, so how did
he suddenly become Yeshua? Oh, I shouldn't pay any attention to that
because you have 300 other proofs? How about the fact that 70 weeks
were supposed to pass between Event A and Event B, but actually only
69 weeks passed? Oh, that's close enough?" etc
My original statement was that (contrary to what Slate claimed), there
is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that someone can point
to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis of the talmud repudiated (the
man whom the Christians) call Jesus." Nor does the talmud ever mention
that the rabbis had a negative attitude toward Christmas. (unless of
course, they were offended because it had become too commercialized).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
JJ
How could it be too commercialized ? They didn't have that many toy
stores, no TV to advertise on, and probably no circulars to insert
into newspapers. No catalogs to stuff into your too-small mailbox.
They probably only had 2 or 3 camel dealerships. Can't really make a
big hoopla with that.
Jay
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
W. Baker
: GEK
All I know is that my grandmother referred to hi as Yoshke, as in "I can't
turn n the radio now. All it is is Yoski, Yoski , Yoski all the time."
The overdoing of Christmas was even around sove 70 years ago.
Wendy
Micha Berger
> cristian claim and popular misconception, it does NOT mean "from
> Nazareth". From Nazareth would be in Hebrew "HaNatzarti" and in
> Aramaic, probbably "Natzreisa". The best guess of what HaNotzri means
> is that he was a member (or perhaps leader) of a cult called Notzrim,
> likely some sort of ascetics akin to the Issiyim.
There is little indication the Notzrim were ascetics.
They were Gnostics. Some forms of Gnosticism took the lowliness of
physical existence as reason for asceticism. But much more frequently
their schools would teach elevating the physical, and thus involve sacred
sexual union and other excuses for spiritual hedonism.
They Gnostics we're discussing were called "notzrim", "sentries",
because they expected the messiah to arrive momentarily. So magick and
false messiahs were endemic to their community.
Epiphanius, a church father who lived in the 4th cent (ie 400+ years
after the time under discussion, but still someone with a strong interest
in getting it right) describes some of their practices. According to
him, the Notzrim were vegetarians who rejected Temple sacrifice, the
centrality of kohanim, and tried to stick to a prophetic / moralist
message. Alternatively, that's what Epiphanius would like to believe
Jesus came from.
The Notzrim claimed Yirmiyahu as their founder, but there is no record of
the movement existing for the first 400 years from Yirmiyahu's day (the
fall of the 1st Temple) to theirs (shortly before the fall of the 2nd).
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger One doesn't learn mussar to be a tzaddik,
mi...@aishdas.org but to become a tzaddik.
http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> All I know is that my grandmother referred to hi as Yoshke, as in "I can't
> turn n the radio now. All it is is Yoski, Yoski , Yoski all the time."
> The overdoing of Christmas was even around sove 70 years ago.
Yes, in popular Yiddish vernacular he is called Yoshke, or Yoshke
Pondritch. Pondritch is probably derived from Pon-dreck, the same of
either his father, or his mother's husband. As for the overdoing of
crismas, you can cheer up. It will all be over in a few days. Pity
those who live where eastern cristianity prevails, and it all begins
on January 7.
GEK
Dennis
>> But IMHO, Yeshua ben Pandera was only one of a number of figures that
>> got fused into the story of Jesus.
> -----
> Thank you, Micha, again supporting the assertion I made in the other
> thread that there is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that
> someone can point to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis were talking
> about the man the Christians call 'Jesus'."
A year or so ago, someone pointed me to an article, which unfortunately I
can't find, that showed that the figures in the Talmud often cited as the
Founder of Christianity didn't belong to the right century.
As for what the correct Hebrew or Aramaic name of Jesus of Nazareth would
have been, I'm not qualified to say. I've read that the term 'Jesus of
Nazareth' in the Greek NT is unusual and not the form expected.
Dennis
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> Giorgies E Kepipesiom <kepipes...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It is not clear exactly what HaNotzri means, but contrary to the
> > cristian claim and popular misconception, it does NOT mean "from
> > Nazareth". From Nazareth would be in Hebrew "HaNatzarti" and in
> > Aramaic, probbably "Natzreisa". The best guess of what HaNotzri means
> > is that he was a member (or perhaps leader) of a cult called Notzrim,
> > likely some sort of ascetics akin to the Issiyim.
>
> There is little indication the Notzrim were ascetics.
Okay, let it be like you say. But the Notzrim were a cult, and my
point is that HaNotzri means a member of that cult, and has nothing to
do with the south-Galilean town of Natzeres. That he came from
Nazareth is just part of the myth created by the authors and compilers
of the New Testacle who lived and wrote some centuries later. It is
akin to the New Testacle myth that he lived a century later than he
actually did (Cindy's objections noted, but rejected). {brief off-
topic synopsis of Gnosticism and early cristian church history
deleted}
GEK
W. Baker
: Tir'u baTov!
: -Micha
The Church Fathers had good reason to badmouth Gnostics, as they were
attempting to stamp them out in favor of their own brand of (orthodox
christianity. If you are intereted in Gnostic thought adn literature, I
suggest you read some of Elaine Pagels work. The gospel of thomas(banned
by the curch fathers) and other books.
Wendy Baker
Micha Berger
> Okay, let it be like you say. But the Notzrim were a cult, and my
> point is that HaNotzri means a member of that cult, and has nothing to
> do with the south-Galilean town of Natzeres...
Agreed.
> It is
> akin to the New Testacle myth that he lived a century later than he
> actually did (Cindy's objections noted, but rejected).
My own position is that the central figure of the Christian mythos is part
Yeishu haNotzri, part Ben Stada, part Yeishu ben Pandera, part Yeishu
the sourcere (all mentioned in the Talmud, all lived at different times),
part Osiris, part Tammuz, probably some other people who history didn't
preserve mixed in.
...
> {brief off-
> topic synopsis of Gnosticism and early cristian church history
> deleted}
How is it off topic? It speaks directly to the explosion of false
messianism in the last 2nd Temple period.
With the Notzrim there expecting the messiah any day, and working
to cause his arrival, their population must have spawned them weekly.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
mi...@aishdas.org greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)
Art Werschulz
Giorgies E Kepipesiom <kepip...@hotmail.com> writes:
> Okay, let it be like you say. But the Notzrim were a cult, and my
> point is that HaNotzri means a member of that cult, and has nothing to
> do with the south-Galilean town of Natzeres. That he came from
> Nazareth is just part of the myth created by the authors and compilers
> of the New Testacle who lived and wrote some centuries later. It is
> akin to the New Testacle myth that he lived a century later than he
> actually did (Cindy's objections noted, but rejected). {brief off-
> topic synopsis of Gnosticism and early cristian church history
> deleted}
Being a native Southerner, I once heard somebody (most likely a Southern
Baptist) opine that Jesus was a teetotaler. Said person had obviously
mixed up "Nazareth" and "nazir". When asked about when Yoshke's
supposedly turning water into wine at a chaseneh, this person said that
he had turned it into grape juice---"the most delicious grape juice that
anybody had ever tasted".
Oy.
--
Art Werschulz (agw STRUDEL comcast.net)
... insert clever quote here ...
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> Being a native Southerner, I once heard somebody (most likely a Southern
> Baptist) opine that Jesus was a teetotaler. Said person had obviously
> mixed up "Nazareth" and "nazir". When asked about when Yoshke's
> supposedly turning water into wine at a chaseneh, this person said that
> he had turned it into grape juice---"the most delicious grape juice that
> anybody had ever tasted".
Just shows the cristian ignorance of the Bible. A Nazir is forbidden
to drink grape juice just as wine, and is even forbidden to eat grapes
or anything made of grapes. On the other hand, the nazir need not be a
teetotaler at all. Nothing forbids him from enjoying beer, whiskey (or
whisky), vodka, gin, teqilla, or any other alcoholic beverage, just so
long as it is not made from grape product.
GEK
Harry Weiss
> On Dec 29, 7:22?am, Larry Scholnick <larry_scholn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > We all (should) know that Jesus never knew the name "Jesus Christ";
> > that name did not develop during his lifetime.
> >
> > My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
> ----
> What lifetime? Is there any independent historical evidence that he
> even existed?
> Best regards,
As Micha and others posted it was a composite character. one was probably
known as the Mamzer and that caused some of their bubbe mysehs.
> ---Cindy S.
> >
> > Yeshua ben Yosef?
> >
> > Yeshua ben Hashem?
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> As Micha and others posted it was a composite character. one was probably
> known as the Mamzer and that caused some of their bubbe mysehs.
>
up trying) is that theis Yeshu Hanotzri is one of the components that
went into the making of this composit character. That's all.
GEK
mm
non-Jewish theology. DSL ]
>We all (should) know that Jesus never knew the name "Jesus Christ";
>that name did not develop during his lifetime.
>
>My question is what his hebrew name was during his lifetime.
>
>Yeshua ben Yosef?
If someone like the Jesus in the Xian Bible existed, and if that part,
the non-miraculous and non-incredibly-unlikely part of the story is
true, he was probably called something like that. (I hadn't thought
about the difference between Aramaic Yeshua and Hebrew Yehoshua until
I read Micha's post, but anyhow, some Jews might have had two versions
of their name, like many do now. Like someone called Solomon or Sol
outside of shul, and called Shlomo when called up to the Torah. Not
that there are any examples of Jesus going to the beis knesset in the
Xian Bible -- and indeed he allegedly complains about public prayer***
-- by the time he's about 30 which is his age when the narrative
starts to go into any level of detail.)
***And Xian clerics and laymen quote this line, even though they all
pray publicly.
IF you read their Bible, you'll see that Joseph was out of town and
surprised to find his fiancee Mary pregnant when he got back. He
wanted to send her away. I'm not sure if that means until after the
baby was born or something else. I had assumed it meant only the
first. [I need to verify small details of this paragraph, but don't
want to delay the whole post.]
It was the practice in the USA, and still is I'll betcha, and I'm sure
many other places to send a pregnant unmarried girl away until after
the baby is born, and then usually let her return, with a story, like
she lived out of town, got married there, had a baby, and then got
divorced. Of course people would have doubts or not believe the story
at all, but it was still less embarrassing than having her stay around
during the entire pregnancy. (Regardless of whether the sex was
voluntary of because of rape, aiui.) And maybe the grandparents would
believe the story. I'm gullible and live in Never-Never Land much of
the time. I would probably would believe it.
But in the story, Mary seems to have convinced Joseph that God was the
baby's biological father. Note that Joseph didn't say, "Wow, this
must be the child of a virgin that is predicted in Isaiah, who will
become the messiah. How great that will be!" He didn't' say that
because no one thought that's what Isaiah said, since he didn't.
In 9th grade Latin, the teacher didn't discuss this, but he did tell
us that the wife of Philip II of Macedon got pregnant when Philip was
away conquering some place, and when he got home, she too had to
explain how that happened, and she told him that a god had made her
pregnant. He seems to have believed that, and they raised her son as
if he were the direct son of a god. This was probably good for the
child's ego, and he grew up to be Alexander the Great, who conquered
even more than his father did.
Another thing the Latin teacher pointed out was that all those Roman
movies, where the messenger or someone opens a scroll and holds it
with one hand above the other, were inaccurate. I guess I had figured
that Roman scrolls were different from Jewish scrolls, but they're
not. Roman scrolls [and not just Jewish scrolls] were written from
side-to-side. The next "page" was on the left or right of the
previous "page", and when read the wood on which they were rolled
("etzim" in Hebrew) were side-by-side.
The Latin teacher said a lot of interesting things, more than any
other teacher I had, and many of them had some Jewish relevance, and
it dawned on me when I was about 40 that his name was Feldman and he
was probably Jewish! Several years after that I called the school and
asked for him, and she told me he had just retired, and she wouldn't
give me his phone number but she would let him know that I had called.
He called me about 10 minutes later, and I told him the truth, that he
was probably the best teacher I had (somehow I excluded my first grade
teacher who was very good). And during the converstion I asked if he
was a Jew. It turns out despite the half dozen or more clues he gave
that he was, he wasn't. His name was German, and his ancestors were
German.
>Yeshua ben Hashem?
No. You're kidding, right? :-) The earliest "Gospel" was written
more than 30 years after Jesus died. No one thought him the special
son of God when he was alive. The story about Mary telling Joseph
that was, I'm sure, concocted by Xians as "back story" to explain his
alleged powers in the story about him as an adult. Sort of like "The
Lone Ranger" had a back story about how the Lone Ranger had been a
Texas? ranger and the 5 rangers he was with that day were all killed
but him, and so he was inspired to catch the killers and to catch
other criminals.
If perhaps Jesus said he was the son of God, assuming he was a normal
guy and not a megalomaniac, it would have been in the context of all
human beings being children of God. I suspect that for the Greek
mind, this would have been incomprehensible, and as fewer Jews and
more Greeks became followers of Jesus after he died, the
generalization wasn't preserved and the sentence was reinterpreted
from a Greek perspective, that he was the *special* son of God in a
way that the rest of us aren't. Somewhere I read that "It's more
likely that bad things happen because of incompetence than malice",
and I think that applies to many things and much of the Jesus story.
--
Meir
"The baby's name is Shlomo. He's named after his grandfather, Scott."
Harry Weiss
> >Yeshua ben Yosef?
> If someone like the Jesus in the Xian Bible existed, and if that part,
> the non-miraculous and non-incredibly-unlikely part of the story is
> true, he was probably called something like that. (I hadn't thought
> about the difference between Aramaic Yeshua and Hebrew Yehoshua until
> I read Micha's post, but anyhow, some Jews might have had two versions
> of their name, like many do now. Like someone called Solomon or Sol
> outside of shul, and called Shlomo when called up to the Torah. Not
> that there are any examples of Jesus going to the beis knesset in the
Most snipped
Is that above a more recent phenomeno. Did Rebbi Eliezer's father get
called up by teh name Hurkenos or a Hebrew name. What was Sumchus'
Hebrew name. There are numerous Greek names in the Talmud.
How many people have a Alexander for Hebrew name even now.
cindys
wrote:
----
I think you've completely misunderstood my position. I never argued
that Yeshu Hanotzri wasn't one of "the components" who went into the
making of this composite character. Quite the contrary. My position
was that there was not one single specific individual in the talmud
who specifically correlates to the Christian Jesus (as Slate had
suggested there was), and therefore, one cannot point one's finger to
any one particular figure mentioned in the talmud and say "there,
right there, Rav (for example) is talking about the man whom the
Christians refer to as Jesus." That was my point. "Jesus" is NOT in
the talmud.
Your position (IIUC) is that the Church went to the talmud, found a
character called Yeshu HaNotzri, and incorporated some aspects of
Yeshu HaNotzri as they were inventing this man called Jesus (who never
actually existed). I wasn't arguing that one way or another. My
argument is that no one can open the talmud and say Yeshua HaNotzri
*is* Jesus.
My argument was with Slate who suggests that the single character of
Jesus (as understood by the Christians to be the Son of God, messiah
etc) is mentioned unequivocally in the talmud and that the rabbis of
the talmud repudiate Jesus. It would seem that Slate (and others)
believe that Jesus is mentioned explicitly in the talmud (perhaps
using a different name) but as a fully formed character who actually
existed and whose life story as told in the Gospels is for the most
part true.
And I'm saying that Jesus never existed, that he was invented by the
Church. Maybe some of the characteristics of Yeshu HaNotzri were
incorporated into him decades or a century later (or not), but Jesus
(as the Christians understand him) does not appear in the talmud at
all. Yeshu HaNotzri is not Jesus. Nor is Ben Pandera nor Stada nor Ben
Perachia nor anybody else mentioned in the talmud. And Christmas is
most certainly not mentioned in the talmud.
My point (in a nutshell) was simply that Slate was an ignoramus.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Micha Berger
> Your position (IIUC) is that the Church went to the talmud, found a
> character called Yeshu HaNotzri, and incorporated some aspects of
> Yeshu HaNotzri as they were inventing this man called Jesus (who never
> actually existed). I wasn't arguing that one way or another. My
> argument is that no one can open the talmud and say Yeshua HaNotzri
> *is* Jesus.
I would say that there was a historical Yeshua HaNotzri about whom
the Talmud tells a few stories (true or enhanced for serving as a
"cautionary tale" or to turn into a parable). Similarly Ben Stada,
and Yeshua ben Pandera.
These historical figures had followers. In fact, we hear about Yeshua
b Pandera in a story of his follower Yaaqov coming to heal R' Eleazar
b Damma (2nd cent CE).
So they didn't need to pick through the talmud, they got the stories
from the same places the talmud did.
The early Christians came in many flavors -- Evionim, the Jerusalm Church,
the Notzrim who decided their Yeishu was the guy they were waiting for,
etc... Who said they actually started out following the same person?
When followers unified into one community, the resulting religion had
to make one story out of multiple biographies, plus pagan beliefs that
converts couldn't give up. So Jesus not only gets the histories of
multiple people and the stories that grew up around them, he also gets
the whole son of god thing, return from the dead, etc... (Not to mention
the "kill all the baby boys" motif from Exodus.)
Following the history of how the gospels get written makes a lot more
sense once you realize that each gospel writer had a conflicting set
of stories they thought were cannonical, and yet about the same guy.
For that matter, the earier gospels were written by members of communities
before the message they want to draw from these stories got unified.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> Is that above a more recent phenomeno. Did Rebbi Eliezer's father get
> called up by teh name Hurkenos or a Hebrew name. What was Sumchus'
> Hebrew name. There are numerous Greek names in the Talmud.
> How many people have a Alexander for Hebrew name even now.
Your problem is that you are using the term "Hebrew" names. When I was
growing up, we never heard of Hebrew names. Most of us had secular
names (actually they were called "cristian" names) and we all had
Jewish names (not Hebrew names). Alexander is certainly a Jewish name,
though not Hebrew. What about Fishel? It is certainly a Jewish name,
though neither Hebrew nor Greek. Or Feivel. Or Todros. And Female
names: Charne, Yente, Sheina, Reizil, Gnendel, Bluma, Fruma Shprintza,
and so on. All of these are perfectly good Jewish names, none of them
Hebrew or Greek.
GEK
mm
<kepip...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 30, 10:30 am, Harry Weiss <hjwe...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is that above a more recent phenomeno.
It might be. I don't know.
>> Did Rebbi Eliezer's father get
>> called up by teh name Hurkenos or a Hebrew name. What was Sumchus'
>> Hebrew name.
Don't know.
>> There are numerous Greek names in the Talmud.
>> How many people have a Alexander for Hebrew name even now.
If your point is that Alexander is really a Macedonian or Greek name,
but it's used as a Jew's real name**, I'm wondering how much of a
tribute to Alexander it would have been if they named their kids
Alexander on the street but Avraham or something when called to the
Torah. Maybe that would be okay now but then I guess they didn't do
that. You make a good point.
**As opposed to his secular, assimilated, go-along-to-get-along,
cristian, or slave name.
>Your problem is that you are using the term "Hebrew" names. When I was
>growing up, we never heard of Hebrew names. Most of us had secular
>names (actually they were called "cristian" names) and we all had
>Jewish names (not Hebrew names). Alexander is certainly a Jewish name,
>though not Hebrew.
A good distinction. Evertjan might be able to use it to help
distinguish Jewish culture from whatever he has considered Jewish to
be.
> What about Fishel? It is certainly a Jewish name,
>though neither Hebrew nor Greek. Or Feivel. Or Todros. And Female
>names: Charne, Yente, Sheina, Reizil, Gnendel, Bluma, Fruma Shprintza,
>and so on. All of these are perfectly good Jewish names, none of them
>Hebrew or Greek.
>
>GEK
--
Harry Weiss
> >
> > Is that above a ?more recent phenomeno. ?Did Rebbi Eliezer's father get
> > called up by teh name Hurkenos or a Hebrew name. ? What was Sumchus'
> > Hebrew name. ?There are numerous Greek names in the Talmud.
> > How many people have a Alexander for Hebrew name even now.
> Your problem is that you are using the term "Hebrew" names. When I was
> growing up, we never heard of Hebrew names. Most of us had secular
> names (actually they were called "cristian" names) and we all had
> Jewish names (not Hebrew names). Alexander is certainly a Jewish name,
> though not Hebrew. What about Fishel? It is certainly a Jewish name,
> though neither Hebrew nor Greek. Or Feivel. Or Todros. And Female
> names: Charne, Yente, Sheina, Reizil, Gnendel, Bluma, Fruma Shprintza,
> and so on. All of these are perfectly good Jewish names, none of them
> Hebrew or Greek.
> GEK
That exactly what I am talking about. People gave their children names
and eventually the often non Jewish name became Jewish.
Steve Goldfarb
>>
>And my point (which I have failed to convince Cindy of, and have given
>up trying) is that theis Yeshu Hanotzri is one of the components that
>went into the making of this composit character. That's all.
Seems reasonable. Something I've wondered (and since we're talking about
Jews here hopefully this is on topic) is whether this composite character
sort of developed naturally over time, or if it was something more
intentional - the work of maybe an individual preacher (I'm looking at
you, Saul of Tarses) who decided to set himself up with some followers and
needed a good tale to draw in the crowds. If so, he'd pick names that
would seem familiar, plus stories that would seem familiar, but I suggest
they wouldn't necessarily match. That is, why assume that all of the
source characters were named Yeshu?
--s
--
Abe Kohen
Good Yiddish names like Shepsel, Shmeckel and Petzel?
Nah, some of us were given HEBREW names. So when I get called up to the
Torah, there are a total of 5 HEBREW names articulated.
Abe (with 3 Hebrew names; 2 Hungarian names; 1 American/English version of a
Hebrew name}
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> Good Yiddish names like Shepsel, Shmeckel and Petzel?
Is there some point to your remark, or are you just being you? Shepsel
is a perfectly good, and not uncommon Jewish name, though not Hebrew.
As for the latter two, I don't know anyone who actually has those
names, but I know a few who should have these names. A certain poster
here comes to mind. And I was writng about Jewish names, not Yiddish
names. Many non-Hebrew Jewish names are ineed Yiddish; many are not.
But they are still Jewish. There ae entire chapters in books written
by posqim dealing with the origins and corect spellings of non-ebrew
Jewish names.
>
> Nah, some of us were given HEBREW names. So when I get called up to the
> Torah, there are a total of 5 HEBREW names articulated.
Yes, SOME of us have Hebrew names. My own two names are Hebrew, though
the noon ending of Gershon rather than a mem is somewhat suspect.
Eliyahu is Hebrew. But they are still Jewish names, besides being
Hebrew in origin. Giorgies Earnst, by contrast, are the not Jewish
names appearing on my legal documents fo use by the goyim.
>
> Abe (with 3 Hebrew names; 2 Hungarian names; 1 American/English version of a
> Hebrew name
I m curious about your two Hungarian names. Are they the Hungrian
equivalents o certain names you suggested above?
Gershin Ayliyoohee
wishing you all all of achayee bays Yisrooayl a gitten Shabbes
Micha Berger
> the noon ending of Gershon rather than a mem is somewhat suspect.
Why?
Gershom is the son of Moshe, of Menasheh (if he isn't Moshe; Shofetim
18:30), and a descendent of Pinechas who returned to Israel with Ezra.
Gershon is Levi's oldest son (see Bereishis 46:11, Shemos
6:16). He is called Gershom in a few places in Divrei haYamim I
(6:16,17,20,43,62,71,15:7). But Gershon, with a nun, is what the Chumash
calls him. Hebrew enough for me.
:-)BBii!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy,
mi...@aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of
http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy.
Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>
> Gershon is Levi's oldest son (see Bereishis 46:11, Shemos
> 6:16). He is called Gershom in a few places in Divrei haYamim I
> (6:16,17,20,43,62,71,15:7). But Gershon, with a nun, is what the Chumash
> calls him. Hebrew enough for me.
Not every word in chumash is of Hebraic origin, even beyond the
frankly obvious like yegar sahadusa. Just this morning we read about
hatzefarde'im, which in a different venue I learnt yesterday that the
late rosh yeshiva R. Y. Kaminetzky says is an Egyptian word, despite
its appearing numerous times in the chumash.
GEK
Abe Kohen
The baal koreh (or kriah) at the hashkama minyan pronounced it (multiple
times) as ha-tzfar-dim and I was wondering if he shouldn't have reread the
whole parsha.
By the time I drank the delicious A'bunadh, it made no difference.
Shavua Tov,
Abe
Giorgies E Kepipesiom
>>
> The baal koreh (or kriah) at the hashkama minyan pronounced it (multiple
> times) as ha-tzfar-dim and I was wondering if he shouldn't have reread the
> whole parsha.
There are numerous works dealing with that subject. In part, it
depends on whether the tzibbur knows the difference. For the record,
the tzaddiq has a schewa na, despite the absence of the expected
dagesh following the hay hayedia. Ha-tze-far-de-im. If anyone is
interested, I will point them to the relevant discussion in a
different forum.
>
> By the time I drank the delicious A'bunadh, it made no difference.
I don't know what A'bunadh is, but if it is some kind of Scotch
whisk(e)y, my own reaction is Fehh! Fooy! Faugh! Grey Goose suits me
far better, especially if someone else has bought it. But today all
that would have been in theory only. On Shabbos when the new moon is
blessed, Hannies accompanies me to shule, and she allows me no
distilled spirits of any sort.
GEK
wishing all a good week and good chodesh
Yisroel Markov
[grin] My kids all wound up with Biblical names (although that was not
a conscious decision), so it's a good bet they're all Hebrew ones. Two
have a non-Hebrew second name: Gittel and Hersh.
They have no "English" names. Thank God this is no longer necessary to
get along in the USA. Seeing all the Hymans (Haim) and Morrises
(Moshe) on old yahrzeit plaques makes me a little sad.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Yisroel Markov
<kepip...@hotmail.com> said:
[snip]
>I don't know what A'bunadh is, but if it is some kind of Scotch
It is.
>whisk(e)y, my own reaction is Fehh! Fooy! Faugh! Grey Goose suits me
>far better, especially if someone else has bought it. But today all
This is like a third time Grey Goose has been mentioned in the past
week. As a [nearly] life-long vodka drinker (I *am* from Russia), I
can't understand what the fuss is all about. There are several
better-tasting cheaper vodkas on the US market. Last winter I
conducted a blind test of Vikingfjord (Norwegian potato vodka I favor)
vs. Grey Goose, and all three participants preferred the former, by a
substantial margin. These so-called premium vodkas are a sham, IMHO -
the spirit just needs to be well-distilled.
>that would have been in theory only. On Shabbos when the new moon is
>blessed, Hannies accompanies me to shule, and she allows me no
>distilled spirits of any sort.
Alas.
Abe Kohen
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 01:50:43 +0000 (UTC), Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> <kepip...@hotmail.com> said:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I don't know what A'bunadh is, but if it is some kind of Scotch
>
> It is.
Yes and at 59.5% - 60% it's mighty potent and mighty smooth.
>
>> whisk(e)y, my own reaction is Fehh! Fooy! Faugh! Grey Goose suits me
>> far better, especially if someone else has bought it. But today all
>
> This is like a third time Grey Goose has been mentioned in the past
> week. As a [nearly] life-long vodka drinker (I *am* from Russia), I
> can't understand what the fuss is all about. There are several
> better-tasting cheaper vodkas on the US market. Last winter I
> conducted a blind test of Vikingfjord (Norwegian potato vodka I favor)
> vs. Grey Goose, and all three participants preferred the former, by a
> substantial margin. These so-called premium vodkas are a sham, IMHO -
> the spirit just needs to be well-distilled.
>
>> that would have been in theory only. On Shabbos when the new moon is
>> blessed, Hannies accompanies me to shule, and she allows me no
>> distilled spirits of any sort.
I've never done a blind test, but to me Grey Goose does taste better than
other vodkas I've had, and more important to me - no hangover after 6
ounces. Now, I haven't drunk a 1/2 bottle of vodka since freshman year at
Ben Gurion or a full bottle of whiskey since the IDF, and I promised myself
never to repeat those stupid stunts.
Also when giving gifts, and I understand it's all marketing, Grey Goose is
considered a nice gift.
But I would love to know which vodkas you like, as I appreciate your opinion
on all kinds of things.
Best,
Abe
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> "Abe Kohen" <abek...@gmail.com> said:
>>Giorgies E Kepipesiom wrote:
>>> On Dec 30, 10:30 am, Harry Weiss <hjwe...@panix.com> wrote:
snip
>> Nah, some of us were given HEBREW names. So when I get called up
>> to the Torah, there are a total of 5 HEBREW names articulated.
>>
>> Abe (with 3 Hebrew names; 2 Hungarian names; 1 American/English
>> version of a Hebrew name}
>
> [grin] My kids all wound up with Biblical names (although that was
> not a conscious decision), so it's a good bet they're all Hebrew
> ones. Two have a non-Hebrew second name: Gittel and Hersh.
>
> They have no "English" names. Thank God this is no longer necessary
> to get along in the USA. Seeing all the Hymans (Haim) and Morrises
> (Moshe) on old yahrzeit plaques makes me a little sad.
My daughter Rayzel, and my son Nachman, have that name on their USA
birth certificates. When my daugther Chaya was born, my brother-in-law,
may he live and be well, insisted that using that name would cause
her untold grief in school where the non-Jewish teachers would mangle
her name. Against my better judgement, I put Karen on the birth
certificate. We moved to Israel when she was three. Here, _none_ of
her teaches have trouble with "Chaya", but having "Karen" on the
BC has caused her untold grief with her "official" papers. So I
share your sadness. :-(
--
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
The home and family are the center of Judaism, *not* the synagogue.
May Eliezer Mordichai b. Chaya Sheina Rochel have a refuah shlaimah
btoch sha'ar cholei Yisroel.
Disclaimer: Nothing here necessarily reflects the opinion of Hebrew University
Harry Weiss
> Yisroel Markov wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 01:50:43 +0000 (UTC), Giorgies E Kepipesiom
> > <kepip...@hotmail.com> said:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> I don't know what A'bunadh is, but if it is some kind of Scotch
> >
> > It is.
> Yes and at 59.5% - 60% it's mighty potent and mighty smooth.
I haven't seen that one. the only cask strength scotch I have at the
moement is Glenlivit Nadurra, which is quite good for a mass producer.
I like the Balvanie 15 single barrel.
> >
> >> whisk(e)y, my own reaction is Fehh! Fooy! Faugh! Grey Goose suits me
> >> far better, especially if someone else has bought it. But today all
> >
> > This is like a third time Grey Goose has been mentioned in the past
> > week. As a [nearly] life-long vodka drinker (I *am* from Russia), I
> > can't understand what the fuss is all about. There are several
> > better-tasting cheaper vodkas on the US market. Last winter I
> > conducted a blind test of Vikingfjord (Norwegian potato vodka I favor)
> > vs. Grey Goose, and all three participants preferred the former, by a
> > substantial margin. These so-called premium vodkas are a sham, IMHO -
> > the spirit just needs to be well-distilled.
> >
> >> that would have been in theory only. On Shabbos when the new moon is
> >> blessed, Hannies accompanies me to shule, and she allows me no
> >> distilled spirits of any sort.
> I've never done a blind test, but to me Grey Goose does taste better than
> other vodkas I've had, and more important to me - no hangover after 6
> ounces. Now, I haven't drunk a 1/2 bottle of vodka since freshman year at
> Ben Gurion or a full bottle of whiskey since the IDF, and I promised myself
> never to repeat those stupid stunts.
> Also when giving gifts, and I understand it's all marketing, Grey Goose is
> considered a nice gift.
> But I would love to know which vodkas you like, as I appreciate your opinion
> on all kinds of things.
> Best,
> Abe
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
mm
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>To speculate that a number of real-life individuals mentioned in the
>talmud were used to create a composite of the [mythical] Christian
>Jesus and to assert that a man who lived 100 years after the Christian
>Jesus was allegedly the same guy who the Christians used to invent
>their Jesus (and attempt to explain away this inconsistency by saying
>his date of birth was deliberately misrepresented in order to mislead
>people), is a huge stretch.
>
>This sounds a lot like the technique that Christian missionaries use
>to rationalize inconsistencies in their stories, especially when it
>comes to proofs based on calculations of time frames. "But according
>to Isaiah's prophecy, his name was supposed to be Emmanuel, so how did
They even have a popularn Xmas song that he will be called Emmanael
but afaik, no reference Xmas or not to his *ever* being called
Emmanual. I wonder what percentage of Xians notice the
inconsistency, and how many think it important.
>he suddenly become Yeshua? Oh, I shouldn't pay any attention to that
>because you have 300 other proofs? How about the fact that 70 weeks
>were supposed to pass between Event A and Event B, but actually only
>69 weeks passed? Oh, that's close enough?" etc
>
>My original statement was that (contrary to what Slate claimed), there
>is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that someone can point
>to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis of the talmud repudiated (the
>man whom the Christians) call Jesus." Nor does the talmud ever mention
>that the rabbis had a negative attitude toward Christmas.
I agree with both of these points, as I said elswhere.
>(unless of
>course, they were offended because it had become too commercialized).
>Best regards,
>---Cindy S.
mm
wrote:
>On Dec 29, 5:31 pm, cindys <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 29, 2:02 pm, Giorgies E Kepipesiom <kepipes...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 29, 1:35 pm, cindys <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > Thank you, Micha, again supporting the assertion I made in the other
>> > > thread that there is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that
>> > > someone can point to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis were talking
>> > > about the man the Christians call 'Jesus'."
>>
>> > The mythical cristian Jesus is undoubtedly a composite figure,
>> > composed long after the time he supposedly lived. But the Yeshu
>> > Hanotzri of the Talmud is one of the ingrediaents that went into the
>> > composition. That he was a disciple of R. Yehoshua be Perachia of the
>> > first pair of zugos, and lived more than a century before the cristian
>> > Jesus was said to have lived, does not refute the notion that Jesus is
>> > in part based on that Yeshu. The authors and composers of the New
>> > Testacle gospels placed placed him a century later either out of
>> > ignorance, or as a deliberate distortion, to place the crucifixion
>> > close to the destruction of the Temple, which fits better into their
>> > theology that without blood of the sacrifices on the altar, there
>> > could be no atonement of sin except by the sacrifice of thier son-god,
>> > whose blood they claim atoned for all sins, present and future,
>> > committed by believers.
>>
>> ----
>> Everything you have written above is pure conjecture (as I stated
>> before), and does not refute anything I wrote.
>>
>> To speculate that a number of real-life individuals mentioned in the
>> talmud were used to create a composite of the [mythical] Christian
>> Jesus and to assert that a man who lived 100 years after the Christian
>> Jesus was allegedly the same guy who the Christians used to invent
>> their Jesus (and attempt to explain away this inconsistency by saying
>> his date of birth was deliberately misrepresented in order to mislead
>> people), is a huge stretch.
>>
>> This sounds a lot like the technique that Christian missionaries use
>> to rationalize inconsistencies in their stories, especially when it
>> comes to proofs based on calculations of time frames. "But according
>> to Isaiah's prophecy, his name was supposed to be Emmanuel, so how did
>> he suddenly become Yeshua? Oh, I shouldn't pay any attention to that
>> because you have 300 other proofs? How about the fact that 70 weeks
>> were supposed to pass between Event A and Event B, but actually only
>> 69 weeks passed? Oh, that's close enough?" etc
>>
>> My original statement was that (contrary to what Slate claimed), there
>> is no figure mentioned anywhere in the gemara that someone can point
>> to and say unequivocally, "The rabbis of the talmud repudiated (the
>> man whom the Christians) call Jesus." Nor does the talmud ever mention
>> that the rabbis had a negative attitude toward Christmas. (unless of
>> course, they were offended because it had become too commercialized).
>
>How could it be too commercialized ? They didn't have that many toy
>stores, no TV to advertise on, and probably no circulars to insert
>into newspapers. No catalogs to stuff into your too-small mailbox.
>They probably only had 2 or 3 camel dealerships. Can't really make a
>big hoopla with that.
Good point. But they had spoofing.
>Jay
>
>
>> Best regards,
>> ---Cindy S.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
Yisroel Markov
>Yisroel Markov <ey.m...@MUNGiname.com> writes:
[snip]
>> [grin] My kids all wound up with Biblical names (although that was
>> not a conscious decision), so it's a good bet they're all Hebrew
>> ones. Two have a non-Hebrew second name: Gittel and Hersh.
>>
>> They have no "English" names. Thank God this is no longer necessary
>> to get along in the USA. Seeing all the Hymans (Haim) and Morrises
>> (Moshe) on old yahrzeit plaques makes me a little sad.
>
>My daughter Rayzel, and my son Nachman, have that name on their USA
>birth certificates. When my daugther Chaya was born, my brother-in-law,
>may he live and be well, insisted that using that name would cause
>her untold grief in school where the non-Jewish teachers would mangle
>her name. Against my better judgement, I put Karen on the birth
>certificate. We moved to Israel when she was three. Here, _none_ of
>her teaches have trouble with "Chaya", but having "Karen" on the
>BC has caused her untold grief with her "official" papers. So I
>share your sadness. :-(
Interestingly, when a friend's wife had taken ill recently, I heard
her name mentioned in a "mi she-berakh" as "Karen." I asked him
whether she had a Hebrew name, and he told me that it was Keren rather
than Karen, and cited a Hebrew name book where it can be found as a
legitimate Hebrew female name, one I've never heard before.
Yisroel Markov
<abek...@gmail.com> said:
>Yisroel Markov wrote:
[snip]
>> This is like a third time Grey Goose has been mentioned in the past
>> week. As a [nearly] life-long vodka drinker (I *am* from Russia), I
>> can't understand what the fuss is all about. There are several
>> better-tasting cheaper vodkas on the US market. Last winter I
>> conducted a blind test of Vikingfjord (Norwegian potato vodka I favor)
>> vs. Grey Goose, and all three participants preferred the former, by a
>> substantial margin. These so-called premium vodkas are a sham, IMHO -
>> the spirit just needs to be well-distilled.
>>
>>> that would have been in theory only. On Shabbos when the new moon is
>>> blessed, Hannies accompanies me to shule, and she allows me no
>>> distilled spirits of any sort.
>
>I've never done a blind test, but to me Grey Goose does taste better than
>other vodkas I've had, and more important to me - no hangover after 6
>ounces. Now, I haven't drunk a 1/2 bottle of vodka since freshman year at
>Ben Gurion or a full bottle of whiskey since the IDF, and I promised myself
>never to repeat those stupid stunts.
I only do these stunts with those 1-ounce sampler bottles :-)
>Also when giving gifts, and I understand it's all marketing, Grey Goose is
>considered a nice gift.
I can see that. It's a pretty bottle and all that.
>But I would love to know which vodkas you like, as I appreciate your opinion
>on all kinds of things.
Thank you for your kind words. Like I said, I drink Vikingfjord. I
tend to buy everything in the bulkiest sizes I can (for savings), and
a 1.75l bottle of vodka usually lasts at least nine months in my
house, so I originally switched to potato vodkas when I stopped
selling hametz for Pesakh. I then discovered that those tend to be
smoother than any wheat- or corn-derived vodka I've had until then.
Possibly this is because they are typically distilled four or five
times. Another possible factor is the initial composition of the feed.
Vodka, after all, is ethyl alcohol with water (the best vodka I've had
was 96% industrial alcohol mixed 50/50 with distilled water), so the
only differences are in trace ingredients - whatever survives
distillation. It appears (I'm no food chemist) that there are fewer
precursors to those hangover-making oils in potatoes than in grains.
Other drinkers seem to be taking notice. On my last visit to the local
liquor store I counted five brands of potato vodkas - two Polish
brands and two US ones, plus Vikingfjord - but the Norwegian stuff
remains the most affordable. At $20/1.75l it's slightly cheaper than
even the domestic brands like Smirnoff (which is corn-based and
so-so). A great value.
Of the premium vodkas I find Ketel One to be good. Despite their
marketing, I can't relate to any Russian vodkas as premium; Stoli in
particular is way over-rated. Finlandia carries an OU, but I don't
recall drinking it. Carmel's molasses-based Pesakh vodka is also
pretty good, but fairly expensive here.
Abe Kohen
I can at least vouch that it is a modern Hebrew name. One of the daughters
of my wife's cousin in Israel has that name, which I remember her
Czech-Slovak born grandmother, may she rest in piece, called her as
Keren-ka.
Best,
Abe
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il said:
[snip]
>>My daughter Rayzel, and my son Nachman, have that name on their USA
>>birth certificates. When my daugther Chaya was born, my brother-in-law,
>>may he live and be well, insisted that using that name would cause
>>her untold grief in school where the non-Jewish teachers would mangle
>>her name. Against my better judgement, I put Karen on the birth
>>certificate. We moved to Israel when she was three. Here, _none_ of
>>her teaches have trouble with "Chaya", but having "Karen" on the
>>BC has caused her untold grief with her "official" papers. So I
>>share your sadness. :-(
>
> Interestingly, when a friend's wife had taken ill recently, I heard
> her name mentioned in a "mi she-berakh" as "Karen." I asked him
> whether she had a Hebrew name, and he told me that it was Keren rather
> than Karen, and cited a Hebrew name book where it can be found as a
> legitimate Hebrew female name, one I've never heard before.
When we arrived, the Immigration officer had no trouble with "KRN".
I'm sure he pronounced it "Keren".