Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant ~ Volume IV, Part 5 ~ Nonfiction
jane
April 4, 2005 - 07:11 am
  
"I want to know what were the steps by which man passed from barbarism to civilization." (Voltaire)

What are our origins? Where are we now? Where are we headed? Share your thoughts with us!

Volume Four (The Age of Faith)

"Four elements constitute Civilization -- economic provision, political organization, moral traditions, and the pursuit of knowledge and the arts. "

"I shall proceed as rapidly as time and circumstances will permit, hoping that a few of my contemporaries will care to grow old with me while learning. "

"These volumes may help some of our children to understand and enjoy the infinite riches of their inheritance."

"Civilization begins where chaos and insecurity ends."


THE MIND AND HEART OF THE JEW

Letters | The Adventures of the Talmud | Science among the Jews | The Rise of Jewish Philosophy

In this Discussion Group we are not examining Durant. We are examining Civilization but in the process constantly referring to Durant's appraisals.

This volume surveys the medieval achievements and modern significance of Christian, Islamic, and Judaic life and culture. It includes the dramatic stories of St. Augustine, Hypatia, Justinian, Mohammed, Harun al-Rashid, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Richard the Lion-Hearted, Saladin, Maimonides, St. Francis, St. Thomas Aquinas, Roger Bacon, and many others, all in the perspective of integrated history. The greatest love stories in literaure -- of Heloise and Abelard, of Dante and Beatrice -- are here retold with enthralling scholarship.

The Age of Faith covers the economy, politics, law, government, religion, morals, manners, education, literature, science, philosophy, and art of the Christians, Moslems, and Jews during an epoch that saw vital contests among the three great religions and between the religious and the secular view of human life. All the romance, poverty, splendor, piety and immorality, feudalism and monasticism, heresies and inquisitions, cathedrals and universities, troubadours and minnesingers of a picturesque millennium are gathered into one fascinating narrative.

This volume, and the series of which it is a part, has been compared with the great work of the French encyclopedists of the eighteenth century. The Story of Civilization represents the most comprehensive attempt in our times to embrace the vast panorama of man's history and culture.

This, then, is about YOU. Join our group daily and listen to what Durant and the rest of us are saying. Better yet, share with us your opinions.

Your Discussion Leader:Robby Iadeluca

Story of Civilization, Vol. IV, Part 1 | Story of Civilization, Vol. IV, Part 2 | Story of Civilization, Vol. IV, Part 3 | Story of Civilization, Vol.IV, Part4
Books main page | B&N Bookstore | Suggest a Book for Discussion
We sometimes excerpt quotes from discussions to display on pages on SeniorNet's site or in print documents.
If you do NOT wish your words quoted, please Contact Ginny
Internet Citation Procedure

Joan Grimes
April 9, 2005 - 08:07 am
Welcome to your new discussion.

If you use subscriptions don't forget to subscribe to this new discussions.

Joan Grimes

Malryn (Mal)
April 9, 2005 - 08:42 am


Death and Funerals

When my mother died in 1940, my brother ( age 11 ), two sisters ( 8 and 5 ) and I were not allowed to go to the funeral. We had been taken the day before to say goodbye to Mama at the funeral home.

She didn't look anything like she really looked. She had straight, thick red hair that somebody had curled. Somebody else had bought her a lace dress that she never would have worn. But she was there in a casket, and she was dead.

I am the oldest, and at the time of the funeral, all four of us were sitting on a divan at our aunt's house. I said, "We have to say the Lord's Prayer." I knew we should do something, and I didn't know what else to do.

Later the four of us walked down the country road our aunt and uncle's house was on. It was an in and out New England April day with heavy clouds skidding across the sky. I made the kids stop walking; told them to look up and said, "Mama's up there with the clouds."

My mother's death was sudden, just as my son Rob's death was last Sunday night. She had a stomach ache around suppertime that got so bad a neighbor took her to the hospital that night. Her appendix burst, peritonitis set in, and she died the following morning. I was told that afternoon.

I seem to have to see the person dead and think goodbye. That's what's so hard this time. After I had the phone call this past Monday morning, I came in and posted that my son had died. Afterwards I thought, What if it isn't true?.

It's true, all right, and tomorrow there's to be a kind of memorial family gathering for him in Massachusetts. I won't be there. I told somone that Rob Freeman and I will be conspicuous by our absence.

Last night a good friend in New England called me on the phone. He understood exactly how I feel. He said all the right things. He made me feel better.

Mal

robert b. iadeluca
April 9, 2005 - 10:32 am
My mother died when I was nine years old. I have no brothers or sisters. She had been ill at home for some time and now was in the hospital for a couple of days. I came home from school and our church pastor was sitting there with my father. My father said:-"Mother passed away this afternoon." I was stoic and said nothing. Then I went into the bedroom, shut the door, and fell apart.

Being a disabled veteran from WWI, my father was unable to drive a car so friends from the American Legion and other groups kept coming by offering to take us to the funeral parlor. She was in an open casket. I remember at one point that some one suggested that I go up and kiss her on the forehead. I did and it was terrible. Her forehead was cold and as hard as cement. That was not my mother. For weeks I had nightmares.

My son will be cremated at his request. That is also my wish. And if any of my family members have an open casket funeral, I just might not go.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 9, 2005 - 10:59 am
Please note that these past 1000 postings are now listed in the Heading under SofC, Vol IV, Part 4. And for those interested, click onto the first three Parts and you can go all the way back to the day we started "The Age of Faith."

We took approximately eight months to discuss each of the first three volumes -- "Our Oriental Heritage," "The Life of Greece" and "Caesar and Christ." In a week or so we will have been discussing this volume for approximately eight months (we started Aug 27/2004). So far we have completed 349 pages out of the total of 1081 pages. Coming up are The Talmud, The Medieval Jews, The Mind and Heart of the Jew, The Byzantine World, The Decline of the West, The Rise of the North, Christianity in Conflict, Feudalism and Chivalry, The Crusades, The Economic Revolution, The Recovery of Europe, Pre-Renaissance Italy, The Roman Catholic Church, The Early Inquisition, Monks and Friars, The Morals and Manners of Christendom, The Resurrection of the Arts, The Gothic Flowering, Medieval Music, The Transmission of Knowledge, Abelard, The Adventure of Reason, Christian Science, The Age of Romance, and Dante.

When we have completed this volume and will have rested for a month or so, we will be ready to move onto Volume V, The Renaissance.

Eat nourishing food, folks! Continue regular mild (or heavy) exercise. Go to bed at a decent hour. Keep a positive attitude. Stay alive!! This discussion group is not about to die!

Robby

Bubble
April 9, 2005 - 11:37 am
That is about one third of this volume, and there are so much of interest in just the titles given. I am glad we are not rushing through but taking time to absorb it. I look forward to continue for months and years and more. Robby, don't you dare stop being our DL.

DanielDe
April 9, 2005 - 11:49 am
I lost my father at the age of 19, 34 years ago. I never thought then that I would see the day when I would lose my father in a violent way. He died from an accident at work. I was supposed to have supper with him on that day. When I got to the apartment, it was empty, somewhat eerily. After waiting for a while I left a note and went back to my place, not understanding what could have happened. The next day the news was broken to us by our mother. What a shock.

At the funeral parlour, I waited for the moment when the room would be empty. When it came, I came close and touched him, as a way to say; "so long Dad ... my best friend". He was a humble man, a blue collar worker. A very large crowd came at Church to pay a last respect. I was stunned to realize that his life could have touched so many people, as he had touched mine.

I also realized that he was no longer there when I touched him. But I dreamt of him many years later. In that dream, I was alone in a house when I heard someone knocking at the front door. Opening the door, I saw my father with his joyful grin. I gasped, stuttering something like: "Dad ... I thought that ...". After a pause, I wrapped my arms around him. Then I woke up with teary eyes. It felt like I had an extraordinary chance to say goodbye to him.

Jan Sand
April 9, 2005 - 12:18 pm


NOT LONG

Three score and ten is not long
To dance your little dance,
Sing your song,
To snatch a patch of blue from the sky,
To wonder what in hell and why,
To peer into the well of history
And find it murky, solves no mystery,
To despair at ways that things are run,
To catch and grasp your bit of life, your fun,
And realize that everything you know
Will sweep away like shadows over snow

Justin
April 9, 2005 - 01:38 pm
"Not Long" is very nice Jan. I guess the poet does not think of himself as one of the dancers. He is just an observer.

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 9, 2005 - 01:45 pm
Daniel, and at 19 you became a father to your 4 sisters and brother. What would I have done without you? Thank you for being you.

Excuse-me but I am going to cry now.

Jan Sand
April 9, 2005 - 01:51 pm
On the contrary. I am well aware of my evanescence.

Justin
April 9, 2005 - 01:58 pm
Both of my parents lived a long time. Mother died in her sleep at 87 and Dad died at 97. Their funerals were open casket affairs. There were few old friends attending because death had come to them much earlier. Dutifully, representatives of organizations came. I don't remember crying though I loved them both very much. I think I felt it was time.

The years since have brought me snatches of them now and then- when looking in the mirror in the morning, when seeing one of my children in an unusual pose, these are the moments I see my parents. I think about the times with them when I could have been nicer, when I could have said, "I love you" and then I experience remorse. There was so much more we could have shared that we did not. They lived for a century and when they were gone I missed them.

Fifi le Beau
April 9, 2005 - 05:11 pm
Jan, I loved your poem. It has a melancholy to it that appeals to my nature.

Eloise, your tribute to Daniel was touching. He is a welcome addition to this group.

I tried to write about a funeral, but couldn't do it. I admire Mal and Robby's courage in the face of their sadness.

Fifi

monasqc
April 9, 2005 - 06:23 pm
So much has happened to You, my virtual family and real family here. It is a time of mourning since Easter. I have being reading and reading since this morning and feeling so much gratitude for Robert, our DL and all the others in this discussion. It is an immense honor for me to read you all and having gone beyond the discussion on Islam only a sort while ago I wish to share with you a little thought.

The practice of nursing forced my own personal beliefs to be questioned while nursing multi-ethnic clients. The path of understanding medical science goes very deep. Even goes beyond the measurable notion of physics. Questioning life and death from the start. It is there, in the deepest part of man we go, and feel the heart. It is the same in an Atheist, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and Christian. Words are empty to express the deepness of a human heart and many of them, from all the faiths, and the deepest one of the Islamic faith I tell you, sending ocean of ripples of warmth coming from where or whom or what part of the physical body is it, I ask you? It is not a name if you desire to become and behold. It is only to be felt.

kiwi lady
April 9, 2005 - 07:35 pm
When my husband died he was transformed. He looked beautiful. It was unusual in his case that although his liver only had 5% function for the last few weeks of his life his skin never changed colour nor did he get the rash that accompanies liver dysfunction. He looked so much at peace and young again. My two daughters helped the nurse to wash and lay him out. They were 24 and 28 respectively at the time. We got to stay with him for 2 hours and the nurses had strewn beautiful flowers all around him. His face was not covered. There was nothing scary about the experience at all. My daughters said it was a wonderful time of reflection and love. The doctor who was called in to certify the death hugged, comforted us and stayed with us for an hour.

After the funeral home had done their job we had him at home for 48 hrs and neighbours and friends came to pay their last respects. The little nieces and nephews came ( youngest 4yrs old) to say goodbye and none of them had nightmares afterwards. The children in our family have attended funerals from birth. We did this because my adopted children were not allowed to attend their mothers funeral and it really traumatised them. They did not heal from this experience of abandonment and the disbelief that their mother had died until they attended the funeral of a five year old friend where they collapsed and finally grieved for their mother properly.

Because of this our extended family has taken our children to funerals and wakes since they were babies. We have tried to show them that death is part of life. It seems to have worked as they have been of great comfort to those who lose siblings and who themselves have had no experience of death.

When a member of an indigenous culture dies the whole tribe enters into the funeral proceedings including children. The common practice of bringing bodies home here in NZ is from the example we have seen of the tangi ceremonies on the Tribal maraes where the whole tribe stays with the body until burial. They cry tell funny stories about the deceased and even scold the deceased for past wrongs. Its a healthy way of dealing with death and grieving.

Carolyn

winsum
April 9, 2005 - 07:53 pm
I haven't attended many. As a child I wasn't allowed to and as an adult there were reasons not to. I did attend my parents funerals, both closed casket and both deposited neatly in their drawers at their masolium which strikes me as somehow obscene....

My own wishes have to do with whatever my kids want...i.e. probably a get together and maybe a party and what's left of this body turned to ash and scattered where it's convenient. . . probably the pacific ocean. They will have constant reminders of me since my art,paintings pots etc. are all over their homes even now.

There are times even now that I feel disconnected from this body as if it's already gone. At least the one I've had most of my life, the active useful one is long gone. I don't like funerals or even memorial services which embarrass the active participants, but I do like parties . . .and music. . . . Claire

winsum
April 9, 2005 - 08:02 pm
from Jans poetry page here

there is a description of the deaths of his fathr, mother and son which breaks my heart.. This fella is not just an OBSERVER . . . .Claire

3kings
April 9, 2005 - 08:38 pm
I think it is proper for me to offer apologies to someone who has been hurt or wronged by my actions. It is actions such as these that make civil and social relations so much easier. That is something that should be desired by all, I think.

So too, for nations. When, after 50 years of denial, Gorbachev, leader of the Soviet Union admitted to the Poles that the NKVD had murdered 27000 Poles at Katyn, he added a note to his communique, asking "Please forgive us, if you can."

In response the Polish Church, and the Nation, held a day of forgiveness for the Soviets. The entire Polish nation took part, saying that while they could never forget, they were willing to forgive.

My wife, who had family members killed in the massacre, tells me she personally felt an easing of the pain that had for 50 years angered her. To have the Soviets, who along with the Polish communists, had banned her from visiting her native homeland, because she had led demonstrations here in NZ over the affair, finally admit it was them, and not the Germans who were responsible. was an uplifting experience.It seems a strange term, but it was what she felt.

Two years later, my wife joined a Polish Government group touring with Red Army Officers visiting the places of imprisonment and burial of the Poles. The Officers officially apologized for their Government and personally offered their expressions of deep regret. One even converted to Catholicism and still keeps in touch with Church adherents in Moscow.

Her experience leads me to feel that apologies will always be worth giving, and that they will strengthen the feelings of humanity that we all lay claim to. ++ Trevor

winsum
April 9, 2005 - 08:49 pm
apologies certainly do relieve the giver somewhat of the guilt he or she bears. I' not sure that they really FIX anything though. There is no rule that says you must accept one or that it's not nice to hold a grudge,but it seems to be politically incorrect even if emotionally there are no rules. We can't help how we feel when we are wronged. dwelling on it is another matter. moving on is necessity but forgiveness is not. . . . Claire

Jan Sand
April 9, 2005 - 09:31 pm
There is a noteworthy column in the NY Times today on death. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/opinion/10rich.html?hp

There are obvious contributions to society by religion, some good, some bad, but the underlying orientation of much of religious belief is towards our individual final demise. This is understandable since the final destination is a terror we must all face.

But I wonder if it is healthy and useful.

Malryn (Mal)
April 10, 2005 - 06:42 am

Excuse me. What about the Jews? I thought we were talking about the Judaic Civilization?

Mal

robert b. iadeluca
April 10, 2005 - 08:07 am
The Makers of the Talmud

Jan Sand
April 10, 2005 - 08:14 am
Since we are being disciplined back to Judaeism I thought it might be worthwhile to discover the Jewish view of the afterlife. There is a site dealing with this: http://600000men.com/book/heaven.html

It deals with what G-d offers. Since "-" usually is a substitute for the letter "u" in common indication I felt a bit uneasy but it seems that I was on the right track. There was no St. Peter nor any virgins in evidence and the destination was Eden which has divisions and is indicated as being tilted at an angle to the Sun to provide the seasons.

Other sites provided by Google offer different ideas but the ones I looked at provide a much kinder stay than the Christian dispatch to hell although it is rather unforgiving to Communists.

robert b. iadeluca
April 10, 2005 - 08:19 am
"In the Temple, the synagogues, and the schools of Palestine and Babylonia the scribes and the rabbis composed those enormous bodies of law and commentary known as the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds.

"Moses, they held, had left to his people not only a written Law in the Pentateuch, but also an oral Law, which had been handed down and expanded from teacher to pupil, from generation to genberation. It had been the main point of issue between the Pharisees and the Sadducees of Palestine whether this oral Law was also of divine origin and binding force.

"As the Sadducees disappeared after the Dispersion of A.D. 70, and the rabbis inherited the tradition of the Pharisees, the oral Law was accepted by all orthodox Jews as God's commandment, and was added to the Pentateuch to constitute the Torah or Law by which they lived, and in which, quite literally, they had their being.

"The thousand-year-long process by which the oral Law was built up, given form, and elucidation that accumulated the two Gemaras as commentaries on the Mishra -- the union of the Mishna with the shorter of these Gemaras to make the Palentinian, and with the longer to make the Babylonian, Talmud -- this is one of the most complex and astonishing stories in the history of the human mind.

"The Bible was the literature and religion of the ancient Hebrews. The Torah was the life and blood of the medieval Jews."

Your comments, please?

Robby

Jan Sand
April 10, 2005 - 08:24 am
Yesterday I saw the Shakespeare film featuring Jeremy Irons and Al Pacino. He is as effective as a Venetian Jew as he was as the head of the Mafia or Satan (in The Devil's Advocate). I was surprised at the homosexuality (or bisexuality)and the strong feminist theme and if it is really faithful to the Shakespearean original is is an amazingly modern play.

But the situation of the Jews in Venice was beautifully displayed and well worth seeing.

tooki
April 10, 2005 - 09:01 am
or "Halakhah," seems complicated to me. It is involved with philosophical questions. Following is a site to what's called "Judaism 101," and that's the level I'm on!

TORAH

This site has a section on the Halakhah too.

winsum
April 10, 2005 - 09:16 am
is outdated. consider the sabbath.

"You may do work during the six weekdays, but Saturday must be kept holy as Sabbath of Sabbaths to G-d. Whoever does any work on [that day] shall be put to death. Do not ignite any fire on the Sabbath, no matter where you live".?

Claire

Fifi le Beau
April 10, 2005 - 11:02 am
I have never known any orthodox Jews personally. I have seen them in New York going about their business in the diamond district and other areas. They always seemed to be in conversation with each other, and oblivious to the world around them.

None of the Jews in my family or acquaintances follow Jewish law to the letter. They pick and choose what laws they observe. No one keeps a kosher home, most do not observe the Sabbath. There are holidays where they do observe both, but in day to day life they do not.

Their sons however are circumcised by a Rabbi, they have their bar Mitzvah, they take religion classes at the synagogue, though they attend public and private school, not Jewish school.

As soon as I wrote this I remembered my sister-in-law's mother that all the children called 'Nona', including mine. She came to this country from Turkey as a fourteen year old to marry a man she had never met. An arranged marriage. She was a Sephardic Jew, and she observed the law as she had been taught.

Fifi

kiwi lady
April 10, 2005 - 04:24 pm
The Jews I know do not observe the sabbath. Some of them even have Christmas trees for the children and presents so the kids do not feel left out from their peers.

However they do celebrate and keep the law on all the important days of the Jewish calendar. They go to Synagogue ( liberal) and we have a large Jewish school in Auckland where the kids have religious instruction and do their schooling.

3kings
April 10, 2005 - 06:30 pm
MAL. Yours #20.

I fear I may have earned your wrath, in speaking about relations between Poles and Russians, but a closer reading on your part will reveal that I constantly referred to the Holocaust. This is an event very close to the Jewish experience, and was central to my arguement.

I was also making a few remarks about the usefulness or otherwise of giving and receiving apologies, which was a subject that Robby had introduced.

In this vein, I ask for your understanding, and will think hard in the future about posting anything which you may rule as being off topic. +++ Trevor

Persian
April 10, 2005 - 07:18 pm
I have been fortunate to know both religious and secular Jews - some in my family, others as friends or colleagues. I recall that during the Iranian Revolution, many Persian Jews came to the USA. I was teaching at the local JCC then and several were students in my American Citizenship classes. They and their families benefitted enormously from the American Jewish community, especially the Orthodox, who went out of their way to welcome and assist the Persians.

Later, during the first Gulf War, several Egyptian Muslim families (who had been teaching and living in Kuwait) were evacuated to the USA. When the local Arab community was slow to respond to their need for assistance, I turned to my Orthodox Jewish friends, who almost overran each other to reach the site where the Egyptians were housed at a local military base. They came with open arms, open wallets, and proceeded to offer a diverse range of assistance to the evacuees and their families.

Malryn (Mal)
April 10, 2005 - 07:53 pm

TREVOR, believe me, neither you or anything you said were on my mind, nor was anyone else, when I posted #20. I was tired of talk about death and wanted to change the subject. It's been a difficult time. My son died a week ago tonight, and that sad event is still very close to me.

Mal

tooki
April 10, 2005 - 08:58 pm
Apparently Jewish religious rites changed after Christ. This site doesn't really explain why. But it has some interesting distinctions between religious practices and stresses the importance of the practices for centering Jews during the dispersion. Perhaps Jews are able to be secular now because they have a homeland. Well, really, the question remains. If being a Jew is so dependent on the "law" and ritual practices, why do those Jews who do not practice their religion continue to call themselves Jews?

Oh, HERE'S the site.

kiwi lady
April 10, 2005 - 09:04 pm
To me an ethnic Jew is one who comes in direct lineage from the House of David. For instance I have known Jews who are avid Zionists who are not at all religious in fact they could be described as almost secular. Maybe Mahlia can enlighten us further as regards Tooki's question?

Justin
April 10, 2005 - 09:08 pm
Trevor: We were all off target dealing with topical material. Robby allows that from time to time. When he thinks we have had enough he will reign us in to focus on the Durant topic.

Your message about the Poles and the Russians needed to be said. In many ways the Soviets were, if not more troublesome than the Nazis, at least their equal in brutality.

Jan Sand
April 10, 2005 - 09:24 pm
The Jews have been persecuted for over 2000 years whether or not they are religious. I have heard many discussions amongst Jews as to what constitutes a Jew and the formal condition is matrilineal descent as if the designation is genetic, not philosophical. The many inconsistencies of religion and its outright cruelty and silliness at times and its offensive history and hypocricy has distanced me from religion but if anyone asks me if I am Jewish I will not deny it but indicate qualifications. What makes me Jewish is not what I believe but what potential oppressors believe. The consolidation of any division of humanity is responsive to the integrity of the members and the opposition to that group.

Jan Sand
April 10, 2005 - 09:59 pm
It is useful at this point to insert a note of caution. There has been comment that Russians and Poles have behaved as badly as Germans towards the Jews. This implies an acceptance of nationality as an indication of behavior and I find this most objectionable. I have known Russians, Poles, Germans, Americans,Israelis, American Indians, Latin Americans, Italians,French people, Jews, Blacks, Asiatics, Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Atheists, Agnostics, Arabs, and people of several other general classifications.

Within each of these general classifications I have encountered wonderful, kind, creative, stupid, brutal, thoughtful, idiotic, intelligent, brave, cowardly, etc. people. I am repelled by smearing any of the people with the brush of generality. People are individuals and very frequently inconsistent composits of many characteristics and their personalities react to pressures in various ways.

I have recently heard witnesses to acts of horrendous cruelty in Africa including rape, dismemberment, and cannibalism and these acts were committed by black people but I do not attach this behavior to any particular general human classification.

To judge people as individuals is not easy and frequently dangerous but vitally necessary.

Justin
April 10, 2005 - 11:10 pm
Jan: you did not read that Poles and Russians were as bad as the Germans. The language I read is that "the Soviets were as bad as the Nazis." We all recognize that some Soviets and some Nazis may have been good people, although, perhaps, a bit misguided. But in the main, those who are members of an evil organization can hardly expect to be considered as anything other than evil. PC not withstanding.( whatever that means).

Jan Sand
April 10, 2005 - 11:33 pm
Justin

I believe we are thinking along the same lines, but again, much caution should be exercised in judging individuals. Granted that a member of the Nazi Party has a classification of heavy weight against him/her but there must be accommodation for individual circumstances. There is very little if anything in Naziism to recommend it but Communism is another case altogether as is capitalism or being a Catholic or a Jew or a Muslim. A certain weight must be attached to each of these ideas but the weight differs over time and individuals and circumstance.

kiwi lady
April 11, 2005 - 12:28 am
It was not so long ago that the the Church of England members showed anti semitism. I can remember being shocked ( I am not C of E) at some of the things said by Anglican friends. I am talking about forty years or so ago. I belonged to a family where there was no prejudice because we had a very close friend who was Jewish ( our honorary Uncle Jack) I was fifteen or so before I found out that there was prejudice. Our friend was the kindest and most generous of men and adopted us as family. I believe there was anti semitism in England for many years even up to the Second World War according to my father (an Englishman.) You could not belong to any of the exclusive mens clubs if you were Jewish. I don't know what the prejudice was based on quite frankly nobody ever told me.

I think the Holocaust began a big change in attitude. It stunned and shocked people.

Carolyn

Jan Sand
April 11, 2005 - 12:55 am
Much of the Nazi mistreatment of the Jews was not publicised in the USA and before the end of WWII anti-semitism was pandemic. Hollywood did not mention the German brutalities and there were limits on participation of Jews in clubs and universities and Roosevelt turned away a shipload of German Jewish refugees who sought asylum in the USA. A few novels and films such as "Gentleman's Agreement" appeared after the war but progress was gradual.

But there are negative effects of the Holocaust. Germany, before Hitler, had the reputation of high civilization and its descent into brutality not only destroyed this illusion but it seemed to grant permit for open brutality throughout the world. The more current atrocities in Cambodia, Burma, Jugoslavia, Ruanda, the Congo, China, Sudan, South America have resulted in a world insensitivity to savage behavior that makes one long for the previous hypocricy which might have stimulated better behavior.

Bubble
April 11, 2005 - 01:57 am
http://wordsmith.org/words/pontificate.html "As many rivers flow to merge in one ocean, many paths for spiritual enlightenment can achieve the same goal. The problem begins when we want to portray our religion as the best: "mine is the one true religion and all others are false." Such religious fervor leads to endless violence. No other cause in human history has resulted in as many killings." "

Jan Sand
April 11, 2005 - 02:26 am
If all eternity depends upon your particular religion being the true one it is no question that any others must be eliminated. No doubts are tolerable. That's the problem.

robert b. iadeluca
April 11, 2005 - 03:25 am
Can a religion -- Jewish, Catholic, Muslim -- be practiced A LA CARTE? If so, what is meant by believing in the "true religion?"

As we ponder this question, let us also continue to follow Durant's words. We are concentrating these days on the Judaic Civilization.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 11, 2005 - 03:41 am
"Because the Law of the Pentateuch was written, it could not meet all the needs and circumstances of a Jerusalem without freedom, or a Judaism without Jerusalem, or a Jewry without Palestine.

"It was the function of the Sanhedrin teachers before the Dispersion, and of the rabbis after it, to interpret the legislation of Moses for the use and guidance of a new age or place. Their interpretations and discussions, with majority and minority opinions, were transmitted from one generation of teachers to another.

"Perhaps to keep this oral tradition flexible, possibly to compel its memorizing, it was not written down. The rabbis who expounded the Law might on occasion call in the help of persons who had accomplished the feat of comitting it to memory. In the first six generations after Christ the rabbis were called tannaim -- 'teachers of the oral Law.'

"As the sole experts in the Law, they were at once the teachers and judges of their communities in Palestine after the fall of the Temple.

"The rabbis of Palestine and of the Dispersion constituted the most unique aristocracy in history.

"They were no closed or hereditary class. Many of them rose from te poorest ranks. Most of them earned their living as artisans even after achieving interntional repute.

"Until near the end of this period they received no payment for their work as teachers and judges. Rich men sometimes made them silent partners in business enterprises or took them into their homes or married their daughters to them to free them from toil. A few of them were spoiled by the high status accorded to them in their communities. Some were humanly capable of anger, jealousy, hatred, undue censoriousness, pride.

"They had frequently to remind themselves that the true scholar is a modest man, if only because wisdom sees the part in the light of the whole. The people loved them for their virtues and their faults, admired them for their learning and their devotion, and told a thousand stories about their judgments and their miracles.

"To this day no people so honors the student and the scholar as do the Jews."

Any comments here about students? scholars? teachers? rabbis?

Robby

Jan Sand
April 11, 2005 - 04:12 am
The contrast between the social status of the religious leaders of the Jews and of the other religions is significant. The Catholic hierarchy was bound to the political rulers of the country and the organization became a shadow government with its own wealth and subsequent power. The Jews, on the other hand, used their religious leaders as consultants rather than rulers of a spiritual domain. I am not familiar with the system enough to know if the rabbis had a power hierarchy but it does not seem to be in any way comparable to the Catholic system and therefore less corrupt. Of course, even though the credit systems were consigned to the Jews, their overall wealth probably did not in any way compare to that of the Christians. Nevertheless there must have been several families like the Rothchilds that did rather well.

My faher had a portion of his childhood in what was, I guess, pre-WWI Austria and which today may be part of what was once Czechoslovakia and his family was subject to the pogroms of the time which is why his family fled to America. He spoke to me of the disdain he had for the rabbis who did no work but took food and lodgings from his destitute followers. No doubt he bestowed some of his dislike of religion on me but on reflection I imagine he was not aware of the spiritual strength the rabbis must have conferred upon their communities to permit them to sustain against fierce odds.

Bubble
April 11, 2005 - 06:07 am
All this about the tannaim and the role of the ravs in the community has been true for centuries. It is unfortunate that when religious parties joined in the government and became political with enough influence they also became venal. There have been quite a few scandals with rabbis, all involving money or funds collected unlawfully. Rabbi Deri who once was minister of Interior even went to prison for bribery and mishandling of public funds.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/298250.stm

Many here believe religion and government should be kept separate.

tooki
April 11, 2005 - 09:09 am
The Three Rabbis

Rich7
April 11, 2005 - 09:34 am
I think I'm back. My computer seems to be working after being driven across the country, plus a six month hiatus.

Robby, If your Italian last name didn't suggest a Catholic upbringing, your last question confirmed it. I remember,as a kid, priests driving into our heads the fact that the Catholic religion is not a smorgesbord where you could accept one doctrine from column A and one from column B and not accept the others. They drove home the fact that that if you did not accept ALL the doctrine, you were not a good Catholic.

Well, what if you thought it was a good idea for priests to marry, of for women to be priests. The answer was that you are not supposed to have those thoughts. Accept what you are told. Some have told me that there are no women priests because none of the first priests (the apostles) were female. Well, none of the apostles were Chinese, either, but there are Chinese priests!

I have a lot of trouble believing what another person tells me I must accept on "blind" faith or I am not a good Catholic, or Jew, or Mormon, or Muslim, etc.

Rich

moxiect
April 11, 2005 - 10:37 am


If you accept an individual as an individual with all their quirks and their beliefs and not try to change or impose your will on them wouldn't that constitute respect which leads to friendship and well being on the whole.

Course this idea is frowned on isn't it.

Jan Sand
April 11, 2005 - 10:54 am
Accepting an individual as an individual can have all sorts of consequences. The individual may have tendancies and desires and beliefs that could be hostile or more friendly than you might prefer. Who knows?

winsum
April 11, 2005 - 12:05 pm
in the discussion was this comment by Robby



"Any comments here about students? scholars? teachers? rabbis?"

ABOUT TEACHERS: yep I got caught in that trap I married one, a non jew, vaguely christian, because I thought his work was important. He didn't think so although he was good at it. What attracted and held him to the job was TENURE. so much for my Jewish heritage.

Claire

Justin
April 11, 2005 - 12:51 pm
Jan: This is a discussion about historical events, about ideas,and about the contributions of historical people in forming events and ideas. It is not about individual people. I concur in what you have said but I do not think the comment was necesary. We do not generalize about individual people in this discussion and we fully recognize that people bearing labels may have a mixed bag of traits.

Jan Sand
April 11, 2005 - 01:04 pm
Justin

I was replying to a post by moxiect. Am I permitted that or should I sit on my tongue?

kiwi lady
April 11, 2005 - 01:20 pm
Actually there were women leaders in the early church. Lydia the woman who dyed robes was a leader. The early churches were what we today would call house churches. Held in peoples homes. There were other women leaders but I would have to go back to the New Testament to find them. I know there were several.

I do not think there was ever any edict that leaders should be only men apart from what Paul said.

There are women Rabbis these days so I presume there is no hard and fast rules about this in the Jewish faith. Maybe in the Orthodox branch but not in the mainstream.

winsum
April 11, 2005 - 01:24 pm
describes it for a catholic friend of mine who now and then goes to mass to GET CLEAN. His sexual pursuits make him feel a little off color and a week or two of observance make him clean again. He's found a way to use the church as a pacifier when he's feeling a little guilty about his life style. The confession seems to invite this kind of use.

My ex husband was a non practicing non believing Episcipalion who HATED CATHOLICS. I never could understand that. At one time he even HATED JEWS because that is what he'd picked up until he married one . . me . . and became very fond of my father. He was another one of those unfortunate kids whose father died when he was nine years old. there are a few of them. . what is it about losing a parent age nine? . . . I don't hate catholics. I just wonder about them and how they can accept the inconsistencies that are required of them. . . . Claire

moxiect
April 11, 2005 - 01:24 pm
Thank you for your comment Jan, it was appreciated.

Justin, my post 49 I was refering to individuals, but it was a concept. Anyway if everyone thought the same there would not be a diferrence in ideaology and isn't that what we are talking about.

winsum
April 11, 2005 - 01:31 pm
do they have an effect on the way we relate to individuals. do we expect certain behaviors from them because of a general opinon about the group to which they belong? I'm sure this is true. . . . but what do you all think. . . . Claire

Shasta Sills
April 11, 2005 - 02:31 pm
In an earlier link to a site about Jewish practices, it is stated that there are three things in the Ark of the Covenant--the ten commandments, a jar of manna, and the rod of Aaron. I have never heard this before. I knew the tablets containing the ten commandments were supposed to be in there, but are these other things really supposed to be in there too? They identify the jar of manna as the "Eucharist." Isn't the Eucharist a Christian concept? Do Jews have a belief concerning the Eucharist? I think the writer of that site is a Jewish Christian, who believes Jesus was the Messiah that the Jews were waiting for.

robert b. iadeluca
April 11, 2005 - 03:16 pm
Rich:-I'm not sure which question of mine confirmed my Catholic upbringing.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 11, 2005 - 03:33 pm
"As rabbinical decisions accumulated, the task of memorizing them became unreasonable.

"Hillel, Akiba, and Meir attempted various classifications and mnemonic devices, but none of these received general acceptance. Disorder in the transmission of the Law became the order of the day. The number of men who knew the entire oral Law by heart was dangerously reduced, and dispersion was scattering these few to distant lands.

"About the year 189, at Sepphoris in Palestine, Rabbi Jehuda Hanasi took over and transformed the work of Akoba and Meir, rearranged the whole oral Law, and wrote it down, with some personal additions, as the 'Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda.'

"It was so widely read that it became in time the Mishna, the authoritative form of the oral Law of the Jews.

"As we have it, the Mishna (i.e. oral teaching) is the result of much editing and interpolation since Jehuda. Even so it is a compact summary, designed for memorizing by repetition, and therefore tantalizingly terse and obscure to one who comes to it from any background except that of Jewish life and history. Babylonian and European as well as Palestinian Jews accepted it, but each school placed upon its maxims an individual interpretation.

"As six 'generations' (A.D. 10-220) of rabbinical tannaim had shared in formulating the Mishna, so now six 'generations' (220-500) of rabbinical amoraim ('expounders') accumulated those two masses of commentary, the Palestinian and the Babylonian Gemaras.

"The new teachers did to the Mishna of Jehuda what the tannaim had done to the Old Testament. They debated, analyzed, explained, amended, and illustrated the text to apply it to the new problems and circumstances of their place and time. Toward the end of the fourth century the schools of Palestine co-ordinated their commentaries in the form known as the Palestinian Gemara. About the same time (397) Rab (Rabbi) Ashi, head of the Sura college, began to codify the Babylonian Gemara, and worked on it for a generation.

"A hundred years later (499) Rabina II bar (son of) Samuel, also at Sura, brought this work to completion. If we note that the Babylonian Gemara is eleven times as long as the Mishna, we shall begin to understand why its compilation spanned a century.

"Through an additional 150 years (500-650) rabbinical saboraim ('reasoners') revised this vast commentary and gave the finishing touches to the Babylonian Talmud."

Any comments?

Robby

Rich7
April 11, 2005 - 03:41 pm
The "A la carte" question.

Just an unrelated aside: I can see how easy it is to be misunderstood in a posting. I read my last post over again and figured out that it could be construed to have at least two or three different meanings. Making onself perfectly clear is a real challenge to one's writing ability. Mine is not that well polished yet, but Mal has been helping me.

The lack of inflection and body language, things my speech therapist niece calls "contextual content" in a posting really challenges one's written communication skills.

Anyway, it's good to be back talking with interesting people, again.

Rich

Justin
April 11, 2005 - 05:19 pm
Rich: I agree. Sometimes it takes three or four postings to get a message clearly said and understood and even after that one may feel uncertain because a random comment by another poster will tell you the message missed it's mark. Try shrugging your shoulders in writing for "contextual content." It's nice to have you back. I have missed your humor and I am happy to have it returned.

JoanK
April 11, 2005 - 06:59 pm
Rich: I'm glad to see you again. We missed you in Latin.

To pick up on threads from Durant's earlier discussion, I am looking for the development of elements in Judaism that enabled it to be so successful at surviving in scattered and isolated situations.

If I understand Durant, the first is the transformation from a religion centered on the temple in Jerusalem to one centered in the law.

The rabbi's were able to function individually without an elaborate power hierarchy.

The emphasis on education is important. Each small group, sometimes each family must know enough to carry on the religion independently, unlike a religion where there is always a "church" at hand to tell them what to do.

The written laws again are more easily disseminated among scattered groups.

We haven't discussed the family centered observances; Shabbat, Passover, the daily prayers yet, but these are clearly very important in maintaining the religion in isolation. Again, they require that each family be educated in observance and prayer in a way not necessary in other religions.

Interesting that maintaining the religion requires education, and the fact that Jews so value education has contributed to their disproportionate contribution in many societies.

Bubble
April 11, 2005 - 11:36 pm
You are right about education Joan: even those who had almost no schooling knew their letters and could read theBible and its commentaries. It was a required task of the father that his sons should be able to do so as well and entered the covenant at 8 days old with circumcision, and again at 13 with the Bar Mitzva which elevated the youth to the rank of man.

About #60, there are so many interpretations and way of understanding the commentaries, that a virtuous religious would need a rabbi to help find the right answer to his problem. Bot all rabbis are unanimous in their explanations, so it is also a skill to chose the right rabbi to whom to ask one's question... Subtil, no?

Jan Sand
April 12, 2005 - 01:02 am
I wonder if Muslim religious traditions are more oral than reading. That would make a striking contrast with Jewish tradition. For once reading is mastered it is a skill that transfers to reading in general and opens up a wider world to the adherent. It seems to me that much of Muslim tradition is transfered orally and a student must memorize the tradition which leads to a more rigid interpretation as the words must be precise and fixed.

Beyond this it might be noted that the Catholic Bible was forbidden to be read by the ordinary churchgoer and the availablity of the Bible to the common reader was discouraged before the advent of printing.

Jan Sand
April 12, 2005 - 01:39 am
A further extension of this line of thought is worthwhile.

To carry this pereption into our current situation, much of the liberation of the world intellectually might be accredited to the spread of the internet so that information becomes a common heritage of all humanity. Various governments are attempting to clamp down on this openness, including the US administration which is wildly flailing its power to declare uncomfortable information as secret and perhaps damaging to security, a claim that seems to me self serving and unjustified and damaging to democracy.

Malryn (Mal)
April 12, 2005 - 06:36 am

Shabbat: Friday night. (Check the links at the side of the page)

Bubble
April 12, 2005 - 06:49 am
"For once reading is mastered it is a skill that transfers to reading in general and opens up a wider world to the adherent.

Jan,... I'm afraid this is not true for the ultra orthodox Jews.They are literate, it is true, but are forbidden to read secular printed matter, be it books, magazines or newspapers. They have their own papers, often plastered on prominent places as well for those unwilling to buy them, with the news relevant to themselves and approved as suitable by their rabbis. These orthodox Jews don't have a TV or a video or a DVD, don't go to cinema, and IF they have a radio, it is tuned to the religious channel only.

Jan Sand
April 12, 2005 - 07:58 am
I don't doubt that ultra-orthodox Jews behave as you say but I wonder what part of the Jewish intellectual prowess resides within the ultra orthodox area. I know that, at least in New York City, the ultra orthodox have a hold on the diamond industry. But with the limitations they place upon themselves, how commercially successful could they be? There must be a fairly large contingent of Jews who obey the intellectual practices of the Jewish culture and are less tied down than the ultra orthodox.

Bubble
April 12, 2005 - 08:10 am
The secret of their success commercially in the diamond industry lies in their unshakeable honesty. As you probably know this is one place where contracts are not sealed by a signature, but by a handshake.

Jan Sand
April 12, 2005 - 08:39 am
A friend of mine was in the diamond so I know something of them and their industry. There are many aspects of the people involved that are admirable which is also true of any of the other religions including Islam and Christianity. But as is evident in Israel there are serious problems with the beliefs of people of integrity from all sides.

Malryn (Mal)
April 12, 2005 - 09:07 am

"The People of the Book"

Shasta Sills
April 12, 2005 - 02:07 pm
Mal, what is Precarious Global Incandescence?

Malryn (Mal)
April 12, 2005 - 03:55 pm

Shasta, if you click here you'll find the answer to your question

Justin
April 12, 2005 - 03:57 pm
As I understand it, there are two parts to the Torah-The Pentateuch plus the Talmud. The Pentateuch is the early written portion of the Laws and is composed of the first five books of the Bible namely; Genesis, Exodus,Leviticus,Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

The Talmud portion of the Torah is of two varieties- The Babylonian Talmud and the Palestinian Talmud. I assume both are included in the Torah for there are not two Torahs.

The Talmud is composed of the Mishna- a written compilation of previously unwritten law(The Mishna was a thousand years in preparation.)- and the Gemara-a commentary on the Misna.

There is a short and a long form of the Gemara. The short form when added to the Mishna equals the Palestinian Talmud and the long form of Gemara when added to the the Mishna equals the Babylonian Talmud.

I don't know enough yet to distinguish between the long and short forms of the Gemara. Perhaps, Bubble can inform us. The Mishna is mostly halacha which is a Hebrew word for law. The Gemara,on the other hand, is a mix of halacha and haggada. Haggada is a word for stories, some of which are intended to provide relief for studious students.

tooki
April 12, 2005 - 04:06 pm
or, relief for serious students.

I didn’t realize that Judaism is such a dynamic religion; it keeps evolving. Rabbis continue to expound, notes are taken, commentaries and explanations are written. And it’s been going on for, what, how many thousands of years?

By changing the religion to meet the challenges of changing conditions, Jews kept the faith through the centuries of displacement and persecutions. And change is still going on!

The need to learn, know, and understand this body of religious thought places an educational responsibility on Jews. The upshot of that educational responsibility seems debatable, at least in this discussion.

We don’t know much about how doctrine changes from Ultra-Orthodox to Reform Jew. Neither do we know how religion changes from Unitarianism to Southern Baptist in Christiani5ty. This doesn’t stop us from making generalizations about the religion.

But the Jews and their centuries of continuing, vigorous, and centering traditions make both Christianity and Islam seem like Johnny come latelys. Both these Johnny come latelys are dependent on basic Jewish tenets for their existence, except for being the chosen ones. Myself, I’d rather be one of the chosen ones.

Justin
April 12, 2005 - 04:55 pm
Some important changes occurred in Judaism during the first century CE. But before we can understand the changes we must know something about what was in place.

The Sanhedrin was a supreme council of 72 members having jurisdiction over religious, civil and criminal matters. Local Sanhedrin consisting of 23 members exercized the same authority provincially.

The Sadducees and Pharicees were two active groups in the Sanhedrin. The High priest of the Temple, a Sadducee, exercised a chairmanship role in the Sanhedrin. The Sadducees were primarily a party of priestly aristocracy. They rejected the Rabbinic tradition and interpreted the law less strictly than the Pharicees.The Sadducees denied resurection,personal immortality, and retribution in future life, and the existance of angels and demons. The Pharicees were teachers and they eventually evolved into the rabbinic form.

In 70CE Titus, son of the Roman emperor, destroyed the Temple. Three hundred years later an effort was made to restore the Temple but was not successful. The Temple was the only place of animal sacrifice. It was the source of the high priest's power and that of Sadducean power. When the Temple was destroyed, animal sacrifice ended and the business of supplying animals collapsaed. The priestly function disappeared with the Temple.

The Sadducees, thought the Mishna was not from God. The Pharicees or Rabbis thought the opposite and they were the teachers who reached the Jews after the dispersion and so the Mishna as God's word prevailed.

The Sadducees were the hand maidens of the Romans. They had been entrusted with keeping the peace. When the Romans encouraged the dispersion with persecutions the Sadducees were further separated from the Jews thus ending their power.

Thus began the Rabbinic period of influence.

How is that Bubble? Joan? Claire?

tooki
April 12, 2005 - 08:25 pm
I posted this earlier, but it seems to have been lost in the transfer to a new site. I am posting it again because, although more superficial than Justin's, it says much the same thing.

I’m still trying to understand the importance of the Temple historically and today. Daniel’s post 940 makes the point that without a temple Jewish traditions had to evolve. I think it happened like this.

Briefly, Aaron, brother of Moses, was the first high priest. His descendents, the House of Aaron, constituted the priesthood. All sacrifices and rituals had to be performed in the Temple. The rabbis were teachers or sages not connected to the priesthood, but exerting much influence.

When the temple was destroyed the existence of Jewish life was imperiled because all Jewish ritual depended on the existence of the temple. To the rescue came the rabbis. They changed the ritual so Jewish customs could continue regardless of the temple.

The rabbis, who had started out as teachers or sages whose thoughts are embodied in the Talmud, are today much like clergy in other religions. They have pastoral duties, but they remain philosophically orientated and sage like.

Have I missed anything? Oh, right: apparently the priests just disappeared.

Fifi le Beau
April 12, 2005 - 09:11 pm
In Mal's link to Shabbat: Friday night..........

The link says Friday night 1-2-3. That is one of the most misleading headers I have ever read. There are two paragraphs on candle lighting, and then when you click on candle lighting you find there is a long article that when printed out is seven pages long. There are companion articles on candle lighting that carry this even further.

To extrapolate from lighting the candle to the rest of the Shabbat would be well over one hundred pages of print, since this is a twelve web page article.

Therefore it isn't 1-2-3, it's more like one hundred and twenty three. This just goes to show that if you have three simple tasks to explain, and nothing else to do, you can make a living complicating life.

There seems to be an obsessive compulsive aspect to the form mishna took, no wonder it took them a thousand years. They would probably still be parsing words if someone had not said enough already!

I agree with Bubble, knowing every word in the Torah and all the commentary would not make one an educated person. It is about ritual sacrifice both animal and human, myths, genealogy, and the superstitions of several thousand years. Like all the other myths we have read about, it's interesting, but I wouldn't want to live in that superstitious myth filled mind numbing world.

Neither do any of the Jews I know. They do Judaism 1-2-3, and most only on special holy days, and many do nothing.

Fifi

Justin
April 12, 2005 - 10:27 pm
Tooki: In your 31 or 32 you mentioned something about things happening to Judaisism after Christ.I remembered that and thought,"Yes, things happened to change Judaism in the first century but those changes had nothing to do with Christ." That's where my last post came from. We are connected and things you say register on me as I am sure they register on others.

Justin
April 12, 2005 - 10:56 pm
Here we are in the 50 to 70 CE time frame. The Sadducees are in control of the Temple and the Sanhedrin. The sadducees oppose resurection,personal immortality, and retribution after death.

Saul (called Paul of Tarsus) is working for the Sanhedrin as a policeman at this time chasing early Christians. He is fully exposed to the ideas of the Sadducees and Pharicees. They are his employer. Later while traveling and writing letters he takes the position of the Pharicees and expands on them- resurection, personal immortality, and retribution after death.These ideas are clearly those of the Pharicees and a clear example of the transference of Judaic thought to Christianity.

Later in the NT the term Pharisee becomes a perjorative. One would think that the writers of the NT would give credit where credit is due but they don't. They attack the gift giver and make him an enemy to help erase the source of the ideas. Religious formation is really a political game.

Bubble
April 13, 2005 - 01:13 am
Justin: about the Mishna

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/judaism/FAQ/03-Torah-Halacha/section-10.html

The Torah is the 5 first books of the Bibble, It is umuable. The Talmud (Halacha and Gmarra) are mainly commentaries and thus man or rabbis made.

Fifi, I took the link Shabbat 1-2-3 to mean that the first three things mentionned would be the most important in keeping the shabbat. They are observed by all observant Jews, even if some of the others, like driving, not cooking or putting lights on or off during the shabbat are not kept.

Rabbis here will tell you that a little is better than no Shabbat whatsoever. Call it "a la carte" if you want. The fact that Jews are circumsized, have their bar/bat Mitzva, wed in the faith and are buried apart does make the Chosen People unique. Even the mourning period is organized specifically in all its details. It does create unity and a sense of appartenance.

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 03:08 am
"The word 'talmud' means teaching.

"Among the amoraim it was applied only to the Mishna. In modern usage it includes both the Mishna and the Gemara.

"The Mishna is the same in both the Palestinian and the Babylonian Talmuds. The two differ only in the Gemara or commentary which is four times longer in the Babylonian than in the Palestinian form.

"The language of the two Gemaras is Aramaic. That of the Mishna is Neo-Hebraic with many borrowings from neighbor languages.

"The Mishna is concise, stating a law in a few lines. The Gemaras are deliberately discursive giving the diverse opinions of leading rabbis on the Mishna text, describing the circumstances that might require modification of the law and addeing illustrative material.

"The Mishna is mostly halacha, law. The Gemaras are partly halacha -- restating or discussing a law -- and partly haggada ('story').

"Haggada has been lazily defined as anything in the Talmud that is not halacha. For the most part haggada includes illustrative anecdotes or examples, bits of biography, history, medicine, astronomy, astrology, magic, and theosophy, and exhortations to virtue and obedience to the Law.

"Often a haggada relieved the minds of the students after some complex and tiring debate."

Does this clear it up?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 03:10 am
The Law

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 03:22 am
"If now, with offensive brevity and ecumenical ignorance, we attempt to sketch some phases of this immense Talmud that entered into every cranny of medieval Hebrew life, let us confess that we are but scrsatching a mountain, and that our external approach condemns us to error.

"First, said the rabbis, one must study the Law, written and oral. 'Greater is study of Torah than the rebulding of the Temple.' 'Every day when a man busies himself with the study of the Law he should say to himself - 'It is as if this day I received it from Sinai.'

"No other study is necessary. Greek philosophy, secular science, may be studied only 'at that hour' which is neither day nor night.' Every word of the Hebrew Scriptures is literally the word of God. Even the Song of Songs is a hymn inspired by God -- to portray allegorically the union of Yahveh with Israel as His chosen bride.

"Since without the Law there would be moral chaos, the Law must have existed before the creation of the world 'in the bosom or mind of God.' Only its communication to Moses was an event in time.

"The Talmud, so far as it is halacha, is also God's eternal word. It is the formulation of laws orally communicaed to Moses by God and by Moses to his successors. Its decrees are as binding as anything in the Scripture.

"Some rabbis ranked the Mishna above the Scriptures in authority as being a later and revised form of the Law. Certain raabbinical editors frankly voided laws of the Penetateuch or interpreted them into harmlessness.

"During the Middle Ages (476-1492) the Jews of Germany and France studied the Talmud far more than the Scriptures."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 03:48 am
A DIGRESSION from the Judaic Civilization but certainly related to Faith. However, please continue your comments regarding Jewish Law.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 13, 2005 - 05:43 am
The ending of a life is almost always traumatic but the ending of a life by doing nothng gets into all sorts of moral and philosophic messes. Ending Schiavo's life was more in the area of convenience and, supposedly, if it was her will as her husband said, acceptable, at least to me.

But the general principle of ending a life by doing nothing to save the dying person can get one into all sorts of moral difficulties.

Neurologists confirmed as well as it is possible with modern technology that she was not conscious and hopefully not aware but who can know what undetectable activity might have been going on in her head?

In a general way the despicable (to my feeling) massacres in Darfur are also death by the world doing nothing. People, of course, might feel that the situations are not comparable but the bizarre generalization leaves me uncomfortable.

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 13, 2005 - 06:09 am
I believe that it is not natural to artificially prolong the life of a terminally sick patient. It is only possible in modern times with the advancement of medicine. I think that the church intevening in the length of life of a dying person is a misinterpretion of the Bible.

I suspect that to prolong life, or to shorten it could be an economic issue disguised as a religious one in certain cases. I approve of this law where a terminally ill patient should not be given life support systems unless it is desired. I wouldn't want to live artificially myself and my children are aware of that as one of my last wishes.

We were not meant to live forever and in this secular age it is only normal that people should want to stay alive as long as possible, but when my time comes I will be ready to go.

Éloïse

Jan Sand
April 13, 2005 - 07:30 am
At the risk of stretching this digression to an annoying degree I think it is doubtful to flatly state what is or is not natural.

The number of "natural" deaths which would result from the denial of organ transplants, immunization against diseases, the use of anti-biotics and many other modern medications would be horrendous.

My quadriplegic son lived for thirty years through the continuous use of a respirator and supplementary medical procedures and through my efforts and his use of his computer to contact like minds throughout the world which resulted in a life he thoroughly enjoyed.

I imagine that this wonderful guy would produce a rather querulus response to anybody who would voice that his life was unnatural and deserving of termination.

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 08:19 am
Jan:-Regarding "doing nothing to save a dying person," my son, Roland, is in a Hospice in Florida dying from an inoperable brain tumor. The purpose of a Hospice is not to prolong life but to make life as comfortable as possible after a physician has certified that nothing further can be done to cure the person or help him to recover. If he wants to eat, they feed him. If he does not want to eat, they do not urge him to eat. He receives pain medication. While I would prefer that his future be different, I "accept the things I cannot change" and do not consider my inaction or the procedures of Hospice immoral.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 13, 2005 - 08:42 am
Robby

I understand and accept your outlook on the problem. I merely felt queasy about the term "natural".

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 12:09 pm
Bubble: I am confued. On the one hand, you tell me the Torah is just another term for the Pentateuch. I also thought that until I read Durant. He says, the Torah is the Pentateuch plus the Talmud. Durant goes further. The Talmud, so far as it is halacha is also God's eternal word.It is the formulation of laws orally communicated to Moses by God and by Moses to his successors. It is the Mishna that is the halacha portion of the Talmud therefore it is the Mishna that is Gods eternal word. Durant goes well beyond this when he says the Pentateuch is not immutable. Some rabbis ranked the Mishna above the Pentateuch and even degraded the laws of the Pentateuch. They must have been talking about some of the laws of Liviticus. Now I am thoroughly confused. The one thing that seems certain is that Gemara is commentary and some of it is haggada.

kiwi lady
April 13, 2005 - 01:18 pm
Leviticus is one of my favorite books in the Bible. Have a read and think about the laws and the time in which they were written. Many of the laws are for protection of the people. To try to avoid spreading of diseases, to protect the new mother from infection, it goes on on and on. It truly fascinated me and the laws all seemed to have good practical applications in the days when they were given to the people. It actually strengthened my faith. Try and explain hygiene to the population thousands of years ago, Only way to make it work was to make it law. I truly marvel when I read the Levitical laws.

DanielDe
April 13, 2005 - 01:54 pm
I tip toe my way in this conversation because, as far as I can tell, I do not have any Jewish origin. I would like to pay a tribute to my parents for the absence of racial and ethnic discrimination in our family. I can still hear my mother saying that there are no differences between black people, Asian, Jewish or any other group in the eyes God. What profound and strategic teaching that was. My former wife once remarked: "I never hear speak wrongly of anyone!" She was astounded. And I was surprised that she was surprised. This is so because it was this way in my home. I did not discover what racial discrimination was before I spent a few months in Louisiana, at the age of 23, teaching French to 8 year olds. I was deeply shocked.

My parents had Jewish friends. They were close friends and visiting with them was always a treat. My parents were proud of them. When I consider the overwhelming influence and contribution of the Jewish culture and faith in my life, I cannot even begin to express my thankfulness for my parents’ attitude.

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 02:31 pm
Carolyn: I also find Leviticus interesting to read and to wonder about the benefits of the prohibitions. Animals that have a parted hoof and chew the cud are ok. All others are taboo.That let's the camel off the hook and out of the fire.Leviticus lived in Arab country and they ate the camel when stranded in the dessert. Pigs and rabbits are out. So are fish without scales and fins. No shrimp, octopi,squid, or crabs. But locusts, beetles and grasshoppers are ok. Some folks still eat grasshoppers. I suppose they are a source of protein.

DanielDe
April 13, 2005 - 02:39 pm
The people of Israel are descendants of Abraham. This means that, demographically speaking, they form an ethnic group based on the genealogy with him. They were organized in family groups, as descendents of the sons of Jacob. At the time of Solomon, when Israelites worshipped other Gods, they were still the people of the covenant. Afterwards, only Juda remained faithful to the covenant passed with Abraham, and thus the term Judaism. Nevertheless, the ethnic dimension is related to the genealogy with Abraham. The covenant came as an addition to it, and was never consistently applied throughout the history of the descendents. In that genealogy, there is one link which I like to ponder: the promised son, Isaac. His mother was 90 years old when he was born, and Abraham was 100. Sara’s motherhood period had passed a long time before. This means that all the descendents of Isaac bear the mark of this extraordinary circumstance. To me, this is the unique and consistent demographic trait of the Jewish people.

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 02:53 pm
Daniel: The mark of David is a Star. What is the "mark" of Isaac's birth?

robert b. iadeluca
April 13, 2005 - 06:10 pm
"The Talmud, like the Bible, takes for granted the existence of an intelligent and omnipotent God.

"There were occasional skeptics among the Jews like the learned Elisha ben Abuyah whom the pious Rabbi Meir befriended but they were apparently a tiny and hardly vocal minority.

"The Talmud's God is frankly anthropomorphic. He loves and hates, gets angry, laughs, weeps, feels remorse, wears phylacteries, sits on a throne surrounded by a ministering hierarchy of cherubim and seraphim and studies the Torah three times a day.

"The rabbis acknowledged that these human attributes were a bit hypothetical. They said:-'We borrow terms from His creatures to apply to Him in order to assist the understanding. It was not their fault if the commonalty could think only in pictures.

"They also represented God as the soul of the universe, invisible, pervasive, vitalizing, at once transcendent and immanent, above the world and yet present in every nook and fragment of it. His universal divine presence, the Shekinah (dwelling) is especially real in sacred places, persons, and things and in moments of study of prayer.

"Nevertheless this omnipresent God is one. Of all ideas the most distasteful to Judaism is that of plurality of gods. The unity of God is passionately reiterated against the polytheism of the pagans and the apparent tritheism of the Christian Trinity.

"It is proclaimed in the most famous and univesal of Jewish prayers, the Shema Yisrael:-'Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our god, the Lord is one (Shema Yisrael adonoi elohenu, adonoi ehad). No messiah, no prophet, no saint is to have a place beside Him in His temple or worship.

"The rabbis forbade, except on rare occasions, the utterance of His name, hoping to deter profanity and magic. To avoid the sacred tetragrammaton JHVH they used the word Adonai, Lord, and recommended even for this such substitutions as 'The Holy One,' 'The merciful One,' 'The Heavens,' and 'Our Father which is in heaven.'

"God can and does work miracles, especially through great rabbis. But these marvels are not to be thought of as infractions of nature's laws. There are no laws but the will of God."

Robby

DanielDe
April 13, 2005 - 07:45 pm
Justin: I meant "inherit the extraordinary circumstance". It is part of their own history as descendents of Isaac. One could think that as this lineage was given birth, there was something special in it. Many of the greatest talents that shaped the history of Mankind were descendants of Isaac.

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 08:26 pm
Daniel: I understand your thought. Can you by extention apply the same reasoning to Ishmael and the Muslims?.

By the way, if I have not said so before, I am happy to welcome another of Eloise's remarkable family to the discussion.

Jan Sand
April 13, 2005 - 08:31 pm
The psychological effect of a God that is unrepresentable in sculpture and pictures and whose name is unpronouncable gives the concept much more power and mystery than a god that can be seen and evaluated. I thoroughly doubt the existence of a God but I cannot but be impressed with the Jewish concept. And, if there is a God I have no doubts that it would conform to this concept.

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 08:54 pm
The personification of the God of Abraham by the authors of the Talmud leads to some interesting images. It is a male God who has all the attributes and feelings of a human. He stands at the Wailing Wall praying in a phylactery while nodding in rhythm.

The rabbis say the people need pictures to grasp the message and so they did. But at the same time there are rules prohibiting images of God. One may not pronounce his name. Moses discusses this point with God while he is on the Mountain. He is referred to as Adonai by the rabbis. Not as YHWH or as Yahweh or as God. Thus we have the beginning of the use of Lord to describe the God of Judaism and Christianity.

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 09:07 pm
Durant expresses what he sees as a Jewish view of the Christian concept of the Trinity. He calls it Trideism and as such it violates the Judaic idea of one God. The same is true for Muslims who look upon the multiple parts of the Christian God as counter to their principle of One God- Allah. It was Thomas Aquinas who later took up the question for the Christians and by shadow boxing a little came up with the idea of three Gods in one God. It is interesting how religious concepts are evolved.

Bubble
April 13, 2005 - 10:53 pm
About Genes and Mark of origins, there was this article in Yahoo news yesterday:

Human Migration Via Genes

Justin
April 13, 2005 - 10:54 pm
What is the equivalent of two ells in miles or Kilometers? Two ells is the distance one may walk without the necessity of a bow or prayer?..

DanielDe
April 13, 2005 - 10:58 pm
Thanks to you Justin for your kind words. I am honoured to be part of this group.

Ishmael was the son of Abraham, but of natural birth from Agar, the servant of Sara. God honoured him as a son of Abraham, and promised him to be the father of many nations. With the promised son, Isaac, the intent of God - as explained in the Bible - was to set up a scheme destined to reverse the Fall of Man. The lineage from Isaac thus was and probably still is carrying a seed for that purpose. It is not the case for the descendents of Ishmael.

robert b. iadeluca
April 14, 2005 - 03:30 am
Do YOUTH AND RELIGIOUS CONSERVATISM go together?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 14, 2005 - 03:42 am
Is this AN AMEND?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 14, 2005 - 03:57 am
Durant continues.

"Everything created has a divine and beneficent purpose. 'God created the snail as a cure for the scab, the fly as a cure for the sting of the wasp, and the gnat as a cure for the bite of the serpent, and the serpent as a cure for a sore.'

"Between God and man there is a continuous relation. Every step of man's life is taken in the inescapable sight of God. Every deed or thought of man's day honors or dishonors the divine presence.

"All men are descended from Adam. Nevertheless 'man was first created with a tail like an animal.' 'Up to the generation of Enoch the faces of the people resembled those of monkeys.'

"Man is composed of body and soul. His soul is from God, his body is of the earth. The soul impels him to virtue, the body to sin. Or perhaps his evil impulses come from Satan and that multitude of malignant spirits which lurks about everywhere. Every evil, however, may be ultimately good. Without his earthy desires man might neither toil nor breed.

"Says a jolly passage:-'Let us ascribe merit to our ancestors, for if they had not sinned we should not have come into the world.'"

Thoughts to ponder as we discuss the Talmud.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 14, 2005 - 04:52 am
If the beneficence of God created the snail as a cure for the scab, the fly as a cure for the sting for the wasp, and the gnat as a cure for the bite of the serpent, why did he create the scab, the wasp and the serpent? And Satan? Why did he create Satan? Ah well, God is inscrutable. Obviously scruting is useless.

Insofar as God's function is concerned, since he inserts the spirit but not the hardware He is rather like Microsoft supplying the software and, like Bill Gates, does rather well.

Rich7
April 14, 2005 - 05:57 am
does a bit on a "personified" God when he discusses the practice of old time and current religious leaders to explain things not understood as the work of an invisible man with a gray beard living beyond the clouds.

This invisible man set down rules (as interpreted by these religious leaders) that you must live by, and if you did not follow those rules, you would be condemmed, after death, to an eternity of unspeakable suffering and torture, from which you could never return...and remember, HE LOVES YOU!

Rich

Jan Sand
April 14, 2005 - 06:39 am
Carlin, in his appraisal of God, has evidently turned the tables on religious analysts. Instead of looking upon humanity From God's point of view he looks upon God from humanity's point of view and some rather interesting questions start to arise.

What caused God's intemperate nature and what determined His strange exclusion of some rather delicious and nourishing foods? Why is he so elusive in these latter days? (Could He be embarrassed by the results of his labors?)Was his upbringing intemperate which might be the cause of his various violent punishments of people who did not quite conform to his regulations? What has he got against innocent homosexuals and, to a somewhat lesser degree, women? Or, as Freud might say, "What does God want?"

But perhaps this wanders too far from His Jewish version.

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 02:13 pm
Robby, Thanks for the article on the "Theology of the Body." These conservative Catholic Young folks, mostly priests, are advocating an end to sexual progression as well they might.Afterall they have taken a vow of celibacy which is like the Shaker lifestyle. Except of course, those young celibates in the US who have fallen prey to the charms of young boys. Their sexual proclivities bring an end to their interest in the Theology of the Body. It is amazing to me that anyone other than John Paul could think that by persisting in a thieology of the Body one could stem the sexual problems that today plague the Catholic hierarchy.

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 02:31 pm
Imagine going to an Austrian art gallery and finding paintings of your rellies on the walls as well as seven Klimpts that belonged to you prior to WW11.Stolen works have been turning up all over Europe these days since a thirty year statute of Limitations has passed. Fortuneately, for the previous owners, the courts have ruled in this case that they may sue Austria anyway. The settlements against the Swiss banks are especially sweet because it appears they colaborated in the Nazi takeover of German Jewish businesses. I don't call these settlements Ammends.They are retribution and a true expression of justice.

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 02:45 pm
Dan: I don't think the sons of Ishmael will agree with you. Central to Islamic belief is the idea that Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hagar, is one of the ancestral roots in their genealogy. They also believe that it was Ishmael who was saved by god from the knife of Abraham. When Mohammad's writers went through the Pentateuch for ideas they found Ishmael more to their liking.

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 02:55 pm
Man is composed of Body and soul. The soul is from God the body from earth. The soul impels one to virtue, the body to sin. That's from the Talmud. It is akin to John Paul's Theology of the Body. Will man never learn that sex is a good thing?

winsum
April 14, 2005 - 03:01 pm
I think that men have known it for a long time it's the women who need convincing.-- a result of a nice religious orientation. . .men are macho and wmen are delicate and need to be cared for and courted = convinced.. . . . rubbish!!!!

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 03:03 pm
We learn from the Talmud that man is descended from Adam and that early man had a tail as an animal has a tail. Further, that up until Enoch men bore faces like monkeys. Where were the Jews when Darwin needed them? This is the word of God as told to Moses and he to his successors. Is this new evidence for the evolutionists or the creationists?

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 03:14 pm
Jan,You and Rich have brought wonderful humor back to this discussion and I for one appreciate it greatly.

robert b. iadeluca
April 14, 2005 - 03:40 pm
"Sin is natural but its guilt is not inherited.

"The rabbis accepted the doctrine of the fall of man but not of original sin or divine atonement. A man suffers only for his own sins.

"If he suffers more on earth than his sins seem to warrant, that may be because we do not know the full measure of his sins. Or such excess of punishment may be a great blessing, as entitling the suffer to exceptional rewards in heaven. Therefore, said Akiba, a man should rejoice in the multitude of his misfortunes.

"As for death, it came into the world through sin. A really sinless person would never die. Death is a debt owed by a sinful humanity to the author of all life.

"The Hebrew Scriptures had said little of an immortality of reward and punishment. But that idea now played a major role in rabbinical theology.

"Hell was pictured at Ge Hinnom or Sheol and divided like heaven into seven stories with graduated degrees of torment. The valley of Hinnom was a rubbish heap outside of Jerusalem where fires were kept constantly burning to prevent pestilence. Sheol was conceived as a subterranean region of darkness that receivd all the dead.

"Only the most wicked of the circumcised would enter it and even confirmed sinners would not be punished forever. 'All who go down to hell shall come up again except these three -- he who commits adultery, he who shames another in public, and he who gives another a bad name.

"Heaven was called Gan Eden and was represented as a garden of every physical and spiritual delight. The wine there would be of a vintage preserved from the six days of the creation. Perfumes would bless the air. And God Himself would join the saved in a banquet whose supreme joy would be the sight of His face.

"However, some rabbis confessed that no man can say what lies beyond the grave."

Is there anyone here rejoicing from the multitude of your misfortunes?

Robby

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 05:08 pm
I can only hope that my misfortunes were less than I deserved because I am sinless. That may also entitle me to life everlasting.

Lots of good things in the Talmud's view of heaven.It's nice the Muslims thought to add 70 virgins to the revelry. What ever would we do without the ladies in heaven.

Persian
April 14, 2005 - 06:15 pm
I wonder if the jihadists realize that it is Allah's intention for the Virgins in Paradise to remain virgins?

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 06:46 pm
Mahlia: Indeed. A supply and demand problem comes to mind.

Jan Sand
April 14, 2005 - 08:00 pm
The ancient Greeks had a vision of Hell, or Hades, but it was, according to my memory, the repository of all the dead. I don't remember any Greek version of Heaven. And it did not involve punishment. Violation of the will of the Greek gods ocurred, according to my memory of the myths, while one was alive.

It was the Jews who endowed death with the characteristics of judgement which mirrored the secular legal systems and the Hebrew God became a judge whereas the Greek gods had random personality traits that approximated natural laws and demanded obedience. I don't think the Greeks tied sex or guilt into their godly systems.

The idea that adultery was an extremely rare occurence with the old Jews makes me doubt their capabilities of observation unless their hormone systems differed radically from those of modern man or they were as hypocritical as some of the radical religious groups of today.

Justin
April 14, 2005 - 11:15 pm
I watched a 3 hour presentation of the History of Islam on TV tonight and learned a few things that I did not pick up on as we moved through the history of Islam.

In the beginning the Kaaba housed a number of rival idols of gods,each representing a different tribe. The tribes were frequently at war with one another. It is thought Muhammad realized that if all the tribes worshipped the same God intertribal warfare would end.

He was right. When he took Mecca with an army that had grown from 300 to 10,000 warriors over two years, he chose not to take revenge on the inhabitants of the city and thus brought all under the banner of Allah and the inter tribal struggle ended. Peace reigned in Islam under the one God, Allah.

Mohammad then entered the Kaaba and destroyed all the gods of all the tribes. The action is comparable to Jesus expelling the money changers from the Temple and Moses destroying the idols when he returned from the mountain after his conversation with the unnameable.

Mohammad the peace maker died two years after taking Mecca. That is a different slant on the warrior prophet. Is it not?.

Bubble
April 15, 2005 - 01:13 am
Jan, I did not research this, but I feel that adult-ery as in the Bible and your definition of it may not coincide. Same as what is called a bastard child in today's language and what it is in Jewish religion is not the same at all.

Sorry I have no time to research links at this time or even ask my learned neighbors: we are all in full Passover preparations swing!

Jan Sand
April 15, 2005 - 01:41 am
Bubble

Thanks for the thought. I imagine that there are many misinterpretations of ancient writings that lead to confusion about what was originally intended.

Bubble
April 15, 2005 - 02:39 am
The passion of Aramaic

robert b. iadeluca
April 15, 2005 - 04:21 am
Ritual

robert b. iadeluca
April 15, 2005 - 04:34 am
"What distinguished the Jews in this Age of Faith, what kept them one in their scattering, was not theology but ritual, not a creed that Christianity had merely extended and that Islam would substantially adopt, but a ceremonial law of such burdensome complexity that only this proud and high-strung people showed the humility and patience required to obey it.

"Christianity sought unity through uniform belief, Judaism through uniform ritual. The laws 'were given,' said Abba Areca, 'only for the purpose of disciplining and refining men by their observance.'

"The ritual was first of all a law of worship. When the synagogue succeeded the Temple, animal sacrifice was replaed by offerings and prayer. But no more in the synagogue than in the Temple was any image of God or man allowed.

"Every approach to idol worship was shunned. Instrumental music, permitted in the Temple, was forbidden in the synagogue. Here Christianity diverged, Mohammedanism stemmed, from Judaism. The Semites developed a somber piety, the Christians a somber art.

"Prayer made every day, almost every hour, a religious experience for the orthodox Jew. Morning prayers were to be said with phylacteries (small cases containing passages from the Scriptures) affixed to the forehead and the arms. No meal was to be eaten without a brief grace before it, and a longer prayer of thanksgiving at its close.

"But these domestic prayers were not enough. Men can be held together only by doing things together. The rabbis argued, with Oriental hyperbole, that 'a man's prayer is heard by God only when offered in a synagogue.' The public liturgy consisted mainly of the Shemoneh Esreh, the Shema Yisrael, readings from the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the Psalms, a homily of Scriptural explanation, the Kaddish (prayers of praise and blessing for the living and the dead), and a concluding benediction.

"This remains the essential synagogue ritual to the present day."

A high-strung people who have humility and patience?

Robby

Rich7
April 15, 2005 - 09:49 am
or phrase can say more than volumes.

Robby, your quote from Durant, "Christianity sought unity through uniform belief, Judaism through uniform ritual." captures, for me, one of the major differences between the Jewish and Christian faiths.

Being raised as a Boston Irish Catholic, I always had a problem with someone else telling me what I had to believe (or suffer the dire consequences). It always seemed to me that belief should come from within, not from without.

Rich

winsum
April 15, 2005 - 11:14 am
I couldn't agree with you more. However, being raised Jewish in a reform manner even dispensed with much of the ritual. . . to my great relief. It didn't ever seem important to me which is why I eventially dispensed with religion altogether. . . Claire

3kings
April 15, 2005 - 02:33 pm
RICH I wonder if Durant is not exaggerating when he writes "Christianity sought unity through uniform belief, Judaism through uniform ritual."

I seldom attend Church, but when I do ( it is always to a Catholic mass ), I am struck with the emphasis on ritual. Even the beliefs are mentioned only through their ritualistic recital. The ten commandments are given only a minor place in all this.

There is seldom much attempt to link the philosophy of Christ to present day problems, or seeking a guide through His teaching, to their solution. The problem here seems to be that the Church is bending over backwards in its attempts to stay out of Politics.

I have no experience of what occurs in a synagogue, but think that Durant may be correct in his statement about what happens there.++ Trevor

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 03:08 pm
When Durant speaks of unity in belief in the Catholic Church he is speaking of unity in ritual as well as in theology. The Mass had not changed one iota from the Council of Trent till Vatican 2. The substance of the parts of the Mass were retained by Vatican 2 but the rites were simplified to allow more active participation by the laity.The Common prayer ie: the prayer of the faithful was included.The laity may sing those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them. One's mother tongue may be used where appropriate. However, the Dogmatic principles of the Council of Trent continue to apply. That comes from Chapter 11 of the Liturgy section of Vatican 2.

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 03:13 pm
I think Durant understated the case when he failed to include ritual in his comment but when you consider how closely the Mass reflects the beliefs of Catholics, it may not be necessary to separate their identities..

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 06:15 pm
Before letting go of Islam it is well to recall that it was in Bagdad that one realized that germs were the cause of illness and that they are passed in the air currents. Washing one's hands and cleansing the body were considered therapeutic. Europe in contrast thought faith was the way to cure illness.Before you snicker it is well to know that many still think faith is curative. There are sects in Christianity that promote healing by faith as well as the laying on of hands. Christian Science is popular and is practiced by otherwise intelligent people.

robert b. iadeluca
April 15, 2005 - 06:17 pm
Justin:-As a Clinical Psychologist, you should know that I am a firm believer that the mind affects the body. You can call this Faith if you wish.

Robby

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 06:23 pm
Bagdad during one period in the history of Islam was home to scholars of all persuasions- Christians, Jews, Muslims. They came because paper was used in Bagdad and books were numerous. In Europe a monestery was lucky if it held a half dozen books in it's library. In Bagdad, one hundred or more booksellers lined the streets.

The great works of the world were copied here onto paper volumes. In the translation process scholars acquired great knowledge of ancient Greece and used it to discuss ideas with others. Paper spread from the Arabs to the rest of the world though it was probably acquired initially in China and India.

Jan Sand
April 15, 2005 - 06:29 pm
I would be a bit careful about extending the use of pragmatic hygienic practices to a concept about germs. Before the discovery of the microscope there was no idea that little beasties even existed and the work of several people including Pasteur was necessary to firm up a germ theory. Your proposal about Islam and germs is comparable to crediting Democritus with the discovery of the atomic bomb.

robert b. iadeluca
April 15, 2005 - 06:33 pm
"Far more detailed than these regulations of worship were the rules for cleanliness or ritual purity.

"Physical hygiene was considered favorable to spiritual health. The rabbis forbade living in a city in which there was no bathhouse and gave almost medical instructions for the bath. 'If one bathes with hot water, and does not follow it with cold water, it is like iron which is inserted into a furnace and not afterward plunged into cold water.' The body, like the iron, must be tempered and steeled. Anointing should follow the bath.

"Hands were to be washed immediately upon rising, before and after each meal, and before ceremonial prayer or any other ritual observance.

"Corpses, sexual functions, menstruation, childbirth, vermin, pigs, and leprosy (i.e. various skin diseases) were ritually (i.e. by religious law) unclean. Persons touched or affected by any of these were to go to the synagogue and perform a purification ceremonial.

"A woman was considered unclean (not to be sexually approached) for forty days after bearing a son, eighty days after bearing a daughter.

"In accord with the Biblical injunction (Gen. xvii, 9-14), a boy was to be circumcised on his eighth day. This was represented as a sacrifice to, and a covenant with, Yahveh. But the prevalence of the custom among Egyptians, Ethiopians, Phoenicians, Syrians, and Arabs suggests that it was a hygienic measure indicated in a climate more farorable to sexual precocity and excitabiiity than to cleanliness.

"This conclusion is reinforced by the rabbinical command that no Jew should keep beyond twelve months an uncircumcised slave."

Cleanliness is next to Godliness?

Robby

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 06:38 pm
Robby; That may be but it is hard to explain the actions of parents who fail to treat their children medically, while watching them die of some simple malady we had a handle on in the eighjth century in Bagdad. The buffoon healers on TV are certainly not worth a defense.

Let me ask you a question. In what way does the mind influence one's health. Does the person who, while sick, says "that's it. I give up to the pain." stand any less chance of recovery than one who says,"to himself, I don't care about the pain, tomorrow I will be well? It looks good in the movies when the doctor says, after a death, I couldn't help him because he gave up. He had no will to live. But that's the movies. Today we know that antibiotics work no matter the frame of mind. Faith failed to cure during the plague but antibiotics and pestcides work.

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 06:42 pm
Cleanliness is next to godliness. Cleanliness is one of the benefits of religion. It is the reason fewer Jews than Christians died of the Plague in the Middle Ages.

Jan Sand
April 15, 2005 - 07:00 pm
It has been the practice here in Finland since ancient times to construct the sauna first when building a house and living in it and using it for childbirth. The rest of the house is constructed when time and resources permit. The temperature of saunas frequently approaches boiling point which makes it reasonably sterile.

The American Indians also used sweating to cure maladies.

Placebos are a standard medical practice even today and they are frequently effective.

winsum
April 15, 2005 - 10:23 pm
stress can make a person physically ill and laughter has been known to cure cancer. Who was it that is/was a well known writer who required visitors to always come prepared with jokes when they came to see him?

The mind is part of the body Justin. Psychosomatic illnesses can be cured by "talk therapy" etc. Ask Robby.

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 11:51 pm
I don't say that the mind and the body are not linked. I ask what is the range of interraction?. Psychosomatic illness is imagined illness. Clearly, the psychosomatically ill may be cured by convincing the victim that he is not ill afterall. But what is the role of the mind in curing real illness. Have any of these mind-body concepts been tested by the scientific method or are we still in the hypothesis formation stage?

Justin
April 15, 2005 - 11:53 pm
Milton Berle is the fellow who wanted jokes delivered to his bedside so he could repeat them at night.

Bubble
April 16, 2005 - 12:22 am
Justin, I have been struggling from age 2 with an unresponsive body because of polio. Pains, sores, incredible output of efforts for doing any task are the daily lot of those with polio.

From experience, I can announce that I feel, react, manage so much better when I travel abroad and meet loved ones at every "port" I stop. First I will confess that travelling is certainly harder and more stressful than for the usual traveller. For me, the numerous hugs, the hands touching me, the casual massage of neck and shoulders from these long-time friends really lift me physically and renew me mentally. I even wonder why the rub-sores from my braces heal so fast on trips and have no real explanation. It is unfortunate that we are not a very tactile family.

The imposition of a warm hand on my inflamed shoulder finally got rid of the pain and stiffness where 3 weeks of the anti-inflammatories did little difference. I never believed it would work 2 months ago but next time I'll try that first.

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 03:02 am
Justin:-The participants here are explaining it better than I. They are speaking from experience. One of the items listed on my business card is "chronic pain." I often help relieve a patient's pain through relaxation procedures. And yes, there are scientifically conducted experiments that confirm the mind-body connection. I don't have time at the moment to look them up.

So my question remains. Would you call that Faith? And is it similar or identical to the religious-type Faith we are discussing here?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 03:10 am
Here is an ARTICLE on the mind-body connection which might be food for thought.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 03:31 am
Are you acquainted with FEMINIST SEDERS?

Robby

Malryn (Mal)
April 16, 2005 - 06:18 am

You might as well add my name to BUBBLE's post #147. I was 5 years older than she when I had this debilitating disease and wear one leg brace not two, but the effect is pretty much the same.

Everything I did, when I was a lot more active than I am now, was an athletic adventure. Up one, up two -- that's me climbing a stepladder to wash the kitchen walls. Pick yourself up when you fall. No pain, no gain.

I have talked myself out of illness and pain since I had polio 70 years ago this coming July.

I had an intestinal flu off and on for a few weeks. It started to ease off; then my son Rob died. That weakened me; the flu returned and now I need some help.

Is the way I deal with pain and illness a kind of faith? All I can say is that the strongest faith I have is faith in me, myself, me.

Mal

winsum
April 16, 2005 - 08:03 am
is part of the gifts of the golden years for many of us even if we've been realativly healthy otherwise. It's an insult to have the body betray me and emotionally it takes a while to catch up. arthritis makes mornings difficult and yet movement is good. . . so there is much to get used to physically as well as mentally.

I have faith in my body even though it now pains me, I have faith that if I can maintain some control it will cooperate so I define the moments pain and feel more control that way. Now is that really faith or just common sense. . . . Claire

Bubble
April 16, 2005 - 08:18 am
Is it faith? I don't know. I personally would not call it that. I think it is the knowledge that most times, when one wants something badly enough one would find a way to do it or to get it. Our body and mind have resources unrealized that can be tapped into in time of crisis. Severe illnesses are crisis.

Apparently there are instances it won't work. Cancer cannot be routinely cured by the mind power. Still, I wonder if the chances are not much better when, not if, the mind is positive. I believe they are. Bubble

Rich7
April 16, 2005 - 11:59 am
is a pioneer in Mind/Body interaction. His first book, "The Relaxation Response" published in the early 1990's (maybe late 80's) was an eye opener for me. Harvard University now has its own Institute of Mind/Body Studies, and Benson, I believe, is a key member of the faculty.

Spirituality and meditation are important parts of Benson's teaching.

Rich

Scrawler
April 16, 2005 - 12:01 pm
Over the years I have used meditation to help me focus on my pain and lessen it. I've suffered for years from migraine headaches and I've found that I can lessen the pain by focusing on somthing other than my head.

On the other hand meditation didn't cure my son's or my husband's cancer nor take away the severe physical pain from physical abuse I received.

Is meditation a form of faith? Perhaps so. I just don't know.

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 02:15 pm
"The Talmud occasionally reads like a manual of home medicine rather than a code of religious laws. It had to be an encyclopedia of advice for its people.

"The Jews of the fourth and fifth centuries, like most Mediterranean peoples, were slipping back into the medical superstitions and makeshifts of the isolated and the poor. A good deal of the popular and superstitious medicine entered into the Talmud.

"Nevertheless we find in the Babylonian Gemara excellent descriptions of the esophagus, larynx, trachea, lungs, meninges, and genitals. Tumors of the lungs, cirrhosis of the liver, caseous degeneration, and many other diseases are accurately described.

"The rabbis note that flies and drinking cups mnay carry infection. Hemophilia is recognized as an hereditary ailment making circumcision of the offspring inadvisable.

"Mingled with these ideas are magical formulas for exorcising demons supposed to cause disease."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 02:29 pm
Is a mixture of "MODERN" MEDICINE AND SUPERSTITION a thing of the past?

Robby

Justin
April 16, 2005 - 03:32 pm
I understand your reluctance to associate the primitive airborne observations of eighth century Bagdad Muslims with our recognition of microorganisms as a cause of illness. The various university representatives on the History of Islam broadcast took liberties for the sake clarity. They could have said dirt in the air was thought by these early Muslims to cause certain illnesses but that would not have made an explanatory connection with modern viewers.

In refering to the observation as one involving germs they were over reaching and I over reached in relating the message to you. I think that practice is common with historians as they attempt to make connections with ancient practices. They tend to tell the tale in terms of modern ideas and language. I am glad you brought that up.

Shasta Sills
April 16, 2005 - 03:49 pm
"A woman is considered unclean 40 days after bearing a son, 80 days after bearing a daughter."

I had to laugh when I read this. Females are so wicked that it takes twice as long to regain cleanliness after one of us is born.

Justin
April 16, 2005 - 04:59 pm
Shasta: You mean, that's not true? Goodness, what is this world coming to.

Justin
April 16, 2005 - 05:25 pm
Mind-body interaction is not the result of faith, at least not the faith we are talking about in this section of Durant. You Robby, above all,would not call mind-body interaction a faith based idea. Faith is acceptance of one explanation for something we don't fully understand.It is a denial of the scientific method. Your objective is to improve our understanding of mind-body relationships using multiple hypotheses and empirical observation.

robert b. iadeluca
April 16, 2005 - 05:59 pm
Justin:-When a patient comes to me for the first time and I conduct an "intake," one of the questions I ask is "Do you consider yourself a spiritual person?" and I let the patient define spiritual in any way that he/she wishes. And their spirituality often comes up in the process of their recovery.

Robby

kiwi lady
April 16, 2005 - 07:21 pm
Justin my husband lived for 7yrs with a cancer that could not be treated and usually was fatal within 18mths at the most. He was very strong willed and told himself he would not give in to the cancer. He also ate healthily and did not drink alcohol etc after he got cancer. He also had a very strong Christian faith.

I knew another woman with terminal cancer who lived 10yrs most of that time she could live a normal life. She had exactly the same personality as my husband.

Conversely I knew a man ( colleague at work) who had a very bad cancer. Doctors told him even without treatment he would have a year at least. He turned his back to the wall at the hospital and died within a week. Some of his young protegees at work begged him not to give up and he just said I do not want to be a burden to my wife and five children. He truly gave up the ghost and died. I could not believe it when they told me he was dead. He was a very popular man at work and we could not believe he just gave up but he did.

These are my experiences with mind over matter as you might say.

Carolyn

kiwi lady
April 16, 2005 - 07:24 pm
PS to Robbys post about his patients. When I embarked on my therapy my therapist had the same attitude and encouraged me rather than detracted from my beliefs. She herself did not have any belief system. I respected her a lot and she did good work with me.

JoanK
April 16, 2005 - 08:28 pm
" Does the person who, while sick, says "that's it. I give up to the pain." stand any less chance of recovery than one who says,"to himself, I don't care about the pain, tomorrow I will be well?"

When my father had cancer, he was in the middle of writing a book. He was determined to finish it, and he did. One day, he looked at me and said "That's all -- I can't do any more". I could see in his face he was ready to die, and he did, shortly thereafter.

I don't believe anything his mind did could cure the cancer, but I do believe he stayed alive longer than he would have without that goal to work toward.

3kings
April 16, 2005 - 09:02 pm
There are instances when sick people of strong will stay alive longer than medical science expects. Then I know of cases were the strong willed have died quickly, not withstanding their determination not to.

Then too, I know in my sister's case where she had cancer, and decided that "was it, let's get it over with." Doctors gave her only six months, but she lingered on for another 18 years. Through those 18 years she longed to have it all finished with, but it was delayed as I say for 18 years.

I do believe the correct mental attitude, the emphasis of the positive, makes day to day living more bearable, but like Justin, I don't believe it has any bearing at all on one's longevity.

It would nice if it did, but my experience leads me not to believe in "miracles". There is always a physical, not a spiritual reason for health, life, and death.=== Trevor

Jan Sand
April 16, 2005 - 10:41 pm
There is a wealth of evidence that the mind and the body are not, as most religions would have us believe, separate co-inhabitants of the same spacial volume in our existence, but an intimately conjoined entity witn strong consequences from one to the other as each is affected by circumstance. In other words, they are aspects of the same thing.

But faith in itself is a state of total acceptance of the authority of that faith which can be a very useful characteristic attitude to those who would use it to con people who are bereft of a critical mind. The article by Frank Rich in today's Times (Sunsay April 17 2005) clearly demonstrates this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/opinion/17rich.html?hp

Justin
April 16, 2005 - 11:23 pm
Thanks Jan. I hope the embarassed theocratic members of Congress do not remove Delay. He is a wonderful asset to the more secular members of the House.

robert b. iadeluca
April 17, 2005 - 04:38 am
A thought-provoking article on the "conflict" between ORGANIZED RELIGION AND EVERYDAY LIFE.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 17, 2005 - 05:33 am
"The rabbis, like all of us, were experts on diet.

"Dietary wisdom begins with the teeth. These should never be extracted, no matter how they ache for 'if a man chews well with his teeth his feet will find strength.'

"Vegetables and fruits, except the date, are highly recommended.

"Meat is a luxury which only the well washed should have. The animal is to be killed in such a way as to minimize its pain and draw the blood out of the meat. To eat flesh with blood is an abomination. Hence the slaughter of animals for food must be left to trained persons who will also examine the viscera to make sure that the animal is not diseased.

"Meat and milk and dishes prepared with them must not be eaten at the same meal or even placed near each other in the kitchen. The flesh of swine is to be abhorred.

"Eat no eggs, onions, or garlic that have been left overnight without their shell or peel. Eat at stated hours only.

"'Don't peck all day like hens.'

"'More people die from overeating than from undernourishment.'

"'Up to forty eating is beneficial. After that age, drinking is beneficial.' Moderation in drinking is better than total abstinence. Wine is often a good medicine and 'there is no gladness without it.'

"Pursuing the subject of diet to its end, the rabbis argued that he 'who prolongs his stay in a privy lengthens his years' and recommended a prayer of thanksgiving after every answer to nature's call.'"

It took us thousands of years to recognize what the ancient Jews knew about overeating and obesity.

Robby

winsum
April 17, 2005 - 11:47 am
was constipation rampant?

robert b. iadeluca
April 17, 2005 - 11:54 am
Claire:-You aren't asking me, I hope?!

Robby

winsum
April 17, 2005 - 12:49 pm
the durants who specified a prayer of thanks giving after successful defecation. It indicates a possible problem for people of the faith. did it attract those with anal proclivities? with holding rather than outgoing. now that's an appropriate question for a psychologist isn't it? The limitations in their diets may have had an effect on their body functions.

Claire

kiwi lady
April 17, 2005 - 12:54 pm
Don't you find these laws fascinating Robbie in light of what we know today? I know the first time I really read all the laws I was absolutely amazed!

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
April 17, 2005 - 12:59 pm
Yes, I am a Clinical Psychologist and many of my patients do give prayers of thanksgiving but I never noticed whether or not they mentioned their thanks before or after they went to the bathroom.

Aren't you all glad you are a participant in a forum which discusses such pertinent items?

Robby

Bubble
April 17, 2005 - 01:12 pm
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Robby!

Shasta Sills
April 17, 2005 - 01:21 pm
I wonder why the Jews were opposed to eating dates. The Muslims thought dates were perfectly acceptable.

kiwi lady
April 17, 2005 - 01:21 pm
Robby I was being serious!!!!! I was talking about the hygiene laws regarding food preparation etc and overeating!!!!!Guess I am not in the mood for leg pulling today.

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
April 17, 2005 - 01:23 pm
I know you were serious, Carolyn. I guess this was the day I was in the legpulling mood. I am feeling frivolous today -- am going out dancing tonight.

Robby

3kings
April 17, 2005 - 03:05 pm
A law saying not to eat blood when eating meat ? Surely the Rabbis weren't so stupid, as to not recognize the impracticality of such instructions? Of course, being male, they had no knowledge about mundane acts, such as the preparation of a meal.

And, did not Christ, a Jew, say at the last supper, " Drink ye all of it. For this is my blood....... which is shed for many for the remission of sins." ( St. Matthew ) +++ Trevor

Justin
April 17, 2005 - 03:57 pm
Robby; Break a leg.. or is it shake a leg? If more people read the Mishna and the Gemara and fewer books about dieting,the population would be much healthier today.

Justin
April 17, 2005 - 04:04 pm
Blood free meat has something to do with the way a carcass is hung. Is there something in the cooking that denies that condition?

Justin
April 17, 2005 - 04:15 pm
The Last Supper was a Seder, was it not? How then does the advice to "drink my blood" tie in with the message of the Seder? The blood should have been on the door posts. I think I will reexamine Matthew.

Justin
April 17, 2005 - 05:14 pm
Matthew; Chapter 26 verses 17 and 27; Verse 17 tells us it is Passover he and the disciples are eating... He took the cup saying ,"Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Is there any connection between this language and that of the Passover?.

Fifi le Beau
April 17, 2005 - 08:29 pm
All cults begin with a charismatic who has visions, hears voices, talks to a god or gods, and begins to collect followers who yearn not for this world and its troubles but a vision of another world.

They say he is a visionary, because they can't see the god he is talking to, and they can't hear the voices. So they follow him, and collect other desperate people along the way looking for the paradise that only the leader knows how to find.

Many of these visionaries seem to be epileptic. I always think of the young Chinese epileptic who said he was the Christ, and got several million Chinese to follow him to their death in a rampage across China.

Cults if they survive and flourish all have the same modus operandi. They slowly make rules that must be followed to stay within the cult. This sets them apart from others, but that is the whole idea behind cultism. They are different, because their leader hears the voice of the unknown and unknowable, and can see and talk to gods when others cannot.

There have always been people who can talk to the gods, and even actually see them. They have very descriptive visions of unearthly places they say they have been. They hear voices which tell them what they must do and say. They say these voices are god. These visionaries did not die out thousands of years ago, they are with us now by the thousands.

Eventually the man who talks to god dies, and then what are the followers to do. They disband or if the cult is to survive they follow the rule makers. All ritual is some mans set of rules. Cults and ritual go together and become one.

How to spot a cult? They have a god and bathroom rules.

Fifi

Fifi le Beau
April 17, 2005 - 08:56 pm
Robby's link on organized religion (catholic) and everyday life.

According to the article many of the rules and ritual imposed by the catholic church have been dropped by the followers. The rules the church still imposes that affects most followers govern sexuality and gender.

How has the Catholic church handled sexuality and gender since its beginning? I read an article on the election of the pope, and in it we get a description of some of the former popes and how they got elected or dispatched (strangulation seemed the preferred way). This is a short article and doesn't begin to lay out the depraved debauchery within the church hierarchy from the beginning.

The depraved debauchery within the lower orders who service the churches is well known. The sexual abuse of children and women is a sure sign of cultism, especially so when linked to a god.

The changing laws of electing a pope

Fifi

Justin
April 17, 2005 - 09:19 pm
Fifi: Not only bathroom rules, bedroom rules too.

winsum
April 17, 2005 - 09:58 pm
How many saw this film? I think the protagonist is something like the leader that Fifi has described except this gentleman didn't want to lead. However, he was schizophrenic, mentally ill. and the description she gives is something like that. . . Robby?

3kings
April 17, 2005 - 10:57 pm
Justin Blood free meat ? There ain't no such thing... The red colour of a piece of meat comes from the blood it contains. You could hang it until it starts to walk, and the blood would still not be drained from it. Capillaries, don't you know ?

I don't know about Passover. Catholics believe Jesus' remarks were spoken at the last supper. The unleavened bread, and the wine, shared at Mass are believed by Catholics to be transformed by the Priest into Christ's body and blood. Religious folk are asked to believe some strange things. ++ Trevor

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 02:33 am
Blood free meat ?

here is the way to do it:

"The Torah forbids the consumption of the blood of an animal. The two Torah accepted methods of extracting blood from meat, a process referred to as “koshering”, are either salting or broiling.

Meat should not be placed in warm water before it has been “koshered”. Once meat is cooked prior to koshering, it cannot be made kosher.

1. Salting: The meat must first be soaked for a half hour in cool (not ice) water in a utensil designated only for that purpose. After allowing for excess water to drip off the meat, the meat is thoroughly salted so that the entire surface is covered with a thin layer of salt. Only coarse salt should be used. Both sides of meat and poultry must be salted. All inside loose sections of poultry must be removed before the koshering process begins. Each part must be soaked and salted individually.

If the meat or poultry was sliced during the salting process, the newly exposed surfaces of the cut must now be soaked for a half hour and salted as well.

The salted meat is left for an hour on an inclined or perforated surface to allow the blood to flow down freely. The cavity of the poultry should be placed open, in a downward direction.

After the salting, the meat must be thoroughly soaked, and then thoroughly washed to remove all of the applied salt.

According to kosher law, meat must be koshered within 72 hours after slaughter so as not to allow the blood to congeal. If meat has been thoroughly soaked prior to the 72 hours limit, an additional seventy-two hours time stay is granted to complete the first step of the salting process.

2. Broiling: An alternate means of "koshering" meat is through broiling. Liver may only be koshered through broiling, because of the preponderance of blood in it.

Both the liver and meat must first be thoroughly washed to remove all surface blood. They are then salted slightly on all sides. Subsequently, they are broiled specifically on a designated liver-broiling perforated grate over an open fire, which draws out the internal blood. When koshering liver, slits must be made in the liver prior to broiling.

The meat or liver must be broiled on both sides until the outer surface appears to be dry and brown. After broiling, the meat or the liver is rinsed off."

www.ou.org/kosher/primer.html

Salting does not make the meat tender.

robert b. iadeluca
April 18, 2005 - 04:35 am
Here is the TIMELINE related to the election of the Pope.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 18, 2005 - 04:56 am
"The rabbis frowned upon asceticism and counseled their people to enjoy the good things of life where no sin was involved.

"Fasts were obligatory at certain periods and on some holydays. But perhaps here too religion was used as a prod to health.

"The wisdom of the race bade the Jews keep festival and make feast now and then despite the overtones of sorrow and longing that sounded even in their joys. 'On a festival a man must make glad his wife and household.' If possible he must outfit them with new clothes.

"The Sabbath -- greatest of Jewish inventions -- was apparently a burden in Talmudic days. The pious Jew was then expected to speak as little as possible, light no fire in his home and spend hours at the synagogue and in prayer. A long tractate discussed with head-splitting hair-splitting just what might and what might not be done on the Sabbath.

"But the cauistry of the rabbis was directed to mitigating rather than increasing the terrors of piety. Their subtlety devised convincing reasons for doing what one had to do on the day of rest.

"Moreover the good Jew discovered a secret happiness in observing the ancient Sabbath ritual. He began it with a little ceremony of 'sanctification' (kiddush). Surrounded by his family and his guests (for this was a favorite day for entertaining friends), he took a full cup of wine, pronounced a benediction over it, drank, and passed the cup along for guests and wife and children to drink.

"Then he took bread and blessed it, thanking the God 'who bringeth forth bread from the earth,' and passed portions of it to all who share his table. No fasting or mourning was permitted on the Sabbath."

Robby

Rich7
April 18, 2005 - 09:02 am
who had to look up "tractate."

FYI, it means treatise or essay.

(American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 2004)

Rich

kiwi lady
April 18, 2005 - 11:46 am
Thats a bit like our Communion Robbie. First the pastor takes the wine and blesses it ( representing the blood of Christ) and then he takes the bread and blesses it. I guess this comes from that Sabbath ritual that you just describe. After all Jesus was Jewish and that is what he did during that last supper.

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 11:58 am
Kiwi Lady, the blessing of wine and bread for the kiddush, is a thankful blessing for the fruit of the vine and for the fruit of earth. It has nothing to do with Communion,

www.yeshuati.com/wine.html

Passover Seder

http://www.judaism.about.com/library/3_holidays/passover/bl_passover_seder.htm

Fifi le Beau
April 18, 2005 - 12:00 pm
Durant writes, A long tractate discussed with head-splitting hair-splitting just what might and what might not be done on the Sabbath.

I read from a long tractate (treatise or essay) on a Sabbath rule regulating how to move an article from one hand to the next, and what did or did not break the rules. After almost a half hour of reading, my head was splitting over the hair-splitting and the article made absolutely no sense.

But all these rules and regulations are necessary to keep the cult alive and different from their neighbors and other relatives. If everyone followed the same rules and laws, the cult could no longer set itself apart as special and different and would simply disappear.

Cults cling to their rules like a drowning man to a float. They are much more flexible with their gods, who keep messing up on how the earthlings are to worship him. Like most ancient cults the Jews centered their ritual around human and animal sacrifice with lots of blood. This all had to be preformed in a specific temple by specially selected priests on altars designed to catch the blood of the victim.

After losing their temple and being forced out by invasions, they simply changed the rules. They attribute the temple service to god rules that could not be broken, but man changed it and wrote more 'god' rules. One thing about all the gods we have read about, every one of them are always making one mistake after another (at least according to the writings of their followers), and man is continually having to correct these mistakes with new rules.

Fifi

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 12:08 pm
"One thing about all the gods we have read about, every one of them are always making one mistake after another (at least according to the writings of their followers), and man is continually having to correct these mistakes with new rules."

Fifi, you lost me...and your words are not even close to pilpul.

Jan Sand
April 18, 2005 - 12:10 pm
According to what I've heard. God created man in his own image. Apparently mistakes were part of the image.

Justin
April 18, 2005 - 01:28 pm
The ancient Jewish Sabbath ritual is little different from the ritual used at the Last Supper. Wine is blessed and drunk and the cup is passed to others at table. Bread is blessed and portions are passed to all who share the table.

What we see at the Last Supper is Sabbath ritual not Passover ritual. Why? Does anyone know?

It is Passover,(Matthew 26-17) but where in the Last Supper is the story of the Exodus? Where is the matzah and the bitter herbs. Where is the recitation of Hallel? Where is the Haggadah and the four questions? Where are the four cups of wine for Jesus and his Jewish desciples who are celebrating Passover.

There is something not quite right about all this. Can anyone explain the discrepancy?

kiwi lady
April 18, 2005 - 01:29 pm
Bubble I am aware of that. What I was talking about was the ritual of blessing the wine and bread. It was obviously a familiar thing to the disciples it was Passover was it not on the day of the last supper. What Jesus did was change the wording of the blessing but it was still the same ritual the cup and the bread. I am not trying to be inflammatory at all with the statement I made. I merely was commenting on the ritual.

Carolyn

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 02:04 pm
Justin, the Passover Meal always starts with a Kiddush, just as every Feast meal and thus also Shabbat meal.

The last Supper in the New Testament describes only the start of the meal apparently. I suppose that the rest of the meal with the Hagadah was unimportant since now it related to the new religion and not to the story of the Hebrews.

Sorry Carolyn, I misunderstood what you meant. My mistake.

Justin
April 18, 2005 - 04:15 pm
Bubble: You mean Jesus and his desciples stopped being the good Jews they were raised to be and just discontinued the rest of the Seder? That's hard to accept. Jesus never stopped being a Jew. He died a Jew. The Jerusalem Church headed by James continued as Jews. It was not until Paul that the new concepts developed.

robert b. iadeluca
April 18, 2005 - 04:28 pm
"Many holydays divided the year and gave new occasions for pious remembrance or grateful rest.

"Pesach, beginning on the fourteenth of Nisan (April), commemorated through eight days the escape of the Jews from Egypt. In Biblical times it had been called the Feast of Unleavened Bread because the Jews had fled with the dough of their bread still unleavened. Talmudic times called it Pesach, i.e. Passover, because Yahveh, smiting the first born of the Egyptians, 'passed over' those houses whose doorposts had been sprinkled by the Jewish occupants with the blood of the lamb.

"On the first day of the feast the Jews celebrated the Paschal meal (Seder). Each father acted as leader of the service for his gathered family, performed with them a ritual recalling those bitter Mosaic days and passed on, by questions and answers, their treasured story to the young.

"At Pentecost, seven weeks after passover, the feast of Shavuot celebrated the wheat harvest, and the revelation on Mt. Sinai.

"On the first day of Tishri -- the seventh month of the ecclesiastical, the first month of the Jewish civil year, corresponding roughly with the autumnal equinox -- the Jews celebrated Rosh-ha-Shana, the Feast of the New Year and of the month's new moon, and blew the ram's horn (shofar) to commemorate the revealing of the Torah, to call men to repentance and to anticipate the happy day when such a blast would summon all the Jews of the world to worship their God in Jerusalem.

"From the eve of Rosh-ha-Shana to the tenth day of Tishri were penitential days. On all but the ninth of those days pious Jews fasted and prayed. On the tenth, Yom-ha-Kippurim, the Day of Atonement, from sunset to sunset, they were not to eat or drink or wear shoes or labor or bathe or indulge in love. All day long they attended services in the synagogue, confessed and mourned their sins and those of their people, even from the worship of the golden Calf.

"On the fifteenth day of Tishri came Sukkoth, the Feast of Tabernacles. For seven days the Jews were supposed to live in booths, to commemorate the tents in which, it was said, their ancestors had slept during their forty years' sojourn in the wilderness. In the Dispersion a literal fulfillment of this old vintage of harvest festival offered difficulties and the rabbis showed their good will by redefining Sukka to mean almost anyting that could symbolize a habitation.

"On the twenty-fifth of the ninth month, Kislev (December), and for seven days thereafter, the festival of Hanukkah, or Dedication, recalled the purification of the Temple by the Maccabees (165 B.C.) after its defilement by Antiochus Epiphanes.

"And on the fourteenth of Adar (March) the Jews celebrated Purim ('lots'), the deliverance of their people from the wiles of the Persian minister Haman by Esther and Mordecai. Gifts and good wishes were exchanged in a joyful and vinous feast. On that day, said Rab Raba, a man should drink until he could no longer distinguish between 'Cursed be haman!' and 'Cursed be Mordecai!'"

Much to discuss here.

Robby

Rich7
April 18, 2005 - 05:33 pm
God did a lot of "smiting" in those days. This is an angry, vengeful God.

The old time bible-thumpers often referred to themselves as God-fearin'. Maybe after reading the Old Testament they felt they had good reason to be. (God fearing, that is.)

Rich

Fifi le Beau
April 18, 2005 - 08:41 pm
Bubble, you are right, my post could have been written better, it is difficult to write when you have a three year old in the chair with you begging to go outside and jump on the trampoline. The trampoline won over editing.

We spent the rest of the day outside. A beautiful April day. The spring wildflowers are all blooming, and we walked into the woods and gathered wild honeysuckle and violets.

I was talking to a friend about the 'kosher' meat and the process used, and he suggested this web site which may or may not help on whether there is blood in meat after hanging, washing, salting.

Kosher meat and the question of blood

Fifi

Jan Sand
April 18, 2005 - 08:52 pm
Many years ago psychologists experimented with locking cats in a cage and watching how they got out. One cat in particular went through all sorts of contortions in attempting to unlatch the door to the cage. It twisted, flailed its limbs, rubbed its head against the walls of the cage and finally, acidentally and without logic, twistd itd tail in a peculiar way and backed into the latch and undid it. In subsequent trials this cat duplicated the entire sequence of thrashing, tail twisting and finally backing into the latch to free itself. There was no logic or sense in its successful procedures, merely that the outlandish activity resulted in success. It became a tradition.

Justin
April 18, 2005 - 09:37 pm
Trevor; The way not to have blood in meat is to call it something else-like juice. Rabbi Ran has the way to have our meat and to eat it as well. It is done by definition.

Justin
April 18, 2005 - 09:49 pm
Pesach is just one of many evil times that befell the "Chosen People". God is testing them, it is said. If I were a Jew I would say to God, "Choose someone else to love for awhile.My cup runneth over.

Jan Sand
April 18, 2005 - 10:16 pm
Admittedly the Jews have had a difficult history but examination of almost any group of people with a history usually demonstrates that His devotion is well distributed.

Jan Sand
April 18, 2005 - 10:46 pm
One other point about the suffering of the Jews. Those trials which humanity has undergone which can clearly be attributed to God such as floods, earthquakes, hurricanes and meteor strikes seem not to have targeted the Jews in particular. The cause of Jewish suffering has continuously been perpetrated by other contingents of humanity. Dark skinned people have, in the past and, most notably, well into current events, suffered terribly without any reference to God. Perhaps it would be well to place responsibilities correctly.

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 10:49 pm
JUstin - post #202.

Sorry, I did not expressed clearly what I meant. IMHO the New Testament quoted only the start of the last supper. The rest was considered non-important to report for the new religion. What was important was noting the words said during the Kiddush. The tradition and sanctity of the Kiddush was too imbedded to erase, so it was changed.

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 11:27 pm
Post #203 "On the tenth, Yom-ha-Kippurim, the Day of Atonement, from sunset to sunset, they were not to eat or drink or wear shoes or labor or bathe or indulge in love. "

A small discrepancy: Observant Jews are allowed to wear shoes on Kippur, but only those without leather in them. They wear woven shoes with rubber soles. Their clothes are mostly white so as not to risk animal dyes in them.

No carrying loads (only the prayer book and shawl), no using of electricity, no shaving but a day spent in prayer and meditation on holy topics.

Justin, Pessah is fun too. It is a gathering together of the whole family even if for the rest of the year one barely sees one another.

Jan Sand
April 18, 2005 - 11:40 pm
How did electricity get into Kippur? I know that Jews cannot throw a switch, but there are some lights that are activated by proximity. How does that fit into doctrine?

Bubble
April 18, 2005 - 11:51 pm
You can leave the light on for the whole shabbat... or have an automated system too I suppose.

I remember that my grand dad had his own system. He wanted the lights to be turned off at 11 p.m. on Friday nights. He was winding his old fashionned alarm clock [with a bell on top] to ring at that precise time. He also attached to the winding key a small string with a loop at the end. This loop was fixed to the light switch with was on lowered position when the light was on and on up position with the light off. The alarm clock was hanged on the wall above the switch.

You guessed it: on ringing, the string would coil around the winding alarm key and pull the light switch up. The Shabbat was not desecrated in that house. Clever, isn't it?

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 12:03 am
Clever, yes. Was there any consideration of hypocricy? Of outwitting God?

Bubble
April 19, 2005 - 12:08 am
Oh no. He praised the Lord for having shown him a way to sleep soundly after having had the big family reunion for the shabbat meal.

Maybe it is that search for solutions in daily life which made minds more agile and inventive? Or maybe it is the pilpul and hair splitting?

Rich7
April 19, 2005 - 07:39 am
I envy your love and dedication to your faith and its ritual.

It's very easy to see that it comes from your heart.

Rich

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 08:04 am
We each differ, of course, in our view of human activity. To me, ritual seems to be repetitive rote procedures divested of rationality but frequently highly decorative and evocative of favored memories. The odd costumes now on display by the hierarchy of the Catholic church impress me more as a solemn circus rather than the sensible procedures of a humanity that prides itself in its mental capability.

But, admittedly, I am highly prejudiced and the values I prize seem to differ markedly from those adherents to religions.

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 10:29 am
A European Cardinal is elected Pope even as EUROPEANS RAPIDLY ABANDON THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 10:39 am
The PROFILE of the new Pope.

Robby

Bubble
April 19, 2005 - 11:09 am
I have learned more about the Jewish faith since I joined SoC than I ever knew before. My parents were not religious and I did most of my schooling in a RC convent school, so I knew more about that than about my family past.

When I moved to Israel where I married and had two children, I decided to keep some traditions for the sake of the children, since it was the norm for all other children. I wanted them to have roots which for me were lacking. For me lighting the Shabbat candles, having the Passover meal and reading the Haggadah, fasting every Kippur does not comprise the religious content it has for other Jews, but it gives me a sense of belonging to that community. I am not sure if I express myself clearly... By having those traditions, I don't feel a drifter anymore.

I am of the Jewish faith, but I have no clue as to what it is to have faith. I don't search it.

Today my friends from Belgium will be lighting tapers in church for the new pope. They will go to a special mass in his honor too.

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 11:34 am
Jan: Did you not know that God uses other contingents of humanity to punish his chosen people. Correctly placing responsibility in religion is not possible.

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 11:41 am
I have problems enough trying to determine what goes on in the minds of my fellow human beings. Anybody who claims to know the mind of a being who is designated as the creator of the universe is working an obvious scam. For any contingent of humanity to claim to be God's operatives is obviously serving their own ends since they are no more telepathic with superbeings than I am.

Bubble
April 19, 2005 - 12:03 pm
You are so right Jan. I too don't worry much about a creator. I try to be optimistic, open and helpful to those around me because it makes me feel good and that is the way I would like people to be with me. It might look naive or simplistic I know and I don't care.

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 12:16 pm
It depends upon what you call naive. I am a designer and the criteria for design is to make something that functions. A functioning society requires that the members are benefited by its inter-relationships and I see no necessity for the supernatural in this construction. Up to this point in history humanity has not been over-successful in this enterprise as there has been no society in which every individual has been provided for his/her needs. If I have any faith it is that humanity may eventually solve this problem.

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 12:28 pm
And yet there are those among us who are believers so let us choose our words carefully.

Robby

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 01:04 pm
Jan: You mis-read my message. It is God who selects a contingent of humanity to punish his chosen people. Par example: The Babylonians were God's instrument but they (the Babylonians) thought the plan to capture slaves was their own.

We personally may choose to exclude religion from our daily lives but this discussion is about the religion of the Jews and about faith and it's characteristics among the Jews.

winsum
April 19, 2005 - 02:16 pm
not much about being Jewish. I do remember being told that Jews don't believe in an afterlife, but here I see that there is such a belief. are both useful and acceptable to differing contingencies or groups?

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 03:12 pm
Bubble: Being open and helpful to those around you without the help of a creator is not naive but it may be simple in the sense that such a posture simplifies one's life. It is not necessary to feel guilt and to self-flagellate in order to be happy.

While eighty percent of Europeans seem to be aware of the benefits of religion free living only 20 percent of Americans choose to be free of religious guilt and punishment. How does one explain this obvious disparity in religious rejection?

Americans have not experienced the full weight of religious aggression yet. We started out with a separation between Church and State. On the other hand, the aggressive behavior of the Church in Europe has been quite evident since Constantine's edict.

In the US, it is only since the coming of the pill that women have felt the arrogance of the Church in it's attempt to control their lives. It is only in recent years that one has begun to feel the freedom brought by advances in contraception, abortion, and society's increasing acceptance of homosexuality. It is that freedom that is threatened by the current Church.

The US laity has responded by dropping out just as the Europeans have been doing for many years. Religious growth in the US has not been among Catholics. It is the Pentacostal and evangelical groups that are growing in the US.

I don't know how to explain that. When mainline religions were strong in the US the fundementalist groups flourished only in store fronts,tenderloins and mountain hollows. Rural populations were particularly susceptible to that "old time religion". Today, in the US, religious growth is occurring almost exclusively among fundementalist groups.

JoanK
April 19, 2005 - 04:29 pm
Ginny is starting something new July First -- a page a day book club. Reading "Rembrandt's Eyes: a book that combines both art and history. I hope some of you will join. Justin, we need your knowledge of art to keep us on the right path.

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 04:38 pm
Jewish relations with the NEW POPE.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 04:47 pm
The profile of the original SAINT BENEDICT might give us an idea why the new Pope chose him as a role model.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 19, 2005 - 06:03 pm
As this day of the election of a Pope draws to a close, here are some EVENTS in the life of the new Pope Benedict XVI.

Tomorrow we return to the Judaic Civilization.

Robby

3kings
April 19, 2005 - 07:43 pm
JUSTIN " The Babylonians were God's instrument but they (the Babylonians) thought the plan to capture slaves was their own"? Post #227

Does this mean that you believe that the Babylonians were mistaken in thinking that enslavement of the Jews was their own idea? Do you think that in some way the Babylonians were only carrying out God's plan ? I can't believe you do .....+++ Trevor

kiwi lady
April 19, 2005 - 07:44 pm
From what I can gather from Commentators today the new Pope is very conservative. He is foremost a theologian and not a Pastor. He has been at odds with many of the Cardinals in the past and has castigated them for veering from the strict doctrine of the Church as he sees it. With dwindling numbers of young people willing to enter the Priesthood will he help or hinder the drive to get new recruits. The average age of the Priests today is about 60 if my memory serves me right. He is also 78 years of age.

It will be interesting to see how this Papalship develops.

carolyn

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 07:44 pm
Robby

When I declare my opinion of religion and its effects on society I try to be factual. My feelings about ritual are very personal and I do not demand that everybody concurr. I try not to step on any toes and do not enjoy my own toes stepped on. If I see something as silly and ineffectual and perhaps even dangerous I see no reason not to say so. If someone else feels otherwise then I will listen to counter arguments and consider them and reply if it seems sensible. If this is not acceptable to this forum then I will withdraw.

Jan Sand
April 19, 2005 - 08:31 pm
An evaluation of the new pope can be seen at

http://www.thenation.com/thebeat/index.mhtml?bid=1&pid=2335

winsum
April 19, 2005 - 08:57 pm
except maybe me for a while. . . . nuff said. . . . claire

kiwi lady
April 19, 2005 - 09:24 pm
To be honest I think the media overdo it on the coverage of the Pope. We don't get such coverage for the Heads of the other churches! All morning this morning that is all we got on National Radio. Some listeners had the same thoughts as me. I am not a catholic and my belief is that no Pastor of God should be adulated because all humans are imperfect. I think there is a bit too much adulation at times. I feel the same about some Politicians! Some people adulate them to the point of losing all the objectiveness. I liked the previous Pope because he spoke out about injustice even if it got him offside with some of the Politicians.

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 11:03 pm
Carolyn: I too liked John Paul because, like John the 23rd he was accessible to the flock. Roncallo seemed easy to know. Americans related well to him and had great hopes he would implement Vatican 11. Benedict's history, on the other hand, is not indicative of one who will offer new solutions for current problems. I hope that's wrong, but I fear it is not. Somehow, the Church must find a way to solve it's pederasty problem and that won't happen if the new Pope ignores it.

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 11:22 pm
Trevor, Jan: What I said in 227 is a paraphrase of several verses in the OT concerning the Babylonian captivity. I did not say I believed it. I said that's what the OT offered. We are talking about Judaic ideas. Are we not? I am sure no one of us three believes the OT story to be factual. But to be aware of what the OT offers is to learn from our examination of Durant and Judaism.

I don't know of any toes you have stepped on, Jan and your comments have been superior and very welcome.

Justin
April 19, 2005 - 11:31 pm
Benedict 16 has described one thought that troubles me. He talks about the undesirability of "relativism." The term in theological circles means that all religions worship the same God. That God may have different names and a variety of genders but it all the same God. In Benedict's view, the Roman Catholic God is the only TRUE God. That view is very troublesome and it will keep Benedict from reaching out, in a meaningful way, to other religions.

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 12:41 am
Any man at the top of a power structure, such as the pope, must do his best to preserve the system that sustains his influence. Religion is somewhat special in that the system is constructed upon somewhat rigid beliefs which limits flexibility. But there are obvious sectors wherein the structure is threatened by reality and when a system does not adjust to reality, in the long run, it is the system that must give or suffer.

The obvious misbehavior of the hierarchy in the matter of pederasty has clearly not been sufficiently acknowledged and remedied as witness the prominence of Cardinal Law in the recent ceremonies in Rome. They were taken as offensive by many American Catholics.

Beyond that the inflexibility of the official attitude towards the use of birth controls is way out of sync with the practice of a large number of Catholics. It has become a matter of life and death.

And again, women in both the Muslim and Christian worlds are severely deprived of their just place in society and this is a prime issue in the near future for all aspects of society.

The new pope cannot have risen to his current position without consideration of the consequences of ignoring these issues. He may be saturated with religious doctrine but he is obviously a man of intelligence and hopefully he will permit his intellect to motivate his future choices.

Bubble
April 20, 2005 - 01:49 am
___________________________________________ I never felt on-toes stepping in this forum , but I enjoy tremendously the exchange between all of us. One needs to see different points of view so as to become objective.

Justin, if that is what relativism means then some difficult times are ahead.

Jan, in Judaism too contraception is frowned upon and abortions forbidden unless there is a medical emergency. From some cases I saw around me, when having the dilemma of saving a new mother or the newly born, usually the baby will be saved.

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 02:32 am
In medical situations wherein one life must be sacrificed to save another there is no solution that satisfies any real morality. Some religions may prescribe a standard solution but I am sure that the participants will suffer lifelong regrets no matter the decision.

kiwi lady
April 20, 2005 - 02:33 am
Over here its save the mother first. What good is it if she leaves three other kids with no momma? I did know one woman who was diagnosed with cancer part way through her pregnancy. She gave her life for her child by refusing treatment because the baby would not have been able to survive it. However it was her choice she adamantly refused the life saving treatment.

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
April 20, 2005 - 02:55 am
Durant continues with Judaic Civilization.

"We must not think of those Talmudic Jews as dour pessimists, sick with the pangs of despised talents, tossed about by the storms of doctrine, and lost in longing for their ravished fatherland.

"Amid dispersion and oppression, atonement and poverty, they kept their heads erect, relished the tang and strife of life, the brief beauty of their burdened women, and the abiding splendor of earth and sky. Said Rabbi Meir:-'Every day a man should utter a hundred benedictions.'

"And another said for all of us:-'To walk even four ells eithout bowing the head is an offense to Heaven for is it not written 'The whole earth is full of His glory?'"

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 20, 2005 - 02:56 am
Ethics of the Talmud

robert b. iadeluca
April 20, 2005 - 03:07 am
"The Talmud is not only an encyclopedia of Jewish history, theology, ritual, medicine and folklore. It is also a treatise on agriculture, gardens, industry, the professions, commerce, finance, taxation, property, slavery, inheritance, theft, legal procedure, and penal law.

"To do the book justice it would be necessary with polymathic wisdom to survey its judgments in all these fields.

"The Talmud is above all a code of ethics, so different from the Christian, and so like the Moslem, that even a running acquaintance with it challenges the view of the Middle Ages as merely the story of medieval Christianity.

"The three religions agreed in rejecting the practicability of a natural -- non-religious -- morality. Most men, they believed, can be persuaded to tolerate behavior only by the fear of God. All three based their moral code on identical conceptions:- the all-seeing eye and all-recording hand of God, the divine authorship of the moral code, and the ultimate equalization of virtue with happiness by post-mortem punishments and reward.

"In the two Semitic cultures law, as well as ethics, was insepaable from religion. No distinction was admitted between crime and sin, between civil and ecclesiastical law.

"Every discreditable act is an offense against God, a profanation of His presence and Holy Name."

We are nice only out of fear?

Robby

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 03:09 am
As an artist and one who is fascinated with all aspects of nature and science, I find the Jewish proclamation to find delight in all Earthly things and the larger universe very worthy. I do not, however, find the necessity to attribute all this wonder to a supernatural source.

Bubble
April 20, 2005 - 03:23 am
Just a thought for what it is worth: by attributing to a supernatural source the beauty on earth, could that make certain no individual would claim with pride it was his own humane doing?

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 20, 2005 - 06:32 am
Bubble, if I was next to you I would squeeze you to bits. There is no one like you.

Bubble
April 20, 2005 - 06:38 am
Ha ha ha ha Eloise!
You could, you know...
Come to NC after Labor Day and you can see me "live".

But you might need to bend very low to manage that squeeze, I am petite!

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 20, 2005 - 06:55 am
Just going South of the Border is major happening for a Canadian, I can only imagine squeezing you and you can imagine being squeezed.

Rich7
April 20, 2005 - 07:57 am
"The three religions agreed in rejecting the practicability of a natural-non religious morality. Most men, they believed, can be persuaded to tolerate behavior only by the fear of God."

I've always had a problem with religions telling me that there is no morality outside their jurisdiction. A person is more moral,in my eyes when he does the right thing because it is just "the right thing" rather than through fear of punishment by a God who "sees all."

Rich

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 10:00 am
Rich

Perhaps religious people believe that God is necessary for moral behavior because they would behave immorally without Him. The rest of us, of course, are rather decent people.

winsum
April 20, 2005 - 11:03 am
for me re: natural-non religious morality what is left for me to add? amazing how many religious people are decent without fearing punishment for sins . there must be something natural about decency.

Sunknow
April 20, 2005 - 11:42 am
About fear of God and punishment for sins:

Do you think the daring of the sinner has to do with the availability or degrees of forgiveness built into their religion?

Sun

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 11:52 am
Sun

Are you implying that it's most likely that most criminals are Catholic?

Sunknow
April 20, 2005 - 12:00 pm
Jan - make your own implications.

I'm not implying anything. I just ask a question. I happen to have known a few non-Catholic sinners in my time, too. More than a few which expected instant forgiveness.

Sun

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 12:19 pm
To get a bit more on topic, is there a formal mechanism in Judaism paralleling the Catholic doctrine of forgiveness?

Sunknow
April 20, 2005 - 12:36 pm
Pardon me, Jan. I thought I was on topic.

Robby posted: "We are nice only out of fear?"

Others wrote about "fear of punishment by a God" and "fearing punishment for sins".

But forgiveness of sin is not on topic? Nevermind.

Sun

Bubble
April 20, 2005 - 12:37 pm
Not sure what you mean, Jan. Are you refering to confession?

The fast and praying of yom Kippur, maybe, but it is different. Kippur is also called the day of Atonement.

Sun, "on topic" as in returning to specifics about Judaism.

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 12:47 pm
Sun

No accusation intended. Merely that we are involved with the Jewish religion.

The formalities in Catholicism in forgiveness seems to me to be more procedural than the atonement of the Jews which trusts to the individual to contemplate his/her life and increase its general integrity.

Of course there is the observation "God may forgive you but your nervous system won't"

kiwi lady
April 20, 2005 - 01:08 pm
About fear of punishment. My son visited last night. He is the most modern and secular person. However he said "Mum we are breeding a generation of monsters" He said there is no respect of adults or retribution because kids are above the law. (well they are here anyhow). He said to me "I think a bit of healthy fear of parents and the law would be good" My son has two small boys. He also said things have gone from bad to worse because there is no value sytems in the home or at school any more. He thought kids could do worse than go to Sunday School like he did. I was most surprised at his thoughts. The fear of God in my opinion is not a bad thing. I do believe teaching about Gods forgiveness is a good thing too.

Carolyn

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 01:25 pm
The psychology of behavior based on fear of punishment is quite different from a society of participants who willingly join together to create a congenial relationship. As a child my relationship in my family, which was the proximate society I had to deal with, was based on an inherent sense of fairness to the other members. If I misbehaved it was pointed out how damaging my behavior was and what was more sensible. Probably most antisocial behavior is stimulated by a feeling of being treated unfairly. Anyway, It worked in my family, and I have applied that system to the world in general with reasonable success. But perhaps my experience is unusual.

Justin
April 20, 2005 - 01:41 pm
When I was a child in the Roman Catholic Church the Sacrament of Penance consisted of a late Saturday afternoon visit to a priest who sat in the dark in an enclosed confessinal at our parish church.He opened a little door separating us and the ritual started. When the confession was over we recited the prayer called Confeitior and were assigned a few prayers to say in penance.

Childhood sins, especially for a thirteen year old boy were mostly sexual.When our childish sins were too great we went to a neighboring church where we we not known to confess them and to ask forgiveness.

Vatican 2 has changed all that. Now one daily examines one's conscience and seeks forgivness or absolution through prayer without the necessity of priestly intervention.I think absolution is assured if one is contrite. The ritual has been modified.

I have been looking for the modification in the Vatican 2 documents but the index for those documents does not help enough to spell out the actual modification. If any of you are closer than I am to current practice it would be helpful if you would describe the Sacrament as it is administered today.

Bubble
April 20, 2005 - 01:50 pm
The Sacrament of Penance

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

Justin
April 20, 2005 - 02:38 pm
Thank you Bubble: The link you gave says a great deal about the sacrament. It seems to say that no change has taken place in this practice since the Council of Trent yet there does appear to have been a change. Perhaps it is only procedural.

Clearly, there is much similarity between the intent of Yom Kippur and the Sacrament of Penance. Both rituals are concerned with the reconciliation of God and man. Atonement seeks a restoration of friendly relations through sacrifice.In Jewish practice it is a day of contnuous prayer and repentance.In Leviticus 16, Aaron is told to make an atonement because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel and because of their transgressions in all their sins.

The source for the sacrament of penance may well be that of the atonement of Aaron. It looks like an antecedent. .

kiwi lady
April 20, 2005 - 04:14 pm
Jan - Your philosophy has been practised by schools and those in authority for years here. Combined with the instant gratification generation and the me first philosophy of the day its NOT working here. My own sisters admit it with their teenagers softly softly talkee talkee has not worked!

robert b. iadeluca
April 20, 2005 - 04:21 pm
Bubble indicated in an earlier posting that after Labor Day she will travel all the way from Israel to the Carolinas. On a couple of occasions I have asked for thoughts regarding a gathering of Story of Civilization participants.

Folks, this may be our one time opportunity. Mal lives in Carolina. Mahlia now lives in Carolina. Virginia is not that far from Carolina. The four of us are a possible core. I realize that for the rest of this group, your taking part in such a gathering depends on time and money. Only you know whether you have the interest and desire to make the effort.

Let's face it, people. We are a unique group. What do you think?

Robby

Justin
April 20, 2005 - 05:03 pm
It occurs to me that Rabbinic Judaism, that is; what is called Orthodox Judaisn is being formulated at the same time Christianity is being formulated. These religions are being created simultaneously.

Christians have always looked upon Judaism as scriptural ie: having a history that goes back to Abraham and that what we see today as Orthodox Judaism is a seamless stream dating back into BCE. That is not the case.

Rabbinic Judaism came into being after the fall of the Temple in 70 CE and developed from that point. It is focused on the Torah just as Christianity is focused on the Logos or Christ. I think this is a very important observation because early Christians were primarily Jews and they were observing these new ideas the Rabbi's were putting out. Paul functioned in this environment of change.

I hope Durant treats the interaction between these two forces and shows how they blended. Judaism may be just as much Neoplatonic-Plotinian as Christianity.

Rich7
April 20, 2005 - 05:23 pm
as we called it in our Catholic youth brings back memories.

The parish that I belonged to had four priests "hearing" confessions every Saturday afternoon, each in his own dark cubicle. Those who wanted to confess their transgressions would line up in the church pews outside the "confessional" of one of the priests.

One of the, priests, I'll call him Father O'Malley, had a reputation for being very hard on those making their confession to him, so you would see very few people lining up in the pews outside his confessional.

An occasional transient, presumably from another parish, and not knowing Father O'Malley's reputation would innocently come into the church and enter the confessional with the shortest line. (Father O'Malley's)

All ears in the church would focus on the undecipherable mumbling going on in the confessional until the inevitable YOU DID WHAT? would thunder from Father O'Malley's side of the booth.

All eyes would follow the shaken and blushing penitent as he or she exited the confessional and approached the altar to do their penance, and presumably take a silent vow never to take the shortest line in church, again.

Rich

Justin
April 20, 2005 - 05:25 pm
Robby:I would enjoy meeting the petite Bubble and everyone else in this unique group but there are some things that would make it difficult for me to participate. I'm not at all sure my wife will be able to travel that far on an airplane and I will not leave her and come alone. I think you should plan a meeting of some sort and I will investigate the opportunity. Who knows what things will be like in September.

Fifi le Beau
April 20, 2005 - 07:55 pm
There is a new English translation of the Pentateuch called "The Five Books of Moses" by Robert Alter. In this article John Updike reviews the new translation as compared to the King James version and others.

We are reminded in Genesis that God the creator is 'one'. Yet, by the time we get to Exodus God is warring with the gods of Egypt. He vows, "From all the gods of Egypt I will exact retribution."

The Hebrew writers conceded other gods, but stipulated their inferiority to the tribal god of Israel.

The definitive collection and composition by priestly writers, of much of the Old Testament belongs to the sixth and fifth centuries, in the Babylonian exile, after Jerusalem was conquered and the Temple destroyed.

The story of Christianity was written well after the death of Christ. The story of Islam was written and edited long after the death of Mohammed. All three of these religions were compiled on heresay and myth, and only the writers (most are anonymous) know who the editors were.

I read them all as man made myths.

The Great I Am

Fifi

Malryn (Mal)
April 20, 2005 - 08:10 pm

My daughter Dorian and I would be happy to find a hotel or motel here in Chapel Hill, North Carolina for a gathering of Story of Civilization people next September. Right now I'm doing all I can to recover from an illness that has lasted too long. Another doctor's appointment tomorrow, and I'm certain I'll be getting well soon. Click on my name and send me an email if you think you might be able to join us when BUBBLE is here in this state.

These are pictures of Dorian and me when we were both a lot younger

winsum
April 20, 2005 - 08:21 pm
is hard for me so . . . thinking about it. If I could combine it with a visit to the right coast to see my daughter and if she could give me a hand maybe. . . probably not. I need wheel chairs at either end etc. etc. and besides I'm very ignorant of much of what we have been discussing. It's been quite an education learning how I was Jewish. . . . Claire

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 09:00 pm
As interesting as it might be to meet people face to face I live on the edge of my income and the trip is way out of my economic capability. Also I have not restrained my disgust on the internet with the present US administration and the recent incidents of the Homeland Security people with people who are critical of the government make me very uneasy about entering US territory. I have visions of being sent to Syria for the standard torture treatment.

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 09:21 pm
It was rather dispiriting to hear that pragmatic experience with human social relations indicates that punishment and reward is the only way to ensure a workable moral system and that my own family experience of voluntary behavior to mutual benefit is unique. This has implications far beyond mere religion but extends to the total capability for rational human relationships. Democracy's failures can directly be attributed to the lack of a sense of mutual participation in the benefits and difficulties of society. This is evidenced in the minor problems of littering and graffiti and the major problem of non-voting.

In all probability the failure of socialistic systems is, to a large degree, due to this lack of a sense of participation of the common people.

That this sense of totalitarian oppression extends to religious social structures is the most repellant aspect of religion for me.

kiwi lady
April 20, 2005 - 09:26 pm
Jan - Our family has definite leftist Political ideals but this does not stop us from being parents with boundaries. Kids are kids and they need boundaries, Maybe it worked with your kids but we needed boundaries for ours and they thanked me for the fact now they are adults that my late husband and I had boundaries for them. Teens are selfish thats the way they are and self absorbed in the main. Its a natural state for them.

Jan Sand
April 20, 2005 - 09:45 pm
I do not discard the necessity for boundaries. But these boundaries must, in a rational system, be willingly accepted internally by all participants as a necessity for a workable relationship.

winsum
April 20, 2005 - 10:03 pm
I heard somewhere or other and made use of it the following statement. If you haven't established a pecking order by the time the child is five years old it's too late. so my kids knew that and in time -- so it was extablished. Parents were in charge. There were rational explanations when needed and no irrational demands made and they turned out fine.

No teen troubles for us. . only for them with the big changes taking place in their bodies and in their lives.

There were problems with my husband who had visions of old ways and his experience of them, But in the end he was rational too. We were still in charge even as they grew into their teens because it was up to us to keep them alive and functional as long as we were responsible and they understood that.

Claire

JoanK
April 20, 2005 - 10:39 pm
I would love to meet you all. I don't yet know if it would be possible, but I'm looking into it.

The date matters for me. Our 50th wedding anniversary is September 2nd, a few days after my daughter and SIL's 10th. We have plans to go to California to celebrate together..

Bubble
April 21, 2005 - 01:37 am
Claire, I use a w/c (wheel chair) at both end of trips as well as in the middle. lol. That should not stop anyone from accomplishing a dream or realize a project. Airline companies and airports are getting better than ever in the help they provide.

It's a dream to meet my regular companions in SoC. I have no idea where most reside. Justin, I too wonder how I'll survive that long flight, but I will, even if I need 36h to revive.

Mal that last picture with Dorian is delightful. I still prefer your picture with cigarette and checkered top . Does SoC have a photo album on SN?

JoanK
April 21, 2005 - 01:57 am
I use a wheelchair too. So far, I've had no trouble. I have had people to meet me at both ends, and I haven't had to change planes.

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 03:36 am
Four (that I know of) of the SofC participants use wheel chairs. Jan posts to us from Finland and Carolyn from New Zealand. One thing I am positive of from my experience in this discussion group -- the spirit within is powerful. We will do what we can do.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 03:51 am
Durant continues with Ethics of the Talmud.

"The three religions agreed further on certain elements of morality. The sanctity of the family and the home, the honor due to parents and the old, the loving care of children, and charity to all. No people has surpassed the Jews in the order of beauty of family life.

"In Judaism, as in Islam, voluntary celibacy or childlessness was a major sin. To make a home and a family was a religious mandate, the first of the 613 precepts of the Law. Says the midrash:-'A childless person is accounted as dead.'

"Jew, Christian, and Moslem agreed that the adequate continuance of the group is endangered when the religious command to parentage loses its force. Under certain circumstances, however, the rabbis permitted family limitation, preferably by contraception. 'There are three classes of women who should employ an absorbent -- a minor, lest pregnancy should prove fatal, a pregnant woman, lest abortion should rsult, and a nursing mother, lest she become pregnant and prematurely wean the child so that it dies.

"The Jews, like their contemporaries, were reluctant to have daughters, but rejoiced at the birth of a son. He, not she, could carry on the father's name, family, and property, and rend his grave. The daughter would marry into another, perhaps a distant, household and be lost to her parents as soon as her rearing was complete.

"But once children came, they were cherished without favoritism and with a wise mixture of discipline and love. Said one rabbi:- 'If thou must strike a child, do it with a shoestring.' Says another:- 'If one refrains from punishing a child it will end by becoming utterly depraved.'

"Every sacrifice must be made to give the child an education -- i.e. to instruct the mind and train the character by a knowledge of'the Law and the Prophets.' Said a Hebrew proverb:- 'The world is saved by the breath of school children.

"The child in turn must honor and protect the parents, under all conditions, to the end."

This is a topic which touches each one of us. Your comments, please?

Robby

Jan Sand
April 21, 2005 - 06:42 am
Although the Jewish traditions enhanced male dominance as in the other religions, the line of Jewishness is matrilineal. Probably because there are no doubts as to who the mother may be. It is a strange contradiction.

Scrawler
April 21, 2005 - 09:45 am
This may be a little off the beaten path, but this E-mail from a friend refers to children and their relationship with parents:

TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED THE 50S, 60S, AND 70S (OR EARLIER YEARS TOO!)

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they carried us.

They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints.

We had no childpoof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helments, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.

As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.

Riding in the back of a pick up truck on a warm day was always a special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.

We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, bread and butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day. And we were OKAY.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.

We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 99 channels on cble, no video tape movies, no surround sound, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms...WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.

We made up games with sticks and tennis balls and ate worms and although we were told it would happen we did not put out very many eyes, nor did the worms live in us forever.

We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them!

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!

This generation produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!

AND YOU ARE ONE OF THEM!

You might want to share this with others who have had the luck to grow up as kids, before the lawyers and the government regulated our lives for our own good.

Kind of makes you want to run through the house with sissors, doesn't it?!

I am glad of one thing that we have - the INTERNET - otherwise I would have never met you all!

winsum
April 21, 2005 - 10:35 am
five hours in the air from CA and no one to meet me to find transportation to where ever I'm staying and managing once there and mornings are sheer hell around her like this one. come to southern California especially the Laguna San clemente area sometime. . lots of small, medium and a couple of large hotels and things to do. thanks but no thank. I"ll just keep rolling around here. . . . claire

Justin
April 21, 2005 - 11:59 am
The rabbis, who are themselves married and part of the community recognize the importance of using absorbants under certain conditions. These include nursing women, minors, and pregnant women.

This practice contrasts sharply with Christian rules for contraception. It is not permitted. There are no exceptions.

Why is there such a sharp difference in contraceptive policy by the two religions?

The answer lies, I think, in the leaders of the movements. Christian leaders were celibates who had no understanding of the needs of women. They were not married men with families. They functioned from a cloister of their own making. They were not part of the community. They formed an authoritative organization outside and above the community. So they had little understanding of the needs of women or of the community.

The separation of the religious community from the laity has caused many of the problems the Catholic laity experience today.

Bubble
April 21, 2005 - 12:30 pm
Can Presbyterian Clergy Marry?

winsum
April 21, 2005 - 12:34 pm
no longer religious but is it hard to shake off the effects of having been reared in the catholic church. do they last a life time? There is so much bitterness in tone, not only you but Rich. My friend Len who was raised to be a priest and bolted called catholic child rearing CHILD ABUSE. hmmm?

Justin
April 21, 2005 - 01:31 pm
In old world Judaism, that is, before the destruction of the Temple, God's presence, the Shekhinah, was to be found in the Temple where one sacrificed. After the destruction of the Temple, the divine presence is to be found where two men sit and discuss Torah. Shekhinah is now in the Torah. God resides in study.

In Christianity, God is everywhere but he is especially in a church where the Eucharist is present. In the Eucharist it is Christ one sees but since Christ is one with the Father in the Trinity, it is the Divine Presence one may see in churches.

It is in a sense similar to the way the Muslim sees Allah. Allah is everywhere but he is especially present in individual men in prayer. The Mosque where one prays is not where one goes to meet Allah. Allah,Ithink,is more a personal God. He resides in the individual man. Am I on the right track here Mahlia?

winsum
April 21, 2005 - 01:35 pm
thank you so much for that trip down memory lane. it's all true and I just sent it to both of my children, one of whom is raising my only grandchild, male,m now twelve. as well as three pets which might as well be kids the way we treat them and married and working. plus...the other one is a part of a couple and only raises pets, but pretty much the same way. . . . . Claire

Fifi le Beau
April 21, 2005 - 01:51 pm
Presbyterian ministers can marry, as can any others of the Protestant faith. They can also be single, it is their decision and not the church.

Fifi

Shasta Sills
April 21, 2005 - 02:22 pm
Fifi, religion is myth to me, too, but I have a deep respect for myth. The mythology of the human race tells us more about who we are than our facts do.

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 03:19 pm
I was raised in the Presbyterian church where the minister was married. I was also married after I come home from the war by a Presbyterian minister who was married.

Robby

Rich7
April 21, 2005 - 03:29 pm
I would have bet the ranch you were Catholic.

Rich

kiwi lady
April 21, 2005 - 03:35 pm
Robbie I also came from (disinterested) Press Button (Scottish Presbyterian) stock. I chose the Baptist church myself as a child and was baptised at 14 into the church. My great gran who supplied my religious instruction as a child, due to disinterest in the family, was a Quaker. I think my Pacifist outlook comes from her teaching.

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 03:46 pm
Rich:-You mentioned once before that you thought I was Catholic but you didn't answer my question as to why you came to that conclusion. I attended a Presbyterian Sunday School, At age six I recited by memory the 23rd Psalm and other Biblical passages in front of the church congregation. I became a Sunday School teacher. I became a Sunday School Superintendent. I sang baritone for years in the choir. Later on in another church I became the Director of Christian Education.

It also shows how in this discussion group we need to be careful we don't make inferences and to choose our words carefully. What led you to your conclusion?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 03:55 pm
Why do these bureaucratic changes (or continuances) under the new Pope make me think of the bureaucracy in the ancient ROMAN EMPIRE?

Robby

Rich7
April 21, 2005 - 04:13 pm
I did answer your question. Your question in post #59 was answered in my very next posting (#61).

My further comments in that same posting (#61) are appropriate more at this time than at the time I posted them.

I agree with you when you warn us to choose our words carefully, and your admonishment is especially true when, at this time, we are deeply involved in the discussion of religion. Because of the limitations of the English language, and its propensity to be misunderstood almost as much as it is understood, I would also ask you to warn participants not to be thin-skinned.

What they think they are reading may not be what the writer intends to convey. (And there are some very skilled writers in this discussion.)

Rich

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 21, 2005 - 04:23 pm
I can understand, what we learn from someone dear to us as children, we adopt and transmit it to our children even without realizing the influence we have on their future life. It is not necessary to preach, to have rituals to live in the faith, all you do is be what you believe in. It then becomes natural to those coming after us.

Sorry about the 'natural' Jan, it just slipped out.

robert b. iadeluca
April 21, 2005 - 04:36 pm
"Charity was an inescapable orligation. 'Greater is he who practices charity than' he who performs 'all the sacrifices.'

"Some Jews were niggardly, some were miserly, but by and large no other people has ever given as generously as the Jews. The rabbis had to forbid men to give more than a fifth of their property to charity.

"Yet some were found, at their death, to have given half. 'On Abba Umna's face there was always a holy peace. He was a surgeon, but would never accept with his hands any payment for his service. He had a box placed in a corner of his consulting room, so that those who were able to pay could deposit what they wished and those who could not afford to pay would not be shamed.'

"Rab Huna, 'when he sat down to a meal, would open the doors and exclaim, 'Let whoever is in need enter and eat.'

"Chama ben Ilai gave bread to all who sought it and kept his hand in his purse when he walked abroad so that none need hesitate to ask.

"But the Talmud reproved conspicous giving and counseled a modest secrecy:- 'He who dispenses charity in private is greater than Moses.'"

Robby

3kings
April 21, 2005 - 04:38 pm
Carolyn I'm flummoxed. What social grouping does "(disinterested) Press Button (Scottish Presbyterian) stock", refer to ?

I, too, would like to meet with many here, at the proposed gathering, but fear that my finances will debar me from attending. It really is a shame, but one must cut one's cloth .... Trevor

Persian
April 21, 2005 - 05:09 pm
"But the Talmud reproved conspicous giving and counseled a modest secrecy:- 'He who dispenses charity in private is greater than Moses.'"

I was reminded by the above of an Orthodox friend whom I worked with many years ago. When several Arab Muslim families were evacuated from Kuwait during the Gulf War, they were brought to a military base in Maryland, near my former home. After several days of requesting funds from the local Arab business community to help the families, I turned to the Jewish communiy. The latter was most generous. One of the men came to me and handed me a large brown envelope full of cash. When I asked who sent it, he replied "one of your friends and a former colleague who prefers to remain anonymous." After much thought and some Irish intrigue and nosing around, I went to the office of the man whom I thought had contributed the money. When I walked in, I simply said "thank you." His eyes widened, but he replied quietly "you are most welcome. I hope the families will be safe and comfortable."

Justin
April 21, 2005 - 05:22 pm
Claire: I hope you do not detect bitterness in my comments. I try to assess the effects of religion on society objectively. I spent my first eight years of schooling in a Catholic school. They liked me and in general I liked them. They taught me to read and write and I will be forever grateful to them for those gifts.

My parents were practicing Catholics who showed by example the duties of a Catholic. They never preached nor was our home filled with holy pictures. Religious education was left to the Nuns.

It was in 1943, while reading Proust, on the way to Wellington, that I realized, that the idea of God had been generated by men two thousand years before and that those men were a great deal more ignorant than I was at that moment. Over time, of course, the whole house of cards came down.

Every once in a while, Trevor detects a little virulence in my posts. I hope that is not the case. I do try to be objective. I realize there are individual benefits to be derived from religion. It can be very comforting during times of stress. However, that response can also be dangerous, for discomfort under stress promotes action. What would happen to society if it all just went away one day?

kiwi lady
April 21, 2005 - 07:06 pm
Trevor - my family would describe themselves as Presbyterian and were christened Presbyterian but never attended church after I was born. That is what I refer to as disinterested Presbyterians. Press Button is a slang name we used as kids for Presbyterian.

Carolyn

Malryn (Mal)
April 21, 2005 - 07:55 pm

This is a personal message to MARY W (Hank Evans) who is worried about me. She has difficulty reading emails, so I'm using a large font here, and am reposting what I posted in WREX. That's where to find me, HANK, if you can't find me here.

Okay, here's the report. First of all, I love the young doctor I saw today. He's smart; he's caring, kind and compassionate, and he listens.


After asking many questions, he thinks my problem is caused by an antibiotic I took for chronic pressure sore infections on my leg. It is not the usual antibiotic that's prescribed for me. Some easy testing will show if he's right. Blood was taken for other tests, and I'll have those results in a week or so.

The doctor prescribed medication for the intestinal cramping and dysentery I've had. And he's ordering Home Health Care for me, so someone will come in and help me walk and get more exercise. I suggested this, and am sure it will help my health.


A funny thing happened while I was in the examining room. I told the doctor my son had died two and a half weeks ago. I haven't been able to cry at all, and when I told him I burst into tears. Delayed reaction, I guess.


My blood pressure is wonderfully low, and I appear to be quite healthy otherwise. I feel much more optimistic than I have in quite a while.


Dorian went out again to get my medicine and to pick up fruit and other things I need. I'm supposed to eat a high protein, no dairy diet, so asked her to get calves' liver for me and some fresh ground round I can eat next to raw in the middle. I'm not much of a meat eater, but am craving it right now.


I'm rather weak, so had some trouble getting out of the car and into the wheelchair, especially back here on this hill. Dorian and Jim decided to turn the car around and point it down the hill, and I was able to get out of it and into the wheelchair.


I may have to miss a publication deadline. That's never happened before, but the first thing on my agenda is to get well and strong!

Mal

Jan Sand
April 21, 2005 - 08:35 pm
Eloise

The word "natural" has many negative connotations but in this particular case is replaces "unconsidered". All aspects of our lives, both bad and good, benefit by being examined at the time of action and throughout subsequent times when we have been further educated by events and improvement of our cogitative powers.

Charity

One of the most offensive proposals of religion is its justification of various forms of human misery on the basis that it provides opportunity for well meaning people to demonstrate their charitable capabilities. And one of the nastiest performances of the current US government is its continuous proclamation of its generosity to the needy of the world and its total meanness (in all senses of the word) in the actual funds it allocates to those in difficulty.

Bubble
April 22, 2005 - 12:28 am
Thank you about clarifying that the Presbyterian ministers can married. Someone explained the Catholic Churh stand against abortion, etc. as a results of priest being ignorant on women's life, feelings.

I wonder now if it is different for these ministers, if they are more like our rabbis. Although I confess that many rabbis think of the welfare of man in general and learning Torah husbands in particular to be more important than any disinconvenience to women.

robert b. iadeluca
April 22, 2005 - 03:45 am
"To the institution of marriage the rabbis addressed all their learning and eloquence.

"On it and religion rested the whole structure of Jewish life. They did not condemn the sexual appetite but they feared its force and labored to control it. Some advised that salt be eaten with bread to 'lessen the seminal fluid'. Others felt that the only recourse against sexual temptation was hard work combined with study of the Torah. If this availed not, 'let him go to a place where he is unknown, put on black clothes and do what his heart desires, but let him not publicly profane the Name.'

"A man should avoid any situation that may excite his passions. He should not talk much with women and he 'should never walk behind a woman along the road, not even his own wife. A man should walk behind a lion rather than behind a woman.'

"The rabbis apparently felt that virginity is all right in its place but that perpetual virginity is arrested development. In their view the supreme perfection of a woman is perfect motherhood as the supreme virtue of a man is perfect fatherhood.

"Every father was urged to save and provide a dowry for each of his daughters and a marriage settlement for each son lest their marriage be unhealthily delayed.

"Early marriage was recommended -- at fourteen for the girl, eighteen for the man. A girl might legally marry at twelve years and six months, a man at thirteen. Postponement of marriage was permitted to students engaged in the study of the Law.

"Some rabbis argued that a man should get his economic footing before marrying -- 'A man should first build a house, then plant a vineyard, then marry' -- but this was a minority opinion and perhaps involved no contradiction if the parents provided the expected financial aid.

"The youth was advised to choose his mate not for her beauty but for her prospective qualities as a mother. 'Descend a step in choosing a wife, ascend a step in choosing a friend'. To marry a woman above one's rank is to invite contumely."

Robby

Bubble
April 22, 2005 - 05:31 am
I have seen many religious boys married at 18 with girls a year or two younger. I am always surprised on how well these arranged unions works in our age of numerous divorces.

Of course the girls start having children very soon and almost every year; I suppose they don't have much free time for other aspirations than the home and the welfare of the family.

Most of them also work as teacher's aides to supplement the income when the young husband spend half his day in the yeshiva learning Torah.

Jan Sand
April 22, 2005 - 05:48 am
I find it particularly intriguing that a lion's rear end is a better choice than that of a woman. My tastes somehow differ.

Bubble
April 22, 2005 - 08:01 am
Stain Seen as Virgin Mary

Is that faith too?

Jan Sand
April 22, 2005 - 08:16 am
There are those, of course, who view the Virgin Mary as a stain.

Bubble
April 22, 2005 - 08:58 am
Jan!!!! Be serious!

Scrawler
April 22, 2005 - 09:06 am
I believe the teaching of values or morals should start in the home and stay in the home. All the values I ever learned I got from my family not from religion or school.

Rich7
April 22, 2005 - 10:31 am
Rich

Malryn (Mal)
April 22, 2005 - 10:36 am
The doctor called Dorian just now. It seems that according to the blood tests I had, I'm anemic and have an infection.

I am going to be admitted into the hospital this afternoon.

I'll ask my daughter, Dorian, to post in WREX about how I am.

Mal

Justin
April 22, 2005 - 02:55 pm
Vios con courage, Mal. We're pulling for you.

kiwi lady
April 22, 2005 - 03:31 pm
Bubble - My daughter Vanessa was just talking about arranged marriages last night. Her fiance is Muslim ( very moderate) and she had to first be approved by his Godfather here in NZ and then by his parents who have approved but before they actually get married she goes with Cenk to Turkey in November to have the final look over!

Vanessa was introduced by a mutual friend to Cenk who thought they would be a good match. They are. Vanessa thought that outsiders can often see more than we can ourselves. That is why we often have very unsuitable matches - they are often hormonal in origin, When the lust wears off there may be nothing left to bind the couple together.

Vanessa said if you had educated sensible people bringing people together who have similar interests and compatible personalities it can be a very good thing.

These things last when the initial blazing attraction may wear off. By the way before everyone gets horrified about Vanessas match. She gets to keep her own faith and Cenk is very supportive about this. Any kids from the marriage will get to choose their own faith after being exposed to both.

Carolyn

Justin
April 22, 2005 - 04:47 pm
The hormonal pleasures, even at 81, of walking behind a woman are too numerous to forego for any reason. I am a little surprised by the Rabbis who say interested males who can not shake the inclination should don black robes and go off to indulge their pleasures. That's a pretty liberal view for a Rabbi.

Kiwi: Has Vanessa talked with any other young lady who has made the same decision?

kiwi lady
April 22, 2005 - 05:32 pm
Yes she has. We all love Cenk. He is a very fine young man and even her brothers say he is the nicest beau Vanessa has ever had, Their romance has lasted four years so far. The little kids love him too. He is kind, respectful and very family minded. Nothing is too good for me as Vanessa's mother.

When they first went out I was horrified and emailed Mahlia for advice. She gave me some very good advice. Then I got to know him as a person. His manners put most young men of his age to shame. I am held in very great respect as Vanessa's mother.

winsum
April 22, 2005 - 06:40 pm

Justin has it right I think they don't seem to wear off that easily. . . nuff said (G) Claire

Bubble
April 23, 2005 - 02:24 am
Oh Mal! Hope all is OK. I am sure it will be for the best to be intensively looked after and make you finally rest some. You were on overdrive for too long. I'll be sending you patience and patience, and fortitude. Hugssssssss.

Justin, those rabbis knew that at all age the women's "behind" are too tempting a temptation! lol These poor males can only but succumb to such a temptation. lol

Carolyn, those Turks are most civilized and usually gentlemen I should know: my husband was a Turk before becoming and Israeli. He still has family in Izmir and they live quite well in the modern Muslim surroundings, very different from other Moslim places.

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 05:14 am
We will continue with our examination of the Judaic Civilization but with an occasional side trip to religious items in the news. This ARTICLE tells a bit about Catholic youth and religion.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 07:23 am
"The Talmud, like the Old Testament and the Koran, allowed polygamy.

"Said one rabbi:-'A man may marry as many wives as he pleases.' But another passage in the same tractate limited the number to four. A third required the husband, when taking a second wife, to give a divorce to the first wife if she should ask for it.

"The institution of the livitate, by which a Jew was required to marry his brother's widow, presumed polygamy, and was probably due not only to kindly sentiment but also to a desire for a high birth rate in a community which, like all ancient and medieval societies, suffered high mortality.

"Having allowed such freedom of mating for the man, the rabbis made adultery a capital crime. Some of them agreed with Jesus that 'one may commit adultery with the eyes.' Some went further saying:-'Whoever regards even the little finger of a woman hath already sinned in his heart.'

"But Rab Areca was more humane;-'A man will have a demerit in his record on Judgment Day for everything he beheld with his eyes and declined to enjoy.

"Divorce by mutual consent was allowed.

"The husband could be divorced only with his consent. The wife without her consent. To divorce an adulterous wife was mandatory and divorce was recommended where the wife had remained childless ten years after marriage.

"The school of Shammai had allowed the husband to put away his wife only for adultery. The school of Hillel allowed it if the husband found in her 'anything unseemly.' Hillel's view prevailed in the Talmudic period. Akiba went so far as to say that a husband 'may divorce his wife if he finds another woman more beautiful.'

"A man might, without surrendering the marriage settlement, divorce 'a woman who transgresses Jewish law, such as going in public with uncovered head, spinning in the street, or conversing with all sorts of men or 'a loud-voiced woman -- i.e. one who talks in her house and her neighbors can hear what she says.'

"Desertion by the husband gave no ground for divorce. Some rabbis permited the wife to ask the court for divorce from a cruel, impotent, or unwilling husband, or one who did not support her properly, or was maimed, or stank. The rabbis did something to discourage divorce by requiring complex legal formalities and, in all but a few cases, the forfeiture of both dowry and marriage settlement to the wife.

"Said Rabbi Eleazar:-'The very altar sheds tears on him who divorces the wife of his youth.'"

Your comments, please?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 08:10 am
While the link in Post 328 refers primarily to Catholocism, it does emphasize some basic tenets of religion. For example:-

Some measures of "religiosity" are (1) affirming a belief in a personal God, (2) having undergone a very moving powerful worship experience and (3) saying that faith is extremely important in shaping daily lives or major life decisions.

That religious faith entails a (1) fundamental stance toward reality, that it is (2) embedded in a community, that it is (3) expressed in its prayers and practices (not just its rules) and that it is (4) learned by exposure to exemplary individuals.

Taking into consideration the three major religions -- Islam, Judaism, and Christianity -- how do you folks see the above tenets playing a part?

Robby

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 23, 2005 - 08:52 am
Robby, in short, to me it is everything you said in the above.

Jan Sand
April 23, 2005 - 09:28 am
In all three of the main religions although there is much talk of respect for women snd equal women's rights there is some variation in the number of wives that men are permitted but no variation on the number of husbands a wife may take.

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 09:42 am
are suseptable to charisma as in MTV. Maybe the new pope who is looking backward should trot out the saints and sell them to the youth as really COOL individuals. and don't forget the music. . . . .

and Jan, multiple husbands??? that's a thought. But it was hard enough dealing with them one at a time. There is a fifty percent divorce rate here in the US to say nothing of all the separations. . . Now OPEN marriage is another way to go....I read the books and it seemed sensible until I suggested it to my husband who didn't think so. Nope I think the men still make the rules . . . most of them . . . rules that is. . . . Claire

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 10:47 am
The Book of Ruth preceded the Talmud. Ruth, the daughter in law of Naomi, has lost her husband. She and Naomi, who also has lost her husband, return to the land of Naomi's husband's family where they find Boaz a kinsman of Naomi's husband. Boaz does his duty. But he marries Ruth not Naomi. In marrying Ruth, Boaz brings Naomi into the household. There is a little hanky panky in this story. On the night when the men are winnowing the barley on the threshing floor, Naomi tells Ruth to watch where Boaz lies down to sleep. Then to go into him and lie at his feet, to remove his shoes, and to leave in the morning. Does that compromise Boaz? I don't know but it sure looks like it.

Clearly, the custom requiring males in a family to assume responsibility for one's brother's widow was already in place, when the Talmud was prepared.

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 10:59 am
Dorian: Is there any word from your Mom?

Scrawler
April 23, 2005 - 10:59 am
"A man might, without surrendering the marriage settlement, divorce 'a woman who transgresses Jewish law, such as going in public with uncovered head, spinning in the street, or conversing with all sorts of men or ' a loud-voiced woman-- i.e. one who talks in her house and her neihbors can hear what she says."

Can anyone tell me what is meant by: "spinning in the street" means? Is this a reference to insanity?

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 11:08 am
When I saw that expression "spinning in the street," I had an image in my mind which might or might not be what was meant. It is not uncommon for young women to "twirl" as they are standing or walking and are in no particular hurry. Sometimes their clothes twirl with them. There is something very feminine about this, an expression of joy, so to speak, and a way of saying:-"Hey, world, look at me." It is a behavior which is attractive to men.

Robby

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 11:10 am
was the younger of the two and perhaps the only one capable of bearing children. Was that a consideration?

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 11:58 am
Can the Roman Catholic Church be DEMOCRATIZED and still live?

Robby

JoanK
April 23, 2005 - 11:59 am
MAL: rest well, be well, and come back quickly: we miss you.

"divorce was recommended where the wife had remained childless ten years after marriage."

When my husband and I lived in Israel, we did not yet have children -- from personal choice. We had married young, and felt we weren't yet ready for them. When our 10th anniversary came around, I told my friends that we were celebrating. They all looked at me with long faces and pitying words. I didn't understand until someone made clear that they assumed my husband would now divorce me. (We are about to celebrate our 50th anniversary).

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 12:24 pm
Yes, Claire, Naomi was past the age of child bearing. In fact, that is prominent in the story. Naomi had two sons. Both sons died leaving her with two DIL. She sends them both back to mama rather than allowing them to stay with her because she has no more sons for them and is too old to produce more and even if she could bear more sons the DILs could not wait 20 years for them. One DIL returns to her tribe and mama. But the other DIL, Ruth stays and accompanies Naomi back to her original tribe where they discover a kinsman, Boaz. Ruth's message to Naomi is oft quoted. Whither thou goest, I will go and where thou lodgest I will lodge, thy people shall be my people.

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 12:32 pm
Joan: Celebrating 50 years can be great fun. In view of the high divorce rate in this country many folks are astounded that some couples are lucky enough to over come the slings and arrows that come one's way and make it to fifty. We reached fifty a few years back and the party was a party to remember.

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 12:43 pm
Claire: it is interesting how these stories all hang together. Ruth and Boaz give birth to the line of Jesse and David and it is the line of Jesse and David that Mary the mother of Jesus comes from.

There is a famous glass window at Chartres that depicts the ancestral lineage of Mary back to Jesse. If Mal were here she would find it for us.

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 23, 2005 - 01:11 pm
LA CATHÉDRALE DE CHARTRES Scroll down for the window.

Bubble
April 23, 2005 - 01:57 pm
http://www.torah.org/learning/women/class44.html

Justin, post # 341 - Ruth was originally from Moab and that is why that passage you quoted is so special: she chose to follow her mother in law instead of returning to her own people. Ruth nowadays is the name often chosen by women converting to Judaism.

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 02:29 pm
I wanted to see if the location of the window could be accessed without having to put the whole thing on so here is the cod for ...just an experiment. Hey it worked. . the window



nice explanation Justin. makes it come alive. . . . Claire

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 02:34 pm
Ruth was my mothers name. . . . Claire

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 04:34 pm
Nice try ladies. You have brought up the Nativity cycle. It is the famous 12th century Lancet from the west wall. The glass and it's coloring is superb. When the late afternoon sun comes through and the glare is gone, the window lights up as one would imagine heaven to be lit.

The window we are looking for is in the North Transcept. It is called the "Tree of Jesse". The blues in this window are exquisite. The glass was done about 1140 and the techniques are long gone. Much has been written about the glass and it's iconography. Henry Adams' writing on Chartres' Twelfth Century glass is well worth reading by artists. Claire you will find his work on this topic well worth your while.

Would you ladies like to dip back into your well and pull up the Tree of Jesse. You will recognize it by the beauty of the blues and the tree growing out of Jesse's loins.

robert b. iadeluca
April 23, 2005 - 05:31 pm
Tomorrow's PAPAL MASS returns to earlier rites.

Robby

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 23, 2005 - 05:34 pm
Is This It Justin?

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 06:04 pm
You found it Eloise. The blues bring focus on the tree. The colors in the morning light are exquisite. The glass was formed about 1140 and it's beauty is still very evident. During the war the windows were removed and stored for safekeeping.

Jesus sits enthroned as Christ at the top of the tree. His ancestral lineage is beneath him all the way back to Jesse.One's ancestral lineage is a human characteristic and that's understandable if one is depicting Jesus. But the figure at the top is Christ enthroned (all his ancestors are enthroned except for Jesse). Christ the Messiah is God and the equivalent of all the members of the Trinity. Does the Trinity have a lineage? Certainly not a human lineage. It is Jesus who proceeds from Jesse to Mary. This is just one of many interesting constructs that appear in the Tree of Jesse.

There are many things to observe in this window. We can talk about the iconography, about the composition of the work, about the colors, about the religious significance of the work, and finaly about the emotional experience of seeing it in good morning light.

3kings
April 23, 2005 - 07:31 pm
We read that some men were occasionally found guilty of some fault and they were required, in a divorce, to return the wife's dowry, and pay a marriage settlement.

Who imposed this requirement ? The religious authorities ? If the man did not comply with the order, was he imprisoned ? And would the imprisonment be regarded as sufficient punishment, or would he still be required to meet the financial terms?

Were the judgements made by Temple officers or by the secular authorities? Who ran the prisons ? So many questions ....... ++ Trevor.

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 08:09 pm
following your henry adams lead to google I stumbled on this marvelous site with not only a history and examples of stained glass but detailed descriptions of the craft. As a potter I recognized much of what they are doing and how the colors were achieved.. go

here for stained glass

the technical information is at the bottom of the page.

Your discription of the light at the church has me salivating. It's my favorite of all the Gothic churches anywhay with it's irregular design.

Now back to Henry Adams who wrote two novels about the churches? googles list is long. . . .Claire

winsum
April 23, 2005 - 08:28 pm
I found Henry Adams a historian and writer connected through his book on the Chartres church here which is well worth browsing . for it's own sake. . . .

and number thirty one under historians. . . .

Claire

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 09:28 pm
Trevor; The core of your question- who is the adminstrator of the Laws- is something I can't respond to at the moment. I can say this much, however.The Temple and the Temple police are gone.(Paul called Saul was a Temple policeman, you will remember, who participated in the capture of Christians and the stoning of Stephen). We are in a differnt era. It is the Rabbinic era. The Rabbis are engaged in pilpul not law enforcement and justice. Yet, there is a need for both. There are always criminals and civil cases. The Mishna and the Gemarra are not enough. Law enforcement lies in the power of the state. When in Roman lands there is Roman law to guide one and enforce the peace. But we are talking about enforcing religious civil law. If the guilty man is religious and reads Torah everyday as expected he will be aware that he must comply with the law of God. Yet there is still need for hearing, review, and judgement. There must be someone to whom a victim can petition for relief. Perhaps Bubble can help us.

Justin
April 23, 2005 - 09:57 pm
Trevor there is a related pasage on page 364 of Durant.

"If we resent the stringency of these laws, know that the Jews made little pretense to keeping all these commandments and the Rabbis winked on every other page at the gap between their counsels and the stealthy frailties of men. The Talmud was not a code of laws requiring strict obedience, it was a record of rabbinical opinion. The untutored masses obeyed only a choice few of the precepts of the Law."

Fifi le Beau
April 23, 2005 - 10:28 pm
From the Jewish Encyclopedia..........

Influence of Roman Law.

Incomparably greater was the influence exerted by Greco-Roman jurisprudence in later days. The lingua Franca of the East, even during the period of Roman sovereignty, was the κοινή; so that about seventy of the seventy-seven foreign legal terms that are found in the Talmud (Löw, in Krauss, "Lehnwörter," ii. 630), are Greek, only the remaining few being Latin.

As a rule the Jews learned Roman law from the actual practise of the courts and not from legal writings only. Greek terms are used for document, will, protocol, guardian, contract, hypothec, purchase, accusation, accuser, attorney, and the like; and Latin words for legacy, bill of indictment, divorce, etc. Roman law, with its high development, exercised a much greater influence on the Talmudic system than has hitherto been shown, thorough investigations having as yet been made only sporadically. Frankel ("Gerichtlicher Beweis," pp. 58 et seq.) thinks that the majority of the legal cases in Talmudic law have parallels in the Roman code.

"The same subjects are often treated in both, and form a basis for the application of the legal principles. This resemblance was due to the conditions and requirements of the time; and for the same reason many legal provisions are common to both codes."

The difference between the two lies, in his view, "in the divergent mental processes of Orientals and Occidentals, so that Talmudic law formulated anew the very parts it borrowed from the Roman code. The Oriental in his method of investigation is characterized by acuteness and facility of comprehension; so that he is guided in his legal enactments by the vivacity of his mind rather than by a principle. . . .

The Occidental is marked by thoughtfulness: he desires a universal concept, not a schematized nexus or a reduction to some principle. He therefore combines the law into a harmonious whole, while the code of the Oriental consists of disconnected parts."

Although this characterization is in the main correct, it must be borne in mind that Frankel under-estimates the influence of the Roman code on the Talmud. Several Talmudists of the early part of the second century were so deeply versed in the Roman civil law that they decided cases according to it if they were so requested.

Constantin l'Empereur of Oppyck, in his "De Legibus Ebræorum Forensibus" (1637; reprinted by Surenhuis in his "Mischna," iv.), was the first to compare the Roman and Talmudic systems, although he did not postulate any adaptation from the one code by the other.


The Jews copied and adopted Roman law into the Talmud with no credit to the Greeks and Romans. So except for some arcane minutia of the civil law (which could not be enforced) after the Romans came, the rest came from the Occidental mind of the west.

It took them a thousand years to get rid of much of the arcane writings from the Babylon sojourn, and adapt it to the western writings, because that is where they were headed in droves. If they had adopted the Babylon midrash instead and stayed in their original homeland of Arabia/Iraq, they would probably all be muslims now like their brothers.

Abraham it is said by the Jews came from Ur, which is located in present day Iraq. The muslims claim he came from a small village a few miles down the road in Arabia. The Jewish leaders had a choice of where they thought Abraham came from, and they chose Ur in Iraq, instead of the Arabian site which later proved to be one of the biggest oil gushers the Americans found in Saudi Arabia.

The Arabian King Abdul Aziz al Saud let the Americans drill in hopes they hit water. He had no interest in or use for barrels of oil, but water was his dream of paradise.

Fifi

prysm
April 24, 2005 - 02:32 am
Hi All,
Just a quick update on Mal. She had a transfusion yesterday and has been on an iv to rehydrate her and to replenish potassium, and they just started her on Cipro as well. They will be giving her tests to try to determine where the anemia is coming from. I am hoping she will be getting some rest, but you know how it is in the hospital! They have said many times that she will only be in a few days. I'll keep you posted. Thanks to all for your concern.
Dorian

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 04:33 am
While we are on the subject of law and justice, this example of ISLAMIC JUSTICE helps us to compare.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 04:50 am
Also under the heading of JUSTICE.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 05:42 am
Life and The Law

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 05:55 am
"The Talmud is not a work of art.

"The task of reducing the thought of a thousand years into a coherent system proved too much even for a hundred patient rabbis. Several tractates are obviously in the wrong seder or order. Several chapters are in the wrong tractate. Subjects are taken up, dropped, and lawlessly resumed.

"It is not the product of deliberation. It is the deliberation itself. All views are recorded and contradictions are often left unresolved. It is as if we had crossed fifteen centuries to eavesdrop on the most intimate discussions of the schools and heard Akoba and Meir and Jehuda Hanasi and Rab in the heat of their debates.

"Remembering that we are interlopers, that these men and the others have had their casual words snatched from their mouths and cast into uncalculated contexts and sent hurtling down the years, we can forgive the casuistry, sophistry, legends, astrology, demonology, superstition, magic, miracles, numerology, and revelatory dreams, the Pelion on Ossa of argument crowning a web of fantasy, the consolatory vanity forever healing frustrated hope.

"If we resent the stringency of these laws, the intrusive minuteness of these regulations, the Oriental severity of punishment for their violation, we must not take the matter too much to heart. The Jews made no pretense to keeping all these commandments and the rabbis winked on every other page at the gap between their counsels of perfection and the stealthy frailties of men.

"Said a cautious rabbi:-'If Israel should properly observe a single Sabbath, the Son of David would come immediately.' The Talmud was not a code of laws requiring strict obedience. It was a record of rabbinical opinion, gathered for the guidance of leisurely piety.

"The untutored masses obeyed only a choice few of the precepts of the Law."

Robby

Rich7
April 24, 2005 - 07:25 am
of the precepts of the law."

Muslims killing Christians, while shouting "God is great," Christians burning other Christians at the stake because they didn't agree on the word of God, pogroms against Jews, Sunis blowing up Shite women and children, Catholics killing Protestants in Northern Ireland (and vice versa), Tamil (Hindu) children performing as suicide bombers while blowing up crowded Buddist temples.

Each of these groups believed that they understood what God wants, and were doing God's work.

Have you ever thought that, if there is a God, He has not done a very good job in getting across to mankind the message of what he wants?

Rich

Jan Sand
April 24, 2005 - 08:02 am
Since God himself is rather a poor communicator, probably the next Messiah will be a PR man.

winsum
April 24, 2005 - 09:54 am
to the patriot act and this excerpt from a lawyer who was supposed to speak on it and found it impossible for even him to understand.

" "Our laws ought not to be written like static on the radio. They ought to produce a melody."

it sounds a little like the Talmud -- a work of art. . . . Claire

DanielDe
April 24, 2005 - 10:52 am
Eleven days since I last came around. I am sorry to hear that Mal had to be hospitalized. But the news seem to be encouraging. Good to see you around Mal.

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 10:55 am
Mal is still hospitalized but we are all watching carefully. Her daughter, Dorian, is keeping us up to date.

Robby

DanielDe
April 24, 2005 - 10:55 am
There is one fact which befuddles me. Allied countries of the United Nations, after having learnt everything about the rule of law and its corollary - freedom for all human beings -, still use guns to solve problems. It feels very much like the cowboys’ face off down on the main street remains the only efficient rule of order, in spite of all of Mankind’s impressive evolution in philosophy, anthropology, sociology, history, political philosophy, economics, law, business and so on.

I suppose then that the Messiah will be a "Quick Draw McGraw", on top of being a good PR expert ... Someone we could really look up to.

Jan Sand
April 24, 2005 - 11:08 am
You cannot divorce the general outlook of the best possible action away from the politics of power. The Bush administration first came in under a cloud. The president was not well respected and his election looked extremely doubtful. The standard way to control and unite a nation is to have a threat. Stalin used it as did Hitler. I would like to assume that the threat was not generated for that purpose, but 9/11 certainly united the country against an enemy in what was manipulated into an endless war. It was a godsend for a shakey administration.

winsum
April 24, 2005 - 11:35 am
the wag the dog syndrome. you couldn't have put it more clearly. who hasn't seen the movie? . . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 12:00 pm
Anything further on Durant's Judaic Civilization?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 04:24 pm
I just had a lovely 15-minute chat with Mal who is in the Univ of North Carolina hospital in Chapel Hill. She is having a more thorough exam tomorrow morning so she is not eating but they are having her drink lots and lots of all sorts of liquids in preparation. We laughed a lot together and she is as upbeat as anyone can be in that situation. She does not have a laptop with her and says she is glad to be away from the computer for a bit. She is not watching TV and considers her time there as a vacation.

She brought a copy of the book she wrote to the hospital, shows it to everyone and then says: "Go out and buy it." Good marketing, Mal! Then she learned that one of the young woman physicians had read part of Durant's SofC some time ago. Mal is in the process of recruiting her to join us.

Robby

3kings
April 24, 2005 - 04:58 pm
Thanks to those here, ( especially Justin, Fifi, and Robby,) who increased my understanding of the actual practice of the Jews, when taking action against the breakers of their laws. It seems in many cases their misdemeanors were winked at.( for the men, anyway. For the women there was a different outcome. To take part in village events, a citizen needed a ready supply of stones)

I've always been puzzled by those yarns in the Old Testament, where the guy who grabbed the Arc to stop it from falling, and urchins who abused some bald headed old chap, were apparently killed by a wrathful God, not by fellow Jews seeking justice. Stories, stories, stories..... Hans Christian Anderson, anyone ? ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
April 24, 2005 - 05:00 pm
Do MOVIES help to ease the tension between Islam and Christianity?

Robby

winsum
April 24, 2005 - 05:32 pm
called THE RED TENT by Anita Diamant a fictionalized version of Dinah, Jacob daughter through Leah. . this is Jacob, son of Issac, son of Abraham. The blurb says that the bible, if written by a woman, would be like this. It's great I haven't been able to put it down. JUst started it today and --almost halfway through.This discussion has contributed to my willingness to identify with the characters. You really live it the way it was.. . Claire

kiwi lady
April 24, 2005 - 05:45 pm
I don't know about that Robbie I only know by getting to know a young Muslim man and talking with him, has changed my perception. I think actually getting to know people of other cultures in person is the very best way to understanding people who are different to us.

It will be interesting when my daughter goes to Turkey and goes to our War Memorial at Gallipoli and Cenk goes with her to visit the Turkish War memorial in the same area how each of them will feel. I wonder if those fallen soldiers would ever think that a betrothed couple whose ancestors were enemies would be coming to the battlefield.

It does show how things have changed.

Carolyn

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 24, 2005 - 06:32 pm
That movie is a good example of the rise and fall of civilization. The barbaric North conquered the rich and civilized South presumably to abolish slavery, but in fact to redistribute the wealth in the South that was too thinly spread.

In 'Gone With the Wind' you have a spoilt rich girl, having the guts to help a woman give birth, the courage to return to the family farm miles away to finds her mother dead, her father having lost his mind, she fights hunger and profiteers with a passion, kills an enemy soldier in cold blood. She lies, cheats, steals her sister's rich fiancée to build up a fortune for herself and her family.

Movies like that and Schindler's List for instance, have an impact on teaching about things that you don't always learn in school. But they can sometimes widen the gap between two natural enemies.

Justin
April 24, 2005 - 06:57 pm
The Galipoli Campaign in WW1 exacted a terrible toll on young New Zealanders. Many of the New Zealand Regiments were cavalry who were forced to fight on foot from invasive and fixed positions. The Ottoman Turks using classic defensive tactics wiped out whole units in single engagements. It was Churchill's plan that was adopted and he failed to learn from it for he tried it again in WW2 by landings at Dieppe and the Norway coast.

Fifi le Beau
April 24, 2005 - 07:07 pm
Durant writes......

we can forgive the casuistry, sophistry, legends, astrology, demonology, superstition, magic, miracles, numerology, and revelatory dreams, the Pelion on Ossa of argument crowning a web of fantasy, the consolatory vanity forever healing frustrated hope.

I disagree with Durant that the writers of this 'mountain out of a mole hill' fantasy should be forgiven. Instead they should be exposed for leading their unlearned followers into such a fantasy world, and endangering their very lives to defend this nonsense, in the name of their tribal god.

Expose the fallacy of Judaism and all the others will fall. If one god is false, so are all the others. They should fall as all the other gods of man's invention have fallen. Those gods were false and so are these.

Durant writes.....

"Said a cautious rabbi:-'If Israel should properly observe a single Sabbath, the Son of David would come immediately.

No, Judaism would be exposed for the fraud it is, and therefore the Rabbis don't push for compliance.

They remind me of those groups, who are always around, who pronounce the end of the world on a certain date. The date comes and goes, and the world keeps spinning, and they slink off, usually with all the money of their followers, looking for another herd of sheep to fleece.

The Jews were looking for a warrior messiah to throw off the invaders and occupiers of the land they themselves had invaded and occupied. The Roman Empire and others were too powerful for this band of former nomads, and twenty sons of David would not have saved them from occupation and eventual expulsion to their former homeland.

Fifi

Jan
April 24, 2005 - 07:14 pm
A delegation of Turks were honoured guests at one of our(Australian) Dawn Services. Canberra I think it was. Saw on the News yesterday that some Turks who have settled here, have applied to march on Anzac Day. I'm all for it, after all as Slessor wrote " Whether as enemies they fought, or fought with us, or neither; the sand joins them together, enlisted on the other front."

After the War coverage last night I feel all battled out. I was shocked to hear that before charging the Turks in daylight, at close range, Aussies were asked to empty their guns, and throw away their bullets as it was to be bayonets only. It was sheer slaughter, many falling back into the trenches dead. This happened 2 or 3 times before someone had the guts to stop it.

Justin
April 24, 2005 - 07:23 pm
The Crusade of Louis of France with Barbarosa resulted in complete defeat for the Crusaders. The Arabs gave the King and his French knights safe passage home to France on the condition that they would stay there. The following year the King of France is back in a seige of Tunis.

A subsequent Crusade results in the taking of Jerusalem and the crucifixion of every man, woman, and child in the city. In a subsequent crusade King Richard of England and Acquitaine is captured in a Crusade seige and later released for ransome as a good will gesture.

This long period of invasive warfare by Europeans was triggered by al Hakim who burned the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to the ground. Hakim had a short reign and the next ruler rebuilt the church and restored safe access to Christians visiting the holy sites. News of the burning came to the Vatican via Constantinople when they asked for help. Four years later when the Crusades began under Urban the Church had been rebuilt and free passsage restored.

Many infamous sins were committed by the Christians in the Crusades and the world is still paying for the travesty.

Justin
April 24, 2005 - 09:41 pm
I agree, Fifi. I think it's sad the way the Priests, Rabbis, Ministers, Imans and poliicians go on hosing their fellow man.But I don't know what to do about it. The officials get richer and their followers get fleeced.

The hoax is so pervasive, so elaborate, and so extensive that it seems impossible to bring it to an end. Suppose we could bring it all to light and that is probably possible. Millions would refuse to accept the evidence. Others would say, "what do I have to lose by believing, a little money perhaps.

How long,I wonder,would the world be without before something similar replaced the missing ingredient. The fault still lies within ourselves, and not with the perpetrators. We must have answers to life's eternal questions even if the answers are conceived out of whole cloth and served up on a patton.

Jan Sand
April 24, 2005 - 10:53 pm
It is interesting that a good many of the comments in this group observe the nature and the effects of faith as a human affliction rather than a universal stage of human development with rich side effects. There is, of course, appreciation of the art and architecture generated by faith and the twisted organization religion imposes on the legal systems and cultural traditions. It seems very difficult to determine which is baby and which is bath to be thrown out.

In general, I agree with the appraisal of negativity religion imposes on humanity but I am uneasy at losing the rich and delightful cultural side effects of faith. A true investigation of the universe available through science does stimulate some beautiful art but religion seems much more fertile in this contribution.

In general humanity is much more acquainted with the delightful fantasy out of myth than the truly fascinating and mind expanding potential of the ideas generated by science and especially the newer sciences of the mind and there is yet to be developed a strong inspirational artistic culture out of science comparable to the obviously fascinating beauty which grew out of religions.

Perhaps the most unfortunate current relationship between science and religion is the clear conflict of many basic principles with faith held current religious myths. We can, today, enjoy the ancient myths of Greek and Rome without investing in them an unreasonable emotional content obvious in the current myths of Christianity, Islam, and the Jewish faith. It is the attack by religion on rationality which is most reprehensible and dangerous.

winsum
April 24, 2005 - 11:18 pm
art really isn't valued all that much I think I would trade it for rationality any day. In fact I just threw out my scrap file consiting of lots of art that nobody wants. . . . . Claire

Jan Sand
April 24, 2005 - 11:31 pm
Claire

You have a rather narrow view of art. Art is architecture, literature, theater, poetry, film, dance, etc. Science can contribute mightily to these disciplines. Science-fiction, which basically started with Jules Verne and H.G.Welles has expanded enormously in art and there are many science inspired adventures in the other arts but it still has a long way to go to compete with religious art.

It is not a question of exchanging art for rationality. It is a matter of utilizing rationality in art.

Bubble
April 24, 2005 - 11:47 pm
Hello everyone! Passover day is over and maybe now I can concentrate on something else than preparing food and having elaborate meals. Sis in law is still with us for the duration and of course we will have visitors daily until the last 8th day, but at least the big rush is over.

I am always in fear of having forgotten one essential piece of tradition during the Seder. It is exactly what happened: first I forgot to put 3 matzot on the Seder tray, then I forgot to remind my husband Ben to touch each of our heads with it, in blessing. The tray was only raised in the middle of the table. I suppose it counts too?

Many interesting posts here, too many to comment on. TREVOR, I'll just add about " taking action against the breakers of their laws". Surprisingly, in orthodox areas no misbehavior like stealing, kids crimes, adultery, kidnapping, and other unlawful situations is ever reported to the police. These orthodoxes have their own "overlookers" who will deal with their own local crimes or will report it to the final authority which is the local area rabbi.

Claire, The Red Tent is a wonderful book for showing realistically what life was like in the time of the patriarchs. The end is less satisfactory.

I am glad Robby could have direct great news from Mal herself. I am always worried when I hear the word transfusion.

Visitors at the door. Bye.

Justin
April 24, 2005 - 11:54 pm
The age of religious expression is art is just about exhausted. It was used during the middle ages as a visual device for teaching religious ideas. Architecture advanced the notion that churches reached up into the realm of God. That was a time when few people were literate and visual images carried the religious message. During the Renaisance and Baroque periods lay and religious patrons adopted religious art as a mechanism for exhibiting wealth and position. When the 18th century opened the Rococo brought to an end patron support of religious art objects. Patrons were more interested in commissioning more mundane topics at this time. In the 19th and 20th century Modern art completely altered the patron structure and with it religious iconography. Today, it is only the afficionado who spends any time with religious art and architecture. The great Gothic monuments of France are themselves artifacts of a bygone age. Religious art of the past is one of the benefits of religion but it's usefulness, except as an icon, is at an end.

I think Jan has put his finger on an aspect of religion which could if altered make it possible for society and religion to coexist without damage to the body politic. Jan says, it is the attack by religion on rationality which is most reprehensible and dangerous.This is the bath water. However, I fear that religious irrationality is essential to it's existance.

Bubble
April 24, 2005 - 11:56 pm
Justin, we need some magic in our life to lighten the routine?

Jan Sand
April 25, 2005 - 12:16 am
Perhaps what I was reaching for was the totality that religion expresses in coalescing myth, law, personal integrity, appreciation of nature and reality, tradition, and many other human fundamentals into a tapestry that has become a whole.

Over the years this treasured tapestry is seen, with the aid of new knowledge and new ways of looking at things, to have frayed threads, gaping holes, jarring designs, pins and spikes and thorns woven into it that make it jarring and threatening.

What is needed is a new tapestry built with new and more appropriate and stronger materials that are elastic enough to accommodate new and changing and dynamic concepts yet offer a comparable totality as a weapon against chaos.

People in general are not privileged to enjoy the esoteric delights of modern science and view the devotees as odd screwballs or mad scientists who attack the comforts of the uncomfortable but necessary old religions. It is a long and difficult task to bring the general populace into the company of the elite intelligences but it must be done or humanity will remain in severe difficulty.

3kings
April 25, 2005 - 01:37 am
JAN As I am a fan of Science Fiction, which stories you have commented on several times, I wonder if you don't think old legends such as found in the Bible, are not fine examples of that literary form ?

JUSTIN I must say you are remarkably well informed on the details of the ANZAC debacle.++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
April 25, 2005 - 03:42 am
Durant concludes the section on The Ethics of the Talmud.

"All in all, Talmudic law, like the Mohammedan, was man-made law and favored, in the rabbis, a very terror of woman's power.

"Like the Christian Fathers, they blamed her for extinguishing the 'Soul of the World' through Eve's intelligent curiosity. They considered woman 'light-minded' and yet admitted in her an instinctive wisdom missing in man.

"They deplored the loquacity of women at great length ('Ten measures of speech descended to the world. Women took nine, men one'). They condemned their addiction to the occult, to rouge and kohl. They approved of a man spending generously on his wife's raiment but wished she would beautify herself for her husband rather than for other men.

"In law, according to one rabbi, 'a hundred women are equal to only one witness.' Their property rights were limited in the Talmud as in eighteenth-century England. Their earnings, and the income from any property they might own, belonged to their husbands.

"Woman's place was in the home. In the 'Days of the Messiah,' said a hopeful rabbi woman 'will bear a child every day.' 'A man who has a bad wife will never see the face of hell.'

"On the other hand no man is so rich, said Akiba, as one who has a wife noted for her good deeds. Says a midrash:-'Everything derives from the woman.'

"According to Hebrew proverbs:-'All the blessings of a household come through the wife. Therefore should her husband honor her. Let men beware of causing women to weep. God counts their tears.'"

Should I ask if there are any comments?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 25, 2005 - 03:57 am
As we discuss Faith and the "need to believe," is THIS TOPIC related?

Robby

Bubble
April 25, 2005 - 03:59 am
That last post of yours makes me feel like Superwoman with God on my side! lol Women as the start and end of everything.

robert b. iadeluca
April 25, 2005 - 04:04 am
A JEW as mediator between Christians and Muslims?

Robby

Bubble
April 25, 2005 - 05:16 am
We should invite this Rabbi Cohen to participate here!

Rich7
April 25, 2005 - 08:12 am
still does not let me get NY Times articles, but the one sentence lead-in to Robby's last NYT article about a Jew mediating between Christians and Muslims triggered a thought. (Actually a couple of thoughts.)

A generation ago would we have thought or heard of rising Islamic influence in Amsterdam?

Adjusting for immigration, Islam seems to have an appeal in a Europe that, at the same time, is experiencing declining interest in its chief religion since Constantine- Christianity.

I was in Sweden a couple of years ago, and was surprised to learn that the fastest growing religion in that blond, blue eyed population was Islam.

Judism endures despite unbelievable oppression, but Christianity appears to be in decline and Islam in ascendency (sp?) in Western Europe . What is it that is so attractive about Islam in this age of growing secularism?

Rich

Jan Sand
April 25, 2005 - 08:48 am
The stories I have read about the growth of Islam in Europe indicated that it was the immigrants from Islamic countries into Europe the were the Muslims. I have not heard of native Europeans converting to Islam. Beyond that the acceptance of birth control of native Europeans and its non-acceptance by Muslims also added to the growth of European Islam.

The USA is a different story. Although there has been immigration from Islamic countries, a large contingent of black people who have been rejected economically and socially by the whites has reacted by throwing off the "white" religions and accepting Islam.

Scrawler
April 25, 2005 - 10:38 am
I personally don't want to rely on Hollywood to give me a perception of the world around me - either the past, present, or the future. I prefer to get my images from joining discussions, such as this one, where I can talk with you and read all of your posts.

This is coming from a women we loves to watch horror and science fiction movies! I love to watch them, but I'm glad I don't have to live them. To me they are pure entertainment.

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 10:52 am
"Today, it is only the afficionado who spends any time with religious art and architecture. The great Gothic monuments of France are themselves artifacts of a bygone age">


that's what I meant. Why couldn't I say it like that? (G) Claire

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 11:11 am
" Mr. Cohen says he is not religious but holds meetings with religious groups because religion has come to play a greater role in the largely secular Netherlands. He believes Muslim clerics are a key to helping Muslims integrate into Dutch society, although the most conservative clerics oppose this."



This is a predominantly secular country coming under attack. I believe that RELIGION is a virelant force attacking reason, peace and equanimity every where . It has become not only a missionary force spreding the word of god, but one seeking domination of the world. . . .

Claire

Fifi le Beau
April 25, 2005 - 12:43 pm
Robby, your link to the article on the numbers game in New York reminded me of a quote by J.R. "Yellow Kid" Weil, a con artist who gave this explanation when caught.

"They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something"

Fifi

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 02:54 pm
I agree, Bubble, we do need some magic in our lives to lighten the routine. But that magic should not be the magic of the con artist who gives us nothing for something. The magic of religion is that of the magician who amuses us by sleight of hand. We see it in the tales of Moses and the Pharaoh, in the burning bush, in the voice in the clouds, in the parting waters.

The magic I have in mind is the magic of personal accomplishment.It can come from dancing well, singing well, painting well etc. The joy of peer approval is magic. Comraderie also contains magic. It has the magic of peer acceptance,sharing, and loyalty.

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 03:14 pm
Jan: When you tell us, as you did Claire , "that it is not a question of exchanging art for rationality but it is a matter of utilizing rationality in art," you are expressing the frustration of the abstraction observer. The abstract painter has an experience with the work and it is enough for the artist but it is not enough for the observer who also must find a relationship with the work. The artist may employ rationality in an art product by providing the clues and connecting links so necessary to make the product relevant for the next generation-the subsequent owners and observers.

robert b. iadeluca
April 25, 2005 - 03:51 pm
"There was in the Talmud a strong emphasis on ritual. But that was in part the Jew's reaction to the attempts of Church and state to make him abandon his Law. The ritual was a mark of identity, a bond of unity and continuity, a badge of defiance to a never-forgiving world.

"Here and there, in these twenty volumes, we find words of hatred for Christianity. But they were for a Christianity that had forgotten the gentleness of Christ -- that persecuted the adherents of the Law that Christ had bidden His followers to fulfill. And that had, in the view of the rabbis, abandoned the monotheism which was the inalienable essence of the ancient faith.

"Amid these ceremonial complexities and controversial barbs we find hundreds of sage counsels and psychological insights, and occasional passages recalling the majesty of the Old Testament or the mystical tenderness of the New.

"The whimsical humor characteristic of the Jew lightens the burden of the long lesson. So one rabbi tells how Moses entered incognito into Akoba's classroom, sat in the last row and marveled at the many laws derived by the great teacher from the Mosaic code, and of which its amanuensis had never dreamed.

"For 1400 years the Talmud was the core of Jewish education.

"Seven hours a day, through seven years, the Hebrew youth pored over it, recited it, sank it into his memory by sound and sight. And like the Confucian classics similarly memorized, it formed mind and character by the discipline of its study and the deposit of its lore.

"The method of teaching was not by mere recitation and repetition. It was also by disputation between master and pupil, between pupil and pupil, and the application of old laws to the circumstances of the new day.

"The result was a sharpness of intellect, a retentiveness of memory, that gave the Jew an advantage in many spheres requiring clarity, concentration, persistence and exactitude, while at the same time it tended to narrow the range and freedom of the Jewish mind.

"The Talmud tamed the excitable nature of the Jew. It checked his indiviualism, and molded him to fidelity and sobriety in his family and his community.

"Superior minds may have been hampered by the 'yoke of the Law' but the Jews as a whole were saved."

Did the "never-forgiving" world perhaps act that way just because of the Jew's "badge of defiance?

The method of teaching was "by disputation between master and pupil and between pupil and pupil." How often is that seen these days in the American school system?

Robby

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 05:02 pm
Rarely is disputation the method of learning in American schools and colleges. I can't tell you how often I wanted students to challenge, to dispute. But always it was necessary for me to prepare a full lecture to use the time available. As a student I felt it was necessary to feed back exactly what I had been given in order to make an A. There is little or no room for disputation in our classrooms and it's a pity. I know there are teachers who do not feel comfortable when the material is challenged but there are also teachers who would welcome a disputatious class, that is disputation within rules. One must put out the material as well.

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 05:14 pm
Let us come back to that part of the Talmud that recognizes that Jesus directed his followers to obey the Law. Yes, he did. But the message of Jesus was completely forgotten by Paul and Denis, and Augustine, and the boys at Nicene and those at Chalcedon. They put their stamp on the Christian message and not the stamp of Jesus. Here we are 1500 years later looking at Benedict and wondering what possible connection he and his policies could have with the Jew Jesus. The twisted thinking that has made wommen less than deserving in the Church is not the policy of Jesus who loved his mother, Martha, and Mary Magdelene and who raised the Magdelene to a favored position among his apostles.

Fifi le Beau
April 25, 2005 - 06:38 pm
Durant writes.......

"All in all, Talmudic law, like the Mohammedan, was man-made law and favored, in the rabbis, a very terror of woman's power.

"Like the Christian Fathers, they blamed her for extinguishing the 'Soul of the World'


Like Islam and Christianity who got most of their ideas from Judaism we now get down to the real reason for creating a tribal god and writing rules and regulations to govern everyones life. It was all because of those $@%&! women.

They claim their tribal god created them, but they don't blame him for giving them hormones and sexual appetites, they blame women. Chalk up another mistake to this god, As Nietzsche said, "Woman was Gods second mistake."

As for the Rabbi who wanted women to give birth daily, he should have a sign hung around his neck with the words 'sexual pervert', and be kept out of civil society for the sake of small children and animals.

The journal Nature had a report on why women are so complicated. The newly cracked genetic code of the female X chromosome shows that females are far more genetically 'variable' than science realized, and far more complex than men.

Women carry their genetic instructions on two X chromosomes, while men have a X and a Y. The Y chromosome determines maleness, but science has long known that its genes are otherwise fairly inactive. That means that men are largely the product of one chromosome, the X.

In women both X chromosomes are chock full of active genes. Each woman is the product of about twice as many genetic instructions as any man. In essence, there is not one human genome, but two, 'Male and Female'.

Fifi

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 07:31 pm
not one but two. . . but haven't we always known that men and women are different somehow or other. . . hard to determine. Are we naturally "devils advocates"? Do we just naturally spot the holes in these rational lessons taught to us by THEM (men). . . Institutions and govt governed by them are still pretty much the case. although women ceos and govt officials are becoming common, we have yet to elect one president.

Are women more creative than men . . more sensitive and aware of posabilities?

Given the opportunity I've taken a creative thought given to me by a male and run with it -- taking it even further. is this that extra X thingee doing it's job?

Claire

Jan Sand
April 25, 2005 - 08:31 pm
Justin

I also find a good deal of art a puzzle. I never found much interesting in Jim Dine's neckties or in the purist totally white or totally black canvases but I understand their intent. The recent Christo business of "The Gates" seemed to me no more interesting than the huge red flags used in Communist China's celebratory marches. But I must give these things their due.

First it must be acknowledged that all art is abstract. A flat canvas can do no more than stimulate a weak approximation of reality. Even Michelangelo's David is no more than a three dimensional snapshot of a four dimensional living being. But it is not the business of traditional art(at least in present technological capability) to create actual reality. It conveys merely a focused aspect of reality to touch the mind of man with that godfinger depicted in the Sistine Chapel that brought Adam to life. So that humans are enabled to really see what the artist sees in the real world. Most people do not know how to use their eyes and artists try to remedy this.

Modern abstract artists go beyond this and create objects in themselves. Pollock's tossed paint educates the eye to see beauty in color patterns everywhere in the world. Calder makes visual music of the dance of restricted movement. Moore evokes tremendous dignity from strange pierced shapes echoed by huge stones in the American western desert. Chuck Close coalesces galaxies of dots in to photographic faces, Morris Graves evokes mysteries in poetic ghost birds, Stuart Davis blares with the jazz of advertising graphics, Edward Hopper and George Tooker can freeze the mind with urban lonliness and fright.

To throw away abstraction is to not only throw out the baby with the bath, it throws out the bathtub as well.

kiwi lady
April 25, 2005 - 09:39 pm
Justin that is a good point you made about abstract art. I confess there are few pieces I like. When I view a piece of art - either painting or sculpture I want it to please my eye and uplift my spirits. I view music in the same way. It has to speak to me. Not much of the abstract art around my country these days does this for me. It exhausts me in fact! I understand why a piece has been created often and the meaning of the piece but I still do not like it.

I still believe men rely a lot on women for their emotional support base. Men dying on the battlefield often called for their mothers. Behind every good man is a strong woman. I firmly believe that. Where do my boys come when they are troubled - to Mum. They would always do that in preference to Dad. I am not putting men down when I say this, it just the way I see it.

carolyn

Jan Sand
April 25, 2005 - 10:06 pm
We all have our limitations and I have many. But it is unwise to discard much of the world. I must struggle to appreciate whatever a religious fanatic derives from his/her beliefs but I cannot but grant that it is real and very personal and worth investigation whatever my final conclusions.

I do not have any more women behind my emotional foundations than I do men. Many are there to give me strength and insight. Perhaps I am unique. I hope not.

But to toss off the earnest efforts of centuries of skilled observers and craftsmen is a profound mistake. Appreciation does not come without effort but the effort is immensely rewarding.

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 10:17 pm
Jan one doesn't eliminate the other. by the way your post 409 is fantastic. and Kiwi as for abstract art. . . it's probably more fun to make it than to look at it. I've got a page with some of my stuff on it that is abstract and it was magical to do since it did itself. but the viewer won't know that. . . . so oo o . I understand. Claire

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 10:27 pm
re: those long ago and far away artists and craftsmen of which you speak. We've studied them, their work and usually their desire to create which is human and true of all of us. So it can be understood easily. As to the reasons behind the works, they vary from personal to financial. The images, when they are religious, are universal to the market and the community at that time and understood by all--.much more easily than today's abstractions. One might give equal effort to understanding them. My method is to wonder how I would feel doing it or having done it. So I have to agree about the all black or all white subjective paintings. I can only think that all white does something for the consciousness of the artist as does all black. It is simplicity to the nth degree at that. , Claire.

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 11:01 pm
Jan I didn't say abstract art was a puzzle. I said it required linkages and recognition elements to make it's message meaningful to second generation observers. In the abstract works you mentioned the linkages are evident and you indicated some of them. Calder and Moore and Stuart Davis, are all good examples of abstractions that are made meaningful to observers through linkages. Some works like the late Davis paintings are not quite as easy to reach as Moore's sculptures but they are reachable. To be successful in the afterworld an abstractionist, and especially an abstract expresionist, must include recognition elements somewhere in the work. It is not necessary that the recognition elements be evident to the unschooled but they must be available to the tutored and insightful observer who can make the work relevant to others. .

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 11:17 pm
So, women have two and we men have one. It's no wonder the men deny women equal opportunity. They have us outnumbered two to one (chromosone).

winsum
April 25, 2005 - 11:22 pm
in an artist life. There are times when they are more or less eclectic as in these images done by JACKSON POLLOCK not at all what I expected since he's known for his thrown and dribbled style, but the are very good and I would have been proud to be able to do that. It's too bad that artists are only valued when they come up with something NEW that no one else has done.

Claire

Jan Sand
April 25, 2005 - 11:35 pm
Justin

There are linkages and linkages. Your direction points to to convention that art should be representative. But abstract expressionist art moves away from representation. No one who admires the pyramids or the obelisks of ancient Egypt (outside, perhaps, of the Freudian) demands that they represent anything but themselves and there is an obvious intrinsic beauty in each of them, as there is in the huge stained glass windows of the medieval churches and stonehenge (aside from its practical astronomic intent) and the Chrysler Building and even to the non-human construction of Niagra Falls and the Grand Canyon.

If you cannot appreciate the non-representative beauty of a rainbow or a flaming sunset or the star pinpoints and the Milky Way there is something basically lacking in your nature. Why should humans like Rothko or Newman or Newman or Tobey or Kline be denied the privilege and the delight of creating visual poetry to stand alone with no reference but their own dynamic internal interactions?

The relatively near future wil hand the fantastic tools of genetic engineering to creative artists and I have no doubts that strange exotic artistic wonders will be produced if we can survive the well intentioned failures.

Justin
April 25, 2005 - 11:54 pm
No Jan. You are reading into the position more than is there and not capturing the message. I am not saying art must be representational. That's silly. What I am saying is that observers must be able to make a meaningful connection with abstractions. Just as they are able to connect with the pyramids or the Washington monument or the Flat Iron building. Sure the work may have a value all it's own. No one has suggested otherwise.

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 12:39 am
Justin

I am therefore curious about what connections you desire.

Bubble
April 26, 2005 - 01:01 am
The joy of peer approval is magic. Comraderie also contains magic. It has the magic of peer acceptance,sharing, and loyalty.

Justin #402 - orthodoxy in Judaism gives exactly that and it is the reason people there are so strongly bonded.

"There was in the Talmud a strong emphasis on ritual. But that was in part the Jew's reaction to the attempts of Church and state to make him abandon his Law. The ritual was a mark of identity, a bond of unity and continuity, a badge of defiance to a never-forgiving world."

This is so correct... I enjoy all the thought provoking posts. Pity it is coming at such a busy time for me.

I posted in "Then and Now" pictures of us during this year Passover ceremonial of reading the Haggadah and breaking the matza together.
Bubble

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 02:58 am
"The Talmud can never be understood except in terms of history, as an organ of survival for a people exiled, destitute, oppressed, and in danger of utter disintegration.

"What the Prophets had done to uphold the Jewish spirit in the Babylonian Captivity, the rabbis did in this wider dispersion. Pride had to be regained, order had to be established, faith and morals maintained, health of body and mind rebuilt after a shattering experience.

"Through this heroic discipline, this rerooting of the uprooted Jew in his own tradition -- stability and unity were restored through continents of wandering and centuries of grief.

"The Talmud, as Heine said, was a portable Fatherland. Wherever Jews were, even as fearful enclaves in alien lands, they could put themselves again into their own world, and live with their Prophets and rabbis, by bathing their minds and hearts in the ocean of the Law. No wonder they loved this book, to us more undulant and divese than a hundred Montaignes.

"They preserved even fragments of it with fierce affection, took their turns in reading snatches of the enormous manuscript, paid great sums, in later centuries, to have it printd in all its fullness, wept when kings and popes and parliaments banned or confiscated or burned it, rejoiced to hear Reuchlin and Erasmus defend it, and made it, even to our own time, the most precious possession of their temples and their homes, the refuge, solace, and prison of the Jewish soul."

Any comments as we leave the Talmud?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 03:06 am
The Medieval Jews

565 - 1300

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 03:15 am
Please note the GREEN quotes in the Heading to see where we are now and where we are going.

"Israel now had a law, but no state. A book, but no home.

"To 614 Jerusalem was a Christian city. Until 629, Persian. Until 637, again Christian. Then, until 1099, a Muslem provincial capital.

"In that year the Crusaders besieged Jerusalem. The Jews joined the Moslems in its defense. When it fell, the surviving Jews were driven into a synagogue and were burned to death.

"A rapid growth of Palestinian Jewry followed the recapture of Jerusalem by Saladin in 1187. Saladin's brother, the Sultan al-Adil, welcomed the 300 rabbis who in 1211 fled from England and France. Fifty-two yers later, however, Nachmanides found there a mere handful of Jews.

"The Holy City had become overwhelmingly Mohammedan."

I have a feeling that as we read this section about the Medieval Jews, that we will better understand the current Palestinian situation.

Robby

winsum
April 26, 2005 - 09:58 am
know enought o enjoy the art discussion so . . open ended since there are words that need to be defined between us as in LINKAGES which don't really belong here. Since I'm the only one who actually produces abstract art I get to choose a position,

Jan's is very close to mine but broader. I"ve been using the computer to make art for years.

Justin is coming in from the sales approach which is something we've discussed when I asked him if he wanted to be my agent. not only is he retired. He doesn't really care for abstraction very much which puts him in a good position to sell.since most people who don't have an art background don't like it either.

. . Chck out my web page . It has examples and "LINKAGE" in that words may help to explain. abstract figures --carried beyond the obvious . . Claire

winsum
April 26, 2005 - 10:17 am
in Palestine: Each side claiming it as a homeland based on it's history. I've only been alive during the last seventy seven years but I remember the use of force by the arabs to take it in 1948? and later in the sixties, each time repelled by the isrealis. who now are supposed to give it up anyway. I can't understand this. What happens to the territory as SPOILS OF WAR especially when it is not the original agressor but is only defending. . . Palistinians have been suffering as a result, but in the end I see them as just POOR LOSERS. . . . Claire

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 10:23 am
This is pretty far afield from Durant, but it seems to me that the characterization of Palestinians as "poor losers" is a rather odd displacement from reality. This is not a game of tennis where the players leap across the net to shake hands and congratulate the winner.

Scrawler
April 26, 2005 - 10:27 am
Justin: You are so right about education.

But you don't have to have a "structured" education to learn. I never went to college, but I read everything I can get my hands on. I was challenged not by teachers in school, but by my parents and especially by my grandfather. We used to have some lively discussions around the dinner table. [This was before TV dinners or for that matter TV.]

At any rate, I used to tell my children that when they graduated from school if they could think for themselves that they would have accomplished something.

winsum
April 26, 2005 - 10:33 am
I went for four and a half years before I dropped out to get married and then again when I could pick courses at the community college as an adult and all I learned was that I still didn't know everything I felt I would like to know except where and how to look for it. College is a good start but if, like scrawler, you have an enquiring mind and the ability to chase down what it asks of you. it's only a beginning and not necessary.

I know so many adults who think they've missed something if they haven't a college education. Is there something mystical about it or is it just a social niceity? . . . . Claire

winsum
April 26, 2005 - 10:44 am
Jan the vernacular has it's uses and when you don't have a good argument in opposition you just pick on the means of expression? . . . . . Claire

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 10:47 am
Evidently the Jewish tradition involved a religious leader to lead the students into the intricacies of doctrine. It seems that Muslims have a similar tradition but the focus of the Muslim and perhaps the Catholic traditions was more in the line of rote memory exercises rather than the tradition of disputation fostered by the Talmudic records of conflicting viewpoints. Nevertheless ceremony in all the religions required precise unvarying language recitation with perhaps not much consideration of the meaning of the words.

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 10:51 am
I respect words. And the horrors that both the Jews and the Palestinians have endured should not be phrased in the puerile language of rather meaningless sport.

winsum
April 26, 2005 - 11:05 am
and I like drama Understatement can be very powerful. . . . Claire

kiwi lady
April 26, 2005 - 12:11 pm
Guys its not a competition!

Carolyn

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 12:28 pm
You tell'em Carolyn. It's a pilpul.

JoanK
April 26, 2005 - 12:29 pm
Education: I was home-schooled. My mother taught me till I was eight, then handed me the books and said " Here, teach yourself". When I finally got to school in High School, it took me until graduate school to realize that you could actually learn in school -- it wasn't just a place that wasted your time so that you didn't have time to read. I now have a PhD but most of what I know I taught myself.

kiwi lady
April 26, 2005 - 12:50 pm
I am also self educated although leaving high school and not going on to University I held many good positions in my working life. I just learnt on the job and my employers recognised my abilities therefore my lack of a college degree never hampered me in anything I wanted to do. I am still learning!

Good on you Joan for attaining your PhD!

Carolyn

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 12:59 pm
I agree. We can not devote much time to an art topic when the things on Durant's table are so tasty.

Claire; All art is an intellectual exercise for me. Sometimes art creates an emotional experience for me but in the main, art is, for me, an intellectual activity. I am particularly fond of Abstract art because it often provides an interesting challenge- one that is not found in more traditional forms.

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 01:57 pm
Bubble: Where is "Then and Now?"

kiwi lady
April 26, 2005 - 02:04 pm
Justin abstract art mostly to me is like a cryptic crossword puzzle!

Carolyn

Éloïse De Pelteau
April 26, 2005 - 02:06 pm
Justin, it's almost midnight in Israel, Go to 'Discussions' click on 'Photos', click on 'Photos Then and Now #101'.

I saw Bubble's photos and they are just lovely. Lovely lady Bubble is.

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 03:58 pm
I can always hold off printing some of Durant's text for a couple of days if other topics seem more interesting.

Robby

kiwi lady
April 26, 2005 - 04:03 pm
No Robbie go ahead we are just getting side tracked as we do from time to time!

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 05:10 pm
I have just had a nice 20-minute chat with Mal. Dorian has already brought everyone up to date on the medical info. Mal sounds very upbeat. We did a lot of laughing together. I told her that they were going to make a new person of her so that all the "nastiness" would be gone when she returns and she will be so sweet that we won't be able to stand her.

She doesn't watch TV and has no computer available and I asked her what she does during the day. She said she reads whatever magazines are available and lies there and thinks. She said that Dorian brought in her wheelchair and has taken her for a "walk" outside three times today. How's that for a loving daughter?

Mal says that she most definitely is going to recover nicely because we still have seven volumes to go. In fact, she is already thinking about how we can go past where Durant ended up. Now I call that "thinking." I told her that I was still struggling to keep everyone on topic and she sympathized with me.

If I don't call her again before her operation on Friday, I will call her perhaps on Sunday so that she will have time to recuperate after the operation.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 26, 2005 - 05:23 pm
"Despite conversions and occasional persecutions, Jews remained numerous in Moslem Syria, Babylonia (Iraq), and Persia, and developed a vigorous economic and cultural life.

"In their internal affairs they continued, as under the Sasanian kings, to enjoy self-government under their exilarch and the directors of their rabbinical academics. The exilarch was accepted by the caliphs as the head of all the Jews in Babylonia, Armenia, Turkestan, Persia, and Yemen. According to Benjamin of Tudela all subjects of the caliphs were required 'to rise in the presence of the Prince of the Captivity and to salute him respectfully.'

"The office of exilarch was hereditary in one family, which traced its lineage to David. It was a political rather than a spiritual power. Its efforts to control the rabbinate led to its decline and fall. After 762 the directors of the academics elected and dominated the exilarch.

"The rabbinical colleges at Sura and Pumbeditha provided religious and intellectual leadership for the Jews of Islam and in less degree for those of Christendom.

"In 659 the Caliph Ali freed the academy of Sura from the jurisdiction of the exilarch. Thereupon its head, Mar-Isaac, took the title Gaon, or Excellency and inaugurated the Gaonate, the epoch of the Geonim in Babylonian religion and scholarship. As the college of Pumbeditha rose in revenues and dignity from its proximity to Baghdad, its directors also assumed the title of Gaon.

"From the seventh to the elevanth century, questions in Talmudic law were addressed to these Geonim from all the Jewish world.

"Their responsa created a new legal literature for Judaism."

Robby

Fifi le Beau
April 26, 2005 - 07:43 pm
Robby, please give best wishes to Mal and let her know she is missed in SOC.

Bubble, enjoyed the pictures of your handsome family. You served my favorite dessert. It looked yummy.

Fifi

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 10:48 pm
Robby: Forgive me this one little deviation from topic.I don't remember how we got into it but if it doesn't end here we'll take it offline.

Jan: I should point out that I am concerned here only with new works. Connection, at the very least, may be established by the artist in the selection of a title or/and in a catalogue blurb that points the way from the artists point of view.

Abstract works are of two types. One type abstracts from an object or an idea. In this type an object antecedent exists that is identifiable. The artist can describe the antecedent.

The second type of abstract work has no antecedent and it is often referred to as non objective art. The observer must be able to make a connection on his own for the artist can do little more than create relevance through title. But if the artist does employ a relevant title he is then pushing the viewer in a given direction which may not be desirable because it tends to limit the range of the viewing experience.

Why do this at all? Why try to make connection with a viewer? Well, if the viewer in unable to make a connection, he is less likely to buy the work. If that happens, the artist papers his walls with his paintings and sells very few. More importantly, he goes hungry. Some artists prefer to do that.

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 10:59 pm
Bubble: Thank you for letting us visit your seder in your home. I take it the Egyptian story is in the Hagadah. I mentioned the two drops of vanilla for the fruit salad to my wife who promises to try it on our next fresh bowl of fruits.

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 11:25 pm
Justin

I understand your proclivity to share with the artist his/her point of inspiration or departure but perhaps it might be informative to get my feeling.

The point of a painting like, say, Picasso's Guernica, is not only useful but definitive in reference to the Spanish war. But Bridget Reilly's eye twisters or the visual dances of much of Vasarely's work do not need the artist's words to supplement the enjoyment. It is much like music which is not required to place in any context on the piece to enhance the enjoyment and perhaps might be annoying in that each individual observer could supply a personal and more cogent reference for which the experience gives new insight in a very personal way. In the same way, Escher's works visually supply sufficient context as to make words superfluous. To label his works as representative puts a new twist on the term.

I am speaking of this matter from the point of the artist and the viewer. Although, from a practical point of view, the economics of art may be vital for survival it is totally irrelevant to aesthetics and frankly intrusive and annoying. Van Gogh sold, I have heard, none of his paintings during his lifetime and the economic appreciation of his output today does not influence its importance as art one way or the other.

I have painted, sculpted, made jewelry, written poetry all of my life without economic considerations and enjoyed the delights of doing so without the thoughts of monetarily enriching either myself or an agent or adding goods to what seems to me a profitable but insane aspect of the market place. The point of art has nothing to do with money.

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 11:31 pm
A millennium, a thousand years after the Babylonian captiviy began the Jews are still in Babylon and in Persia, Turkestan, and Armenia with their own government and ruled by a hereditary figure called "The Prince of the Captivity". Because the Temple has been destroyed, these people are now not only, self ruling captives but also members of the Diaspora.

They are so powerful in the Jewish world that questions about the Talmud are referred to the Rabbinical college at Sura. They develop a separate Talmud from that developed at Jerusalem. Apparently they were not as anxious to leave Babylon as they were to leave Egypt. I wonder what was different about the Babylonian captivity.

Justin
April 26, 2005 - 11:36 pm
Jan, I understand all that and am happy that you have been able to function in art without the need for money. Others have not been so lucky.

Jan Sand
April 26, 2005 - 11:51 pm
One(hopefully last) comment. Where money influences the relationship of art and the artist the result almost always is detrimental to the art and,hopefully, to the money. Norman Rockwell's career is an anomaly.

Bubble
April 27, 2005 - 01:17 am
Jan - "I have painted, sculpted, made jewelry, all of my life" as well as many other crafts. I didn't want to disgress here. Robby has more absorbing topics for us in this discussion, lets follow that!

Gaon-Gaonim is used in daily language to refer to a Genius, to a very intellectually capable person.

About Babylon:

http://www.phillippe.net/riley/Devotionals/psalms_137.htm

robert b. iadeluca
April 27, 2005 - 01:43 am
We entered the topic of The Medieval Jews at Post 422. There has been discussion about art and education since then but practially nothing about the Medieval Jew. I recognize your deeper interest in those two topics and so will hold off further printing of Durant's text until I hear reaction to Posts 423 and 444 which contain much about that era.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 27, 2005 - 03:39 am
Bubble

I agree in general that we must stick to the main topic at hand but I would rather not be dictated to as to what is absorbing and what is not. There have been several participants in the art discussion. Is there any cogent reason I have been singled out?

robert b. iadeluca
April 27, 2005 - 03:53 am
Jan:-I don't recall singling you out or dictating to anybody. As a matter of fact, I recognized a deeper interest in that topic.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 27, 2005 - 04:04 am
Since an interest was expressed in the city of Jerusalem in Post 422 it appears to me that the city was prized by all three religions that declared themselves proponents of peace and compassion and the history of the place amply demonstrates how deeply they believe in these principles.

kidsal
April 27, 2005 - 04:15 am
Judaism 101 -- An interesting site: http://www.jewfaq.org/toc.htm Has been a lot in the news about some celebrities (Madonna) embracing Kabbalah. On this website it states that usually this mysticism isn't taught to anyone unless over 40 years of age because it might be misinterpreted.

Fifi le Beau
April 27, 2005 - 01:43 pm
A small band of nomads walked out of Ur in what was then Mesopotamia, and is now present day Iraq. They eventually come to a land called Palestine. They invaded the land and overtook the inhabitants and formed their own government and laws based on their tribal god.

They were eventually driven out and wound up back in Mesopotamia, in the Babylonian exile. They return to Palestine. and now we find them driven out again, but still living close by their former homeland. As Durant tells us they flourished there, living under their own laws, and why not this was their first recorded homeland.

On a map with a mileage legend, it looks like about five hundred miles from Jerusalem to Mesopotamia as the crow flies. Syria was right next door, and many Jews we are told are living there. We know there were Jews in Arabia, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and other countries bordering them during this time.

The Jews react to exile as if they are the only people in the world who have ever been evicted. Palestine was not their home of origin so they themselves had exiled others to claim it.

Anyone who has studied history, and all those who have read along with this Durant series know that people, tribes, villages, cities, and entire countries were invaded, put to the sword, driven out of their homelands, or incorporated into the invading armies laws, rules, regulations, forced slavery, forced concubinage, that eliminated or changed entire populations forever.

Nowhere in the world was there protection from foreign strange looking men who probably didn't speak your language or have your customs, invading your territory. If you survived, you either adapted or were wiped out. Many ran away to other lands seeking protection, all exiles.

No one was immune to this chaos, my own family history is one of exile. My ancestors escaped from France, but many thousands died, all in the name of religion. The ancestors adapted, eventually dropping the religion, their mother tongue, intermarried with the French, Dutch, English, Scots, and Irish in their new homeland, and became who we are today.

The original ancestor sailed under the French, British, Dutch, and American flag within his lifetime, and over the four hundred years we are still thousands of miles from our home of origin. They helped build a new homeland of government and laws, that excluded Kings and Queens and governments controlled by religion.

The world is still in chaos, and people are still being driven from their homes into strange territory where they are generally unwanted, and killed at random. Darfar is an example in the twenty first century. We who post here feel more secure, but with the record of the past nearby, who knows when security will end, and chaos begin.

Fifi

robert b. iadeluca
April 27, 2005 - 05:20 pm
"The rise of the Geonim coincided with -- perhaps in some measure it was necessitated by -- a heresy that now shook and divided Oriental Jewry.

"In 762, when the Exilarch Solomon died, his nephew Anan ben David stood in line for the succession. But the heads of Sura and Pumbeditha, discarding the hereditary principle, installed as exilarch Anan's younger brother Chananya.

"Anan denounced the two Geonim, fled to Palestine, established his own synagogue, and called upon Jews everywhere to reject the Talmud and obey only the law of the Pentateuch.

"This was a return to the position of the Sadducees. It corresponded to the repudiation of the 'tradition' and exaltation of the Koran by the Shia sect in Islam and to the Protestant abandonment of Catholic traditions for a return to the Gospels.

"Anan went further and re-examined the Pentateuch in a commentary that marked a bold advance in the critical study of the Biblical text. He protested against the changes that the Talmudic rabbis had made in the Mosaic Law by their adaptive interpretations and insisted on the strict fulfillment of the Pentateuch decrees. Hence his followers received the name of Qaraites -- 'adherents of the text.'

"Anan praised Jesus as a holy man who had wished to set aside not the written Law of Moses but only the oral Law of the scribews and the Pharisees. Jesus, in Anan's view, had aimed not to found a news religion but to cleanse and strengthen Judaism. The Qaraites became numerous in Palestine, Egypt, and Spain. They declined in the twelfth century and only a vanishing remnant survives in Turkey, South Russia, and Arabia.

"Qaraites of the ninth century presumably influenced by the Mutazilites of Islam, abandoned Anan's principle of literal interpretation and proposed that the resurrention of the body, and certin physical descriptions of God in the Bible, should be tken wiht a metaphorical grain of salt.

"The orthodox 'Rabbanite' Jews, reverting to literalism in their turn, insisted, like the orthodox Moslems, that phrases like 'God's hand' or 'God sitting down' were to be taken literally. Some expositors calculated the precise measurements of God's body, members, and beard. A few Jewish freethinkers, like Chivi al-Balehi, rejected even the Pentateuch as a binding law.

"It was in this environment of economic prosperity, religious freedom, and lively debate that Judaism produced its first famous medieval philosopher."

Robby

hegeso
April 27, 2005 - 05:21 pm
Sorry for disturbing the flow of discussions, but I would like to return to Jan Sands's #409. He wrote, "it is not the business of traditional art (.....) to create actual reality.

But actual reality doesn't have to be created. It is there for us to be seen and experienced. But are we doing that? I don't think so. It is the role of the artist to show us what he thinks has to be experienced. Just think about god's index finger approaching the lifeless hand of Adam. It is not 'reality'. It is more than that.

robert b. iadeluca
April 27, 2005 - 05:41 pm
Any reactions to Post 459 as we continue to examine the Medieval Jew?

Robby

kiwi lady
April 27, 2005 - 07:31 pm
Post 459

All I can say Robbie is that is riveting stuff! It really is all in interpretation and who is to say who is right? All of this information we are given by Durant is very very interesting.

Carolyn

Jan Sand
April 27, 2005 - 08:39 pm
The art discussion is obviously unwelcome at this site. If you wish to discuss it with me my e-mail address is jan_sand@hotmail.com.

Fifi le Beau
April 27, 2005 - 08:56 pm
As soon as the Jews get their laws from the tribal God, written in stone no less, the tribe are picking away at it with a chisel. I find this latest writing by Durant entirely amusing, and so human that you would think we are discussing a political association instead of Holy Writ.

Durant writes.....

The Qaraites became numerous in Palestine, Egypt, and Spain. They declined in the twelfth century and only a vanishing remnant survives in Turkey, South Russia, and Arabia.

They have only recently been exiled, and now we find them back in Palestine founding synagogues, and recruiting members. Why would they go back to the dreaded Egypt? Or more likely never left, at least a portion stayed or came back. But, Arabia? Durant worked on this book in the Forties, and perhaps there were still Jews there at that time.

certain physical descriptions of God in the Bible, should be taken with a metaphorical grain of salt.

Please pass the 'white out'.

'God's hand' or 'God sitting down' were to be taken literally. Some expositors calculated the precise measurements of God's body, members, and beard.

Recently there was an attempt to get a realistic portrait of Jesus, instead of the auburn haired, fair skinned, slim faced portrait that graces many churches and cathedrals. The picture shown on television looked like a young Saddam Hussein with a beard, and the one in the news magazine looked so similar to Osama bin Laden, I thought it was him when I first saw it. Jesus would of course look more like his countrymen than John Smith.

I wrote an article titled, "Jesus was an Iraqi" in the run up to our war with Iraq, and my family feared for my safety. I do live in the middle of the Bible belt, and they take their interpretations literally, like the Qaraite Jews.

Fifi

Justin
April 27, 2005 - 08:58 pm
We tend to look upon the Jews and their captivity by the Babylonians as an event peculiar to the Jews.but as Fifi points out so well, it was all just part of an on going process.The Jews came out of Ur in present day Irag, invaded Canaan and pushed out the Canaanites. The Jews in turn were pushed out by the Egyptians and the Babylonians. The Persians in turn pushed out the Egyptians and Babylonians.

The Jews remember their exile because they included it in their scriptures and because they set aside a day of remembrance,the story survived. I think they and we should set aside a day to remember the Holocaust. It is not an event civilized people should forget. If the Haganah is still being written this story should be written indelibly.

Sunknow
April 27, 2005 - 09:03 pm
Fifi - A delightful post. And very reasonable, too.

I agree, you do live dangerously, living in the Bible belt, but I'd love to read that article.

Sun

Justin
April 27, 2005 - 09:18 pm
Jan: You are right. An art discussion in the middle of a discussion about the Jews is not good form. Let me give you a parting comment to take with you.

Norman Rockwell is not an exception. He is the rule. Beginning in the days when an artist cut bison forms into the Lascaux caves, and when an artist was hired to paint the pornography at Herculaneum artists sold their brushes for money. All those painters who came between were crass guys who liked to eat and were proud to work for money. Start with Cimabue and Giotto who sold their artistic souls to the Franciscans. Michelangelo,. Titian , and Bernini are all brothers to Rockwell. These crass guys are etc , etc , etc. Money made it possible for us to have a rich art history.

Jan Sand
April 27, 2005 - 09:27 pm
Damnit, write to me at my e-mail address. That some artists made a living at their work is no indication that they were spurred by money to create their capabilities and their successes. Many people are spurred by money to create artistic garbage.

Justin
April 27, 2005 - 09:42 pm
And so we come to Maimonides- the Spanish rationalist. The movement away from the Talmud and the interpretations of the rabbis to the basic format of the Pentateuch is reminiscent of todays fundementalists who have moved away from the gospels of the Roman church and the rituals of mainstream protestantism to the King James Version of the Bible. Nevermind the history of that document. It is basic in the evangelical mind. While fundementalism is a constricting doctrine, the rationalist movement of Maimonides was a liberalizing proposal.

Justin
April 27, 2005 - 10:18 pm
It is clear, I think, that Anan's thoughts about Jesus were close to the mark. He did uphold the Law and he did encourage his desciples to do so. Jesus took issue with scribes and Pharisees early while engaged in pilpul probably about the time of his Bar Mitzvah or shortly afterward. Jesus was cerainly not interested in forming a new religion. He was a Jew till his death. Reform may have been in his mind but certainly not something new.

Even after his death, the Jerusalem group headed by James closely adhered to the Law. The battles they had with Paul were over Paul's desire to break the Law-to eat with gentiles, to solicit their conversion to Judaism without circumcision etc. Just imagine where Christianity would be without Paul. It would be a Jewish sect and it's members would be attending Synagogue.

winsum
April 27, 2005 - 10:41 pm
popping back and forth between a worn out art discussion and a worn out religious one. At least the second is new to me whereas I'm really tired of the art issue having gone over it many times with these participants. Yes, Jesus was a mediterranian racial type for sure. . . . .most Jews still are. or is this an issue. I know that dating practises for us valued blonde men with blue eyes over our usual dark compadres. . . Now why is that ?. . . . Claire

kiwi lady
April 27, 2005 - 10:45 pm
I have always liked men with dark hair and blue eyes. Never been attracted to a blonde man! Now I am a blonde. (You probably picked that up by now. Duuuuh!) I don't think one can generalise. I have however always visualised Jesus as having a tanned skin, brown eyes and dark hair.

Carolyn

Bubble
April 28, 2005 - 12:19 am
Today I learned what exactly characterised the Qaraites. I had heard about them but never in such precise terms, and I thought them a quaint unimportant sect. I mostly mixed them with Samaritans I suppose.

http://www.the-samaritans.com/

http://www.karaite-korner.org/

Justin - Post 465.
But we do have a special yearly Holocaust Day: Yom ha-shoa. This year we'll celebrate it from sundown on May 4th, on the 26 of the Nissan month. The date is exactly one week before Independence day.

We see many blonds with blue eyes here, among the Arab population and they show a slightly different bone structure too. It is said to have been introduced in the genes at crusades time. Among Israeli there are quite a few with flaming red hair, apart from the typical dark heads. It is said that Kind David was red haired. Bubble

3kings
April 28, 2005 - 02:26 am
Justin remarks, "Just imagine where Christianity would be without Paul."

I think, without Paul, Christianity would be just that; Christianity. With Paul, what we have got is "Churchianity".

I am all for the former, even if it had retained close association with the Jews. I wish we could rid the Christian philosophy of Paul's influence, for he had but a flawed understanding of Christ's teaching. Maybe Peter had a better grasp of the Christian teachings. Pity he didn't have the charisma or the literary skills of Paul. +++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
April 28, 2005 - 03:19 am
"Saadia ben Joseph al-Fayyumi was born at Dilaz, a village of the Faiyum in 892.

"He grew up in Egypt and married there. In 915 he migrated to Palestine, then to Babylonia. He must have been an apt student and sound teacher for at the youthful age of thirty-six he was made Gaon or director of the college at Sura.

"Perceiving the inroads that Qaraism and skepticism had made upon orthodox Judaism, he set himself the same task that the mutakal-limun had undertaken in Islam -- to demonsrate the full accord of the traditional faith with reason and history. In his brief life of fifty years Saadia produced -- mostly in Arabic -- a mass of writings rivaled only by those of Maimonides in the record of medieval Jewish thought.

"His Agron, an Aramaic dictionary of Hebrew, founded Hebrew philology. His Kitab al-Lugah, or Book of Language, is the oldest known grammar of the Hebrew tongue.

"His arabic translation of the Old Testament remained to our time the version used by Arabic-speaking Jews. His several commentaries on books of the Bible rank him as 'perhaps the greatest Bible commentator of all time.'

"His Kitab al-Amanat, or Book of Philosophical Doctrines and Beliefs (933), is the Summa contra Gentiles of Jewish theology."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 28, 2005 - 03:26 am
Here is a detailed bio of SAADIA from the Jewish Encyclopaedia.

Robby

Scrawler
April 28, 2005 - 09:53 am
My Greek, Irish, and French ancestors all came as exiles to the United States. All came with little but the clothing on their backs and yet they all made a life for themselves. One might say that the United States was formed by those who were exiled from their own country. Whenever I get frustrated with my life, I remember those in my family that have gone before me that struggled to give me what I have today and I'm grateful.

winsum
April 28, 2005 - 10:35 am
If my German Jewish ancestors hadn't come here in the 1870's I"d be dead or never would have been born at all. The US has been kind to me whatever it's flaws and warts. I"d rather be here than anywhere else. Claire

Justin
April 28, 2005 - 02:09 pm
Joseph B. Saandiah is a new name to me. He apparently had ideas in the tenth century that are well worth exploring. The works of Maimonides have always been the dominant source of Jewish philosophy in in this period for me and I am happy to find a worth while predecessor to Maimonides. Unfortunately, all the bibliography I saw appeared to be in German. That's a language I have not studied. I can remember high school teachers telling me, "take German, you'll need it." No. I was too smart for that. I studied French and have never been able to do any more than read,and write in that language with competence.

winsum
April 28, 2005 - 02:21 pm
we here in US don't have much use for foreign languages in our daily lives although recently I've had Polish immigrants working for me and their English isn't wonderful. Maybe instead of Latin and Spanish I should have taken Polish and German Although I can sing in German and French and even Greek because of the folk song connection, I can't speak or understand them.

. German, like Latin has declensions and is more difficult than Spanish which I can use if necessary with the help of a dictionary.

I had a partner who was Mexican-Greek and we entertained at kids parties.. I found that singing in Spanish gave me a perfect accent because of the linkages. She grew up in los angeles as did I , but Spanish speaking people thought we could speak in the language because of the singing technique. I found I could adapt very quickly when needed but no tengo bastante palabras for ordinary conversation. I don't have enough vocabulary.

My attempts at doing so have brought helpful smiles from the Mexican workers here in California. We help each other and with sign language manage. . . . Claire

3kings
April 28, 2005 - 03:30 pm
Writing of Saadia ben Joseph al-Fayyumi, DURANT says "He must have been an apt student and sound teacher for at the youthful age of thirty-six he was made Gaon or director of the college at Sura."

This shows how historians' view of life in earlier times may be twisted by their present day experience. Today 36 is "young", certainly. But in those times average life spans were perhaps 40 to 50 years, so to be 36 would have classed one as a member of "the older generation". ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
April 28, 2005 - 04:36 pm
That's a good point, Trevor. Not only was Durant apparently looking at it through his "modern" lense but we, also, need to recognize our own point of view as we examine medieval times.

Robby

Justin
April 28, 2005 - 07:10 pm
I agree, Trevor. When we look through 20th century lenses at 10th century people we must make allowances for 10th century conditions. Differences due to age and health are only one example of the historian's problem. The economy was largely agrarian. Forests were rapidly disappearing to make room for farming. Durant, living in the city, as he did, probably felt a little uncertain about that kind of life.

robert b. iadeluca
April 29, 2005 - 03:36 am
"Saadia accepts both revelation and tradition, the written and the oral Law.

"But he also accepts reason and proposes to prove by reason the truth of revelation and tradition. Wherever the Bible clearly contradicts reason, we may assume that the passage is not meant to be taken literally by adult minds. Anthropomorphic descriptions of the deity are to be understood metaphorically. God is not like a man.

"The order and law of the world indicate an intelligent creator. It is unreasonable to suppose that an intelligent God would fail to reward virtue but obviously virtue is not always rewarded in this life. Consequently there must be another life which will redeem the apparent injustice of this one.

"Perhaps the sufferings of the virtuous here are punishments for their occasional sins so that they may enter paradise at once when they die. The earthly trimphs of the wicked are rewards for their incidental virtues, so . . . But even those who achive the highest virtue, prosperity, and happiness on earth feel in their hearts that there is a better state than this one of indefinite possibilities and limited fulfillments.

"And how could a God intelligent enough to create so marvelous a world allow such hopes to form in the soul if they were never to be reaalized? Saadia took a leaf or two from Moslem theologians and followed their methods of exposition, even, now and then, the details of their argument.

"In turn his work permeated the Jewish world and influenced Maimonides Said ben Maimon:-'Were it not for Saadia the Torah would almost hve disappeared.''

Saadia asks the same questions we have been asking here.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 29, 2005 - 03:50 am
Perhaps He has a different standard.

Sunknow
April 29, 2005 - 09:54 am
...""Perhaps the sufferings of the virtuous here are punishments for their occasional sins....." Perhaps. Like "bad things happen to good people", it is the same rationalization that we use today.

We expect there to be a reason for everything.

Sun

Jan Sand
April 29, 2005 - 10:10 am
If you assume that the universe was constructed by an intelligent being with a set of declared values and the values are violated by events, you have a problem.

winsum
April 29, 2005 - 10:47 am
someone with an open line to him/her. Tell god to use something other than arthritis and heart failure. it gets boring after a while. loses it's impact. and thunderbolts don't scare me either. zeus likes those. but he's got no imagination. . . . Claire

Sunknow
April 29, 2005 - 11:11 am
Jan

The only thing I assume is that you make entirely too many assumptions. That's your problem.

Sun

Jan Sand
April 29, 2005 - 11:52 am
I said "If you assume..." The rest is mere logic.

winsum
April 29, 2005 - 12:07 pm
we are discussing the vagaries of logic? this place is so rich. . . . claire

robert b. iadeluca
April 29, 2005 - 01:05 pm
What is logical for one person is not necessarily the logic of another. In this discussion, as has been indicated for the past 3 1/2 years, we address issues, not personalities. And of course we respect the beliefs of others. From time to time, I re-post the following post which is always presented as each volume is begun.

"Quoting Durant:-"The preponderant bequest of the Age of Faith was religion."

"For this reason, it will be impossible to participate in this forum without discussing "religion" from time to time.

"The following guidelines will be enforced by the Discussion Leader to avoid confrontations and digressions about personal religious views.

"1 - You may make one post describing your own beliefs related to religion (whether you have a religious faith or do not) in order to explain your viewpoint toward the topic at hand. Making additional posts about your religious beliefs or faith is not permitted.
2 - Do not speak of your religion or absence of religious beliefs as "the truth."
3 - Do not attempt to change another's conviction about religion. "Comments about issues are welcomed. Negative comments about other participants are not permitted.

"Those participants who do not believe they are being treated fairly in this respect always have the right to contact Marcie, Director of Education. I will follow her guidance."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 29, 2005 - 01:16 pm
"It must be admitted that Saaadia was a man of some acerbity and that his quarrel with the Exilarch David ben Zakkai injured Babylonia Jewry.

"In 930 David excommunicated Saadia and Saadia excommunited David.

"In 940 David died and Saadia appointed a new exilarch. But this appointee was assassinated by Moslems on the ground that he had disparaged Mohammed. Saadia appointed the victim's son to succeed him whereupon this youth also was slain.

"The discouraged Jews decided to leave the office unfilled. In 942 the Babylonian exilarchate closed its career of seven centuries. In that year Saadia died. The disintegration of the Baghdad caliphate, the establishment of Egypt, North Africa, and Spain as independent Moslem states, weakened the bonds between Asiatic, African, and European Jewry.

"The Babylonian Jews shared in the economic decline of Eastern Islam after the tenth century. The college of Sura closed its doors in 1934, that of Puymbeditha four years later. In 1040 the Gaonate came to an end.

"The Crusades further isolated the Babylonian from the Egyptian and European Jews. After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1258 the Babylonian Jewish community almost disappeared from history."

Any comments about the diaspora?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
April 29, 2005 - 01:18 pm
I am now leaving for a week-end seminar and will be back Sunday afternoon.

Robby

Jan Sand
April 29, 2005 - 01:34 pm
Is that date correct?

winsum
April 29, 2005 - 01:51 pm
I saw that too the 1934. I think it's a grammatical thing . . . read it again and see.

The college of Sura closed its doors in 1934, that of Puymbeditha four years later. In 1040 the Gaonate came to an end.

Nope it looks more like a typo -- so fire the typist. . . (G)

Claire

winsum
April 29, 2005 - 01:59 pm
must leave logic at the door since it has nothing to do with it. but is there in these eleven volumes an AGE OF REASON? . . . . Claire

Bubble
April 29, 2005 - 02:00 pm
1034

Persian
April 29, 2005 - 03:19 pm
BUBBLE - by the time you reach North Carolina this summer, the melons in our garden will be ready for the recipe you served for the Seder table!

3kings
April 29, 2005 - 04:39 pm
CLAIRE As you probably know, there is a volume of Durant's entitled "The Age of Reason Begins," which would seem to indicate that to Durant, folk like us here, are now living in such an age. (BG)++ Trevor

Jan Sand
April 29, 2005 - 08:03 pm
3kings

Now, now. Let's be reasonable.

winsum
April 29, 2005 - 11:04 pm
nope I didn't know about that but it's nice that it's there. and on the agenda, not too soon for me . . . . Claire

Scrawler
April 30, 2005 - 11:12 am
This may be off the beaten path, but since we are close to the Crusades I have a question about the latest Crusade movie: "The Kingdom of Heaven". In the previews they keep saying that one man united a kingdom to fight for those behind the walls. Anyone know who that one man was? I want to say Richard the Lion-hearted, but I'm not sure that is correct. Any ideas?

Justin
April 30, 2005 - 12:39 pm
Scrawler: There were eight Crusades between 1099 and 1270. The Third Crusade was the one in which Richard uncomfortably allied with Phillip of France engaged Saladin. Saladin retook Jerusalem and captured Richard who was held for ransom for two years.

The first Crusade in 1099 was instituted by Pope Urban ll in response to el Hakim's destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. By 1099 when the Crusade got underway el Hakim was dead and the Chruch rebuilt. The need had disappeared but there was no stopping Baldwin and Godfrey who had mounted an army and was moving. They took Antioch and Tyre and Jerusalem killing every living thing in all places. Jerusalem was Latinized until Saladin retook the place and captured Richard.

There was a precursor to the Crusades in 1096 when Peter the Hermit with 12,000 men, women, and children reached Asia Minor. They were annihilated.

The only one I can think of who united a Kingdom and defended successfully against invaders was Saladin. But who knows what Hollywood has done with the history of the Crusades.

Justin
April 30, 2005 - 01:32 pm
Scrawler: In the Third Crusade, the people inside the walls were Latins. They were successfully seiged by Saladin. Richard and Phillip came to the rescue and failed with Richard captured at Acre. Maybe if I read the Hollywood blurb.....

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 09:08 am
The European Communities

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 09:21 am
"Jews made their way into medieval Russia from Babylonia and Persia through Transoxiana and the Caucasus, and up the Black Sea coast from Asia Minor through Constantinople.

"In that capital, and in the Byzantine realm, the Jews enjoyed a harassed prosperity from the eighth to the twelfth century. Greece had several substantial Jewish communities, notably at Thebes, where their silk manufactures earned high repute.

"Up through Thessaly, Thrace, and Macedonia the Jews migrated into the Balkans, and followed the Danube into Hungary.

"A handful of Hebrew merchants came to Poland from Germany in the tenth century. Jews had been in Germany since pre-Christian times.

"In the ninth century there were considerable Jewish settlements at Metz, Speyer, Mainz, Worms, Strasbourg, Frankfort, and Cologne. These groups were too busy and mobile with commerce to contribute much to cultural history.

"However, Gershom ben Jehuda (960-1028) founded a rabbinical academy at Mainz, wrote a Hebrew commentary on the Talmud, and acquired such authority that German Jewry addressed to him, rather than to the Geonim of Babylonia, their questions on Talmudic law."

I have to keep reminding myself that Durant talks in terms of centuries. When he uses a phrase - "Jews made their way" -- I visualize a long stream of Jews wearing back sacks slowly trodding across the land but must force myself to accept that he is talking of Jews settling down, marrying, having children, having grandchildren, and perhaps their grandchildren moving onward toward who knows where.

Perhaps there are participants here who can relate to ancestors pictured in this section.

Robby

Bubble
May 1, 2005 - 10:04 am
My husband ancestors ( and my father's too) from their name were probably from Salonica, whose official name is now Thessalonike. In ancient times ir was Therma, a seaport in south-central Macedonia, in NE Greece, on the Gulf of Salonika. They considered themselves Turkish Jews but that is because Greece was part of the great Ottoman Empire.

It is with good reason that the Jews acquired the surname of "Juifs errants", they moved onward frequently because of circumstances. I am always in awe when I hear from people that their family has lived in the same place for centuries without venturing elsewhere.

winsum
May 1, 2005 - 10:56 am
Jews in my family were from Germany except that my mother mentioned Checkoslovakia as a possible ancestral home as well and Russian Jews escaping the pogroms, went through Poland to Germany. according to Durant, German Jews predated Christianity. so where do I fit in. . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 07:15 pm
Here is a history of the JEWS IN GERMANY.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 07:19 pm
History of the JEWS IN POLAND.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 07:23 pm
History of the JEWS IN RUSSIA.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 07:26 pm
History of the JEWS IN HUNGARY.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 1, 2005 - 07:32 pm
History of JEWS IN TURKEY.

Robby

JoanK
May 1, 2005 - 08:56 pm
I've just started to go through the fascinating histories given here. It will take me awhile.

My husband's mother cane from Brest-Litovsk in the early 1900s. As the history of Jews in Poland notes, this was near the Polish-Russian border, and was sometimes in Poland, sometimes in Russia, depending on which army had come through last. (When in Russia, it was called Brest).

Under Hitler, the Jews of Brest-Litovsk were required to register. These records survive and are on the web. I was able to trace some relatives of Dick's. There is no reason to think any of them survived.

Justin
May 1, 2005 - 10:10 pm
The damage inflicted upon the Jews throughout history is very much the result of religion and it's customs. Judaic religious practice encouraged the isolation of the Jews from the rest of society. They saw themselves as separate from the rest of society and the rest of society saw them as separate and unique.

Christianity blamed the Jews for the torture and death of it's Savior. Punishing the Jews was easy. They were readily recognizable and clustered in their owm communities.

Jealousy may have contributed a little to the problem. When Jews were successful they tended to be blatantly successful. But that's a minor contributor to the problem. The real source of the problem is religion- both Judaic and Christian.

Today we recognize that the outstanding evil of our lifetimes was the Holocaust- an evil with a religious source and a silent religious hierarchy to condone the process.

When religious advocates are taught that their belief in God is a belief in the right God the dictum to "love thy neighbor as thyself" is an impossible charge. The belief and the dictum are not to be taken lightly. One can see both elements clearly and with great emotion on the faces of those in the Vatican Piazza during the recent funeral, election, and succession ceremonies.

winsum
May 1, 2005 - 10:14 pm
these histories are incredible. I just finished the German one, mine. My father's mother was fifteen when she and her husband left Germany in 1873 for the USA. That was a year of finanacial hardship and may have been the reason for their emigration. Now to catchup on the Jews in the other countries. . . . Claire

Justin
May 1, 2005 - 10:20 pm
The arrogance of the religious clerical types may be seen in the comments one recently made after being convicted of child abuse and sentenced to jail for his crimes. The priest said, "I forgive those who betrayed my trust in them" He expected the kids to keep their mouths shut but since they did not he was willing to fogive them for betraying him.Nothing was said about the damage inflicted on the kids or their parents.

Is this practice uncommon. Not at all. Cardinal Law and his honorable treatment at the recent funeral is another example of arrogance.

winsum
May 1, 2005 - 10:21 pm
separate from the rest of society? happened after they were treated as separate and unique and their civil and legal identities separated as well as the religious ones. It wasn't a matter of choice in t he beginning . . . read the link on German Jews. . and eventually became one of survival. That concept has contributed to antisemitism ever since . . . . claire

Justin
May 1, 2005 - 11:21 pm
Claire: I don't think so. In the very beginning and consistently so throughout history Jews adopted their own separate Laws- The Mosaic Laws expressed in Genesis, Leviticus, etc. They gave themselves a separate identity which they encouraged. Durant has leaned heavily on this question of separateness caused by religious practices as part of the problem.

The same is true for Catholics but that group was the rest of society until the Reformation when it's separateness became identifiable.

The Huguenots of France gave themselves a separate identity. The American evangelicals are in the process of giving themselves a separate identity. It is that separateness that causes one to focus on them as a unit.

I think you are right. That concept has contributed to anti-semitism. It has also contributed to anti-Catholicism and anti-Fundementalism. But separateness in and of itself is not damaging it merely allows society to focus on one as part of a group with distinct characteristics. The separateness of the Jews made them identifiable and accessible but not guilty of self-destruction. That is a cross that Christianity must bear.

Clustering in ghettos is something else. People with similar interests tend to cluster but I don't think the Jews would have clustered as much as they did without external forces driving them to it.Rich and poor would have sought different housing solutions.

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 03:26 am
Here is a link to ANTISEMITISM with many related links.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 03:35 am
"There were Jews in England in 691.

"Many more came in with William the Conqueror and were at first protected by the Norman rulers as providers of capital and collectors of revenue. Their communities in London, Norwich, York, and other English centers were outside the jurisdiction of the local authorities and were subject only to the king.

"This legal isolation widened the barrier between Christian and Jew and played a part in the pogroms of the twelfth century."

Again, separation seems to play a part in anti-semitism even when the separation is done in the name of protection. Hence that common barb:-"What makes you so different?"

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 03:42 am
We all remember the date 1066 from our high school days as the date of the Battle of Hastings. Was anyone taught that this was the date that Jews entered England?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 03:49 am
Here is an intriguing tale of how William the Conqueror recruited JEWS FROM ROUEN, FRANCE, and took them to England.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 03:59 am
Here are some comments on SEPARATENESS. As usual, consider the source of the link.

Robby

Rich7
May 2, 2005 - 05:37 am
are taught that 1492 was the date that Ferdinand and Isabella's Spain discovered America. How many are taught that it was the beginning year of forced conversion of Jews in that same Spain under the Spanish Inquisition?

Getting a little ahead of Durant, but the 1066 reference triggered the thought.

Rich

winsum
May 2, 2005 - 10:40 am
is a core issue for me. My father was active in both the american jewish committee and the anti defamation leage, holding office and recieving awards for his work in HOLLYWOOD. Do you remember THE BOY WITH THE GREEN HAIR and GENTLEMANS AGREEMENT? the producer was Dore Share on those and with much encouragement from my Dad and others these films broke a barrier.. I may be a little noisy about it at times but will try not to let my anxiety and anger show. . . if I do . . appologies in advance. . . Claire

winsum
May 2, 2005 - 11:41 am
The Christian churches are in business. . . . and wield too much power, economic power and their operations are a serious threat to the Jewish state of Isreal. see the following link. divestment by corporations doing business with Israel

oops wrong link but it will do too. divestment link



Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 04:00 pm
"Gaul had had Jewish merchants from the time of Caesar.

"By 600 there were Jewish colonies in all the maor cities. The Merovingian kings persecuted them with pious ferocity.

"Chilperic ordered them all to accept Christianity or have their eyes torn out (581).

"Charlemagne, while maintaining discriminatory laws against the Jews, protected them as useful and enterprising farmers and craftsmen, merchants, doctors, and financiers, and employed a Jew as his personal physician.

"In 787, according to a disputed tradition, he brought the Kalonymos family from Lucca to Mainz to encourage Jewish scholarship in the Frank realm.

"In 797 he sent a Jew as interpreter or as dragoman with an embassy to Harun al-rashid.

"Louis the Pious favored the Jews as stimulators of commerce and appointed a magister Iudaeorum to guard their rights.

"Despite hostile legends, legal disabilities, and occasional minor persecutions, the Jews enjoyed in France in the ninth and tenth centuries a degree of prosperity and peace hardly known again by the Jews of Europe before the French Revolution."

If I understand this correctly, the Jews were "accepted" if they were found "useful."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 04:16 pm
History of the JEWS IN FRANCE.

Robby

Justin
May 2, 2005 - 04:24 pm
Claire: Rest easy. The objective of this group is to acquire knowledge. That is the very antithesis of prejudicial stereotyping and bigotry. We are examining religions as a social force in history and I hope we are doing it in a scholarly manner.I am sure the ADL would look favorably on us but if we step over the line I, for one,will rely on you to pull us back.

One of reasons clerical people were able to get away with their outrageous sexual behavior for so long was a socially imposed unwillingness on the part of the laity to openly criticize their Church and the Churches and Syngogues of others. Prejudice must be stamped out but knowledgeable behavior must be encouraged.

Rich7
May 2, 2005 - 04:52 pm
group that lost their homeland and, over the centuries, migrated into Europe.

http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5121/history.htm

They were even a target of the holocost, as were the Jews, but unlike the Jews, they have made relatively little impact on civilization. Why? What's the difference? Is it the fact that the Jews had a developed and well structured religion which held them together in difficult times?

Rich

robert b. iadeluca
May 2, 2005 - 05:12 pm
Justin:-I like your phrase "We are examining religions as a social force in history."

This statement separates our comments on religion from those found in the various religious discussions here on Senior Net where hot disagreements are often made. So long as the term "social force" is kept in mind, we should have no problem bouncing our opinions back and forth.

Robby

winsum
May 2, 2005 - 10:05 pm
may be a little paranoid at times but at least it doesn't miss much. I'll do my part. . . . Claire

rich do you mean the GYPSIES? They moved about and probably were hard to work as a group, but when found suffered as well as the Jews, Catholics and intellectuals in general from Christian persecution,

Bubble
May 2, 2005 - 11:25 pm
Post #532
"The Roma are a distinct ethnic minority, distinguished at least by Rom blood and the Romani, or Romanes, language, whose origins began on the Indian subcontinent over one thousand years ago."

I wonder about the expression Rom blood. Is it that distinct from others? I don't think the mention refer to DNA... Red blood and blue blood?

winsum
May 3, 2005 - 01:18 am
considered as well as Jews and blacks as not quite human and driven about from one country to the next finally here in America the following:

1998. In the United States, New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman signs into law Assembly Bill 2654, repealing that state's anti-Roma law adopted in 1917. Governor Whitman's signature effectively rescinds the last anti-Roma law on the books of any American state.

Things are improving but so slowly. The pressure from India helped but is not enough. The Roma essentially have been struggleing for a national identity throughout their history. . . . They haven't wanted it for theselves but the countries that momentarily found them to be there wanted it.MOstly so that they could ber ousted as a group. They would demand written proof of national birth/citizenship and lacking it treat them as criminals. . . . HORRIBLE !!!!

Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 02:25 am
Last night (Monday) 10:15 p.m. EDT, Mal's daughter, Dorian, sent me the following email:-

"She pulled through surgery like a trooper. Her operation was finished at 7pm tonight, and I got to go see her at 9pm. They'll keep her in recovery tonight and she'll be in a room tomorrow (because no rooms were available tonight). I'll send more details tomorrow."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 02:46 am
"All through Italy there were little Jewish enclaves, from Trani to Venice and Milan.

"Jews were especially numerous in Padua, and may have influenced the growth of Averroism in the university there. Salerno, home of the first medieval school of scientific medicine in Latin Christendom, contained 600 Jews, several of them noted physicians.

"The Emperor Frederick II had Jewish scholars at his court in Foggia and Pope Alexander III (1159-81) had several Jews in high position in his household.

"But Frederick joined with Pope Gregory IX in oppressive measures against the Jews of Italy.

"The Spanish Jews called themselves Sephardin and traced their origin to the royal tribe of Judah.

"After the conversion of King Recared (586-601) to orthodox Christianity the Visigothic government united with the powerful hierarchy of the Spanish Church to make life less attractive to the Jews. They were excluded from public office and were forbidden to marry Christians or have Christian slaves.

"King Sisebut ordered all Jews to accept Christianity or emigrate (613). His successor repealed this decree but the Council of Toledo of 633 ruled that those Jews who had submitted to baptism and then returned to Judaism should be separated from their children and sold into slavery.

"King Chintila renewed Sisebut's decree (638). King Egica prohibited Jewish ownership of land and any business transaction between Christian and Jew (693).

"When the Moors and Arabs invaded the peninsula (711), the Jews helped them at every turn."

Back and forth. Back and forth. This is one thing that causes mental illness of individuals. I wonder what it does to entire groups.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 04:13 am
Here is a history of the JEWS IN SPAIN.

Robby

Rich7
May 3, 2005 - 06:57 am
are an interesting group. Until modern times they, themselves, had no idea where they came from (India). In the past, there was some thought that they originated in Egypt (hence the appellation Gypsies).

I remember, as a child, many years ago in the urban Northeast, a good sized band of "gypsies" passing by my home in their horse drawn red and gold "mobile homes", and camping down the end of a dirt road for several days. Everybody kept their children in and doors locked until they moved on.

That dirt road, which had previously been referred to only as "the lane" was thenceforth called "Gypsy Lane."

Rich

winsum
May 3, 2005 - 07:15 am
back and forth+crazy making or in the case of Jews a subtle background of paranoia. . . some electing to keep a low profile. Chutzpa by Alan Durchowitz addresses this and rages against it. And some of us overdo the assertion portion of our persona in rebellion. (me). I wonder what being a Christian these days or a Roman Catholic in particular with it's burden of shame does to it's members. We all have our "crosses to bear" (pun). . . Claire

Bubble
May 3, 2005 - 07:28 am
You are right Claire. When I first visited San Francisco in '56 as a teenager, I thought paranoia charaterized Jews there. I had always worn a star of David on a chain around my neck. I was stopped in many instances by strangers whispering to me it was better to keep that hidden inside my clothes. Having never suffered from or heard of anti semitism before, I was most puzzled by that request.

3kings
May 3, 2005 - 03:21 pm
Bubble I caught a glimpse of what you experienced in San Francisco, when disembarking from an aircraft in the Netherlands. To mark my luggage I placed yellow sticky tape on it , in form like this #.

A guy next to me said something in a tongue not known to me, but when he found I spoke English, he pointed to my luggage and repeated "Are you a Jew, with that yellow sticker ?"

I said "No, I'm a Kiwi." Which clearly was 'Double-Dutch' to him. He wandered off, muttering aloud about "Jewish B..." LOL.

I later was told by my Dutch friends, that the Nazis made Jews wear yellow emblems on their clothing, but I'm unsure if that is true. ++ Trevor

Justin
May 3, 2005 - 03:32 pm
My first experience with anti-Semitism came in the late 1930's. I was in high school when I dated a Jewish girl. Her name was Henrietta. I called her Hank and I thought she was a "zoftic medle". She taught me Yiddish and mathematics. She was smarter than I thought I would ever be. We went steady in Junior and Senior year till the war took me away. I was her "Goy" and "Yungermanshik". She was my "Bubeleh." But all was not "gut". Our parents were friends but we never felt they quite approved. Her friends were never very nice to me and my friends were never very nice to her. But those reactions just drove us closer to one another. I felt the jokes about Jews and I suppose she felt the jokes about Catholics. During the war she and her papa found a nice Jewish boy for her to marry. My parents moved away so I never returned to that town. I ,later,read Gentleman's Agreement" and understood more of what Hank and I faced.

Sunknow
May 3, 2005 - 04:05 pm
A reference back to the Gypsies.

When I arrived in Germany back in late 60's, the housing market was tight. My family had to live off the Air Base (Wiesbaden) in Germany housing when we first arrived, and found a lovely, expensive apartment in the small town of Baushiem (do I remember how to spell it? humm).

At the end of the street was an open lot with several trees, and as we moved into our neighborhood, there was a group of Gypsies moving on....we did not know how long they had camped there. The first walk my husband and 10 year old son took, they walked across that cluttered lot, looking at all the trash left behind. There they found and brought home one of my 'found' treasures.

A long, flat, oval, hand-carved wooden bowl. Across the top, carved in German: "Give Us This Day".....across the bottom: "Our Daily Bread".

I always wondered if this was actually something the Gypsies would have carved themselves? Or was this something they acquired and left behind?

Sun

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 04:23 pm
As indicated in the GREEN quotes in the Heading, Durant will soon talk about anti-semitism. May I suggest that we continue to concentrate on the second sub-topic there of The European Communities and return later to antisemitism when Durant begins to talk about that.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 04:34 pm
"The conquerors, to repopulate the land, invited immigration.

"50,000 Jews came from Asia and Africa. Some towns, like Lucena, were inhabited almost wholly by Jews.

"Freed from economic disabilities, the Jews of Moslem Spain spread into every field of agriculture, industry, finance, and the professions. They adopted the dress, language, and customs of the Arabs, garbed themselves in turbans and silk robes, rode in carriages, and were hardly distinguishable from their Semitic cousins.

"Several Jews became court physicians and one of these was made adviser to the greatest of the caliphs of Cordova.

"Hasdai ibn Shaprut (915-70) was to Abd er-Rahman III what Nizam al-Mulk in the next century would be to Malik Shah.

"Born in the wealthy and cultured Ibn Ezra family, his father taught him Hebrew, Arabic, and Latin. He studied medicine and other sciences at Cordova, cured the Caliph's ailments, and showed much wide knowledge and good judgment in politics that he was appointed to the diplomatic staff, apparently at the age of twenty-five.

"He was entrusted with ever larger responsibilities over the financial and commercial life of the state. He had no official title. The Caliph hesitated to arouse resentment by making him officially vizier. But Hasdai performed his many functions with such tact that he won the good will of Arabs, Jews, and Christians alike. He encouraged learning and literature, provided students with scholarships and books, and gathered about him a salon of poets, savants, and philosophers.

"When he died, Moslems vied with Jews in honoring his memory."

Your comments, please?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 05:04 pm
Those folks here who participated in the section on Islam may find THIS BOOK thought-provoking. It was written by a Muslim.

Robby

Fifi le Beau
May 3, 2005 - 08:37 pm
There seems to have been a pattern developed as the Hebrews moved around the known world.

That pattern shows up in Baghdad in the golden age of Jewish life there. Saadia who was made Goan began to argue with the Exilarch David. When David dies he appoints a new Exilarch, who disparages Mohammed and is executed by the Muslims. He appoints his son who is also executed. The schools are closed, and the muslims again let the Jews know who is in control.

In the Jewish movement into Germany, France, England, and other European countries, they did not invade and conquer. They immigrated and sent for the families. They did not assimilate, nor did they want to. They lived in Jewish enclaves they themselves selected, and excluded the natives. In almost every country they bought themselves exemption from military service. Since wars were almost continuous, this gave them great advantage over the average citizen, who had no such exemption.

The Jews go into a country with a large purse for the king, and promise to pay more if he will exempt them from all laws except those the king decides. These laws are rarely enforced and are mainly an attempt by the king to collect more money with a threat. The average citizen was very aware of this bribery for privilege, and since they were always being asked to die for this same king and his wars, it would breed resentment.

Resentment would not begin to say what I would feel if my son was fighting from his country and other young men were going to school or making money off his sacrifice. I think resentment is the wrong word, rage would be more fitting. If you set yourself apart, and demand privileges, you will get noticed.

The Jews seemed to have trouble learning this lesson. After the Berbers invaded Spain and took the southern part, the Jews poured in and eventually almost equaled the Berbers in many areas. The muslims even appointed a Jewish Vizier in Granada where half the town was Jewish. He was succeeded by his son Joseph Naghdela, who did not exhibit tact or modesty, and began to dress and act as the king.

He attracted the attention of the Berbers who crucified him for his arrogant usurper grab for power, that was neither earned or given. They massacred 4,000 Jews in Granada and compelled the rest to leave. They ran to the Christians who they had betrayed earlier on behalf of the muslims.

This theme runs through European, middle east, and African history during the middle ages. The Jews would finance wars, but would not fight. They isolated themselves from the population of whatever country they were in, and bought special privileges through political association wherever possible. They wanted what they could get out of the country and its citizens, but with privilege, not sacrifice.

I was amazed that the Jews had been in Germany for hundreds of years and it was the nineteenth century before they even had a school to teach their children the German language. This shows how the Jews isolated themselves from the Germans in their self imposed enclaves, homes, schools, and family life. They did this in every country, not just Germany.

When I read this article that I am providing a link for, I was also reading Durant about the Jews invading Europe, not with guns but with bags of money. As this article sets forth, bags of money can buy access to power today as well as the middle ages.

Money buys power and access

Fifi

kiwi lady
May 3, 2005 - 10:07 pm
The Jewish immigrants in London even in the nineteen twenties lived in enclaves and many did not learn English and spoke only Yiddish. Prejudice existed before they arrived but I think their separation much like the ethnic enclaves we see today in our societies fostered prejudice. There is nothing like getting to know someone who is different to banish preconceived ideas.

However the Jews had a lot to put up with. They were never considered quite good enough no matter how much money they earned to enter British Society. They were banned from gentlemans clubs and golf clubs etc.I am not sure if this still counts today in Britain. Over here being a nation of immigrants and a relatively new nation we don't seem to have the same amount of prejudice towards other religions. Many catholics for instance who came here to escape the troubles in Ireland told me that it was such a relief to be accepted and such a relief for them to be able to accept others without fear of retribution.

Carolyn

winsum
May 3, 2005 - 10:19 pm
I just finished reading the Abramoff story and it shows to go you that the new religion is really about MONEY . . . or is it really new. It reminds me a little of a book I just read by John Grishim...THE KING OF TORTS... . . . money money money. . . so on with religion the way it's supposed to be . . . .and never really was. . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 3, 2005 - 11:00 pm
"Those centuries -- the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth -- were the golden age of Spanish Jewry, the happiest and most fruitful period in medieval Hebrew history.

"When Moses ben Chanoch (d. 965), one of the Bari emigres, was ransomed in Cordova, he organized there, with Hasdai's help, an academy that soon acquired the intellectual leadership of the Jewish world. Similar schools were opened at Lucena, Toledo, Bardelona, Granada.

"And whereas the schools of Eastern Jewry had almost confined themselves to religious education, these gave instruction also in literature, music, mathematics, astronomy, medicine, and philosophy. Such education gave to the upper half of the Jewish population in Spain a breadth and depth of culture and refinement at that time equaled only by the Moslem, Byzantine, and Chinese contemporaries.

"It was then a disgrace for a man of wealth or political position to be unacquainted with history, science, philosopy, and poetry. A Jewish aristocracy took form, graced by beautiful women.

"Perhaps it was too keenly conscious of its superiority, but it redeemed its pride by its sense that good birth and fortune are an obligation to generosity and excellence.

"The decline of Spanish Jewry might be dated from the fall of Joseph ibn Naghdela.

"He served the king almost as ably as his father had done, but not with the modest tact tht had reconciled a population half Moorish to be ruled by a Jew. He took all power in his hands, dressed as royally as the king, and laughed at the Koran. Gossip called him an atheist.

"In 1066 the Arabs and Berbers revolted, crucified Joseph, massacred 4000 Jews in Granada and plundered their homes. The remaining Jews were compelled to sell their lands and emigrate.

"Twenty years later the Almoravids came from Africa, aflame with orthodoxy, and the long honeymoon of Spanish Moslems and Jews was ended. A Mohammedan theologian announced that the Jews had promised Mohammed to accept Islam at the end of 500 years after the Hegira, if by that time their expected Messiah had not come. The five centuries were up in 1107 by Mohammedan reckoning. The Emir Yasuf demanded the conversion of all the Jews in Spain but excused them on payment of an enormous sum into his treasury. When the Almohads replaced the Almoravids as rulers of Morocco and Moslem Spain (1148), they gave the Jews and the Christians the same choice that King Sisebut had allowed the Jews 535 years before -- apostasy or exile.

"Many Jews pretended conversion t Islam. Many followed the Christians into northern Spain."

It appears that nothing is permanent.

Robby

Bubble
May 4, 2005 - 12:13 am
Robby, will you allow this present-day aside, since to night the Holocaust days starts. I heard it on the walkman, half asleep in bed, in the wee hours. I scrawled notes in the dark so as not to forget. It's a scoop!

Tonight 6 flames - for the 6 millions who died in the camps - will be lit in Jerusalem and on main squares in every town of importance in Israel. Six people are given the priviledge to lit one torch. Tonight one of them is Malka Rosenthal, born in Poland during the war and hidden by a polish peasant on his farm, after she saw a German soldier shoot her mom and little brother. She was only seven years old. She spent ONE YEAR AND HALF in a barrel, not moving nor making any noise. She was fed at night by the farmer's girl, two years older. The kidness of that other child kept her alive she said.

In orthodox as well as reformist synagogues throughout the world, the congregations will read with the rabbi the "Holocaust scroll". It is the first time in history that a new scroll is officially admitted and added to the lithurgy. It was the brainstorm of a religious Jew, survivor of the camp and living now in Canada. He said that survivors are all dieing out now and something is needed to not let is fall in oblivion. It was over 10 years in the writing. It is divided in 6 distinct parts, each part describing a different facet of the holocaust. The one before last apparently is reminiscent of the Lamentations of Jeremiah. From now on it will be read every year on holocaust Day. I wonder if it will be aired too?

The author mentionned that all the events of Jewish history have survived for so long because they were incorporated in the lithurgic ceremonies. The chief rabbinate agreed with this view. Bubble

JoanK
May 4, 2005 - 12:20 am
I don't agree that anti-semitism is caused by the isolation of the Jews. All immegrant groups tend to isolate themselves -- only gradually are they assimilated. The Jews in Germany at the time of Hitler were assimilated. It seems that the Jews in Spain were too.

And it is disgusting to suggest that the Jews asked to be slaughtered because they had too much money!! Statements like that do not belong in this discussion!!

CheshireCat
May 4, 2005 - 02:01 am
The beloved of the Almighty are the rich who have the humility of the poor, and the poor who have the magnanimity of the rich. -Saadi, poet (1184-1291)

JoanK
May 4, 2005 - 02:40 am
There is nothing in what we have read that bears out the assertion that Jews don't contribute to the societies in which they live. Everywhere that they have been allowed to contribute, they have done so.

I think we are getting very far away from our commitment to discuss religion while respecting each other. Perhaps it is time for a re- commitment to those principles.

robert b. iadeluca
May 4, 2005 - 02:42 am
Thank you, Bubble, for that very touching post.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 4, 2005 - 03:20 am
Again, a battle between RELIGION AND THE STATE.

Robby

Bubble
May 4, 2005 - 05:23 am
This too has to do with religious stand, I think

abortion for 13-yr-old

winsum
May 4, 2005 - 09:41 am
I couldn't agree with you more, your post #554 says it for me more clearly than I ever could. It's, what I've been feeling . thank you for putting it so well , . . . Claire

winsum
May 4, 2005 - 01:33 pm
I thought it was a language. . . Claire

Justin
May 4, 2005 - 02:17 pm
Joan: I agree with you. Isolation (imposed or voluntary)does not in itself promote an adverse reaction from the rest of society. It does however, create a we/they relationship which again is not necessarily a bad thing. Adverse reactions set in when stereotypes are formed by both groups and predjudices develop. I'm not saying anything new here. We all know these things and if one is aware one can not deny that Jews have contributed greatly in all the societies they have resided with in spite of the adversity they encountered.

The problem of anti-semitism would be simple to solve if it's only cause were the religious one in which Christians blame Jews for the death of their Messiah as well as for their failure to accept Jesus as the Messiah. That is a core problem, certainly, and it's solution lies within Christianity. The Catholic Church can go a long way toward solving the problem by addressing it with the same zeal they attacked communism.

I am not certain the problem of anti-semitism is that simple, however. I am not very clear about other causes. Perhaps we can identify other causes and in that way contribute something to ending an evil that has caused a holocaust.

robert b. iadeluca
May 4, 2005 - 04:02 pm
Any comments regarding Durant's remarks in Post 552?

Robby

Justin
May 4, 2005 - 09:41 pm
Durant says that the tenth, eleventh, and twelth,centuries constituted the Golden Age of Spanish Jewry. Yet in 1066 ( mid eleventh century ) the Arabs and the Berbers crucified thousands of Jews and tossed the remainder out who refused to convert to Islam. That doesn't represent a Golden Age to me. During the Tenth century Joseph, the Jewish AA to the King, over extended himself by laughing at the Qu'ran. That action was not only tactless it was stupid. He paid for it by decorating a crucifix with his body and by the expulsion of his fellow Jews.

We know why the Christians have it in for the Jews but why would the Moslems quarrel with the Jews. I suppose it could be as simple as tactlessness by an AA to the King but I feel in my bones that there must be more to this problem than Durant is telling us.

Fifi le Beau
May 4, 2005 - 09:49 pm
Joan, your post #554 and I quote, "I don't agree that anti-Semitism is caused by the isolation of the Jews."

I was not writing about anti-Semitism, but anti-European ism or anti-western ism by the Jews. You have erected a straw man, to divert my discussion of anti-western ism as practiced by the Jews.

It would not have mattered if they were little green men from Pluto, they moved into someones home and refused to speak their language, obey their laws (they paid off the king) and Durant says, "This legal isolation widened the barrier between Christian and Jew, and played a part in the pogroms of the twelfth century." Durant is writing about England.

So were the Jews anti-English? That is my question. I say that they were discriminating against their hosts, which would be the English people. Most of the kings were ingrates and fools and could have been bought off by anyone. So far they have lived and prospered in Europe for hundreds of years, and it galls me to have to add this, but I am discussing the Middle ages here, not the twentieth century.

My conclusion is that the Jews were the ones discriminating against their European host countries and its people. That arrogance would cause them problems in the future as Durant tells us in plain English.

Joan your words, "And it is disgusting to suggest that the Jews asked to be slaughtered because they had too much money."

The only slaughter and expulsion of Jews in this last segment by Durant and quoted by me, was done by the muslims. Does that make the muslims anti-Semitic? They themselves are Semites and brothers to the Jew, and they have shown more animosity and hatred toward the Jew than any European so far in this series. Middle ages, Middle ages, just so no one forgets.

This paragraph will go from 600 to 2100 in the common era.

It seems improbable that the muslims are anti-Semitic. Why then are there no Jews living in their former homeland? Where are the Jews in Iraq, Arabia, Yemen, Syria, Iran, and the entire middle east except for Israel? Why have they been driven from their homeland by their own kinfolk?

Their fellow Semites slaughtered them by the thousands, over and over if Jewish and Muslim history is any guide. But as Durant warns us they exaggerate in the extreme. One thing is sure they drove the Jews out of their own territory. Does this make them anti-Semitic? Of course not, that term is only used against Europeans.

This discussion of the Jews in Europe during the Dark ages (middle ages to Durant) and how they lived and fared, is of interest to me as history. It seems they have fared well so far, when the population of Europe was devastated by wars and plagues. The Europeans seemed to have accepted the Jews, but the Jews have refused to accept the European or his laws or language.

The Jewish allegiance and political aims were in question then (Dark ages) by the king and his subjects.

Today after reading this article, those questions rise again. Where is the allegiance and what are the political aims of this group?

Spies, lies, and videotape

Fifi

Bubble
May 4, 2005 - 11:08 pm
Post #561 - Claire, in the Bible, in Exodus, (7-15; 9-1; 9-13) God talked to Moses and called Himself the God of the Hebrew people. The term " the children of Israel" is also used to refer to the same people.

From Webster's:
He·brew n.
1. a member of the Semitic peoples inhabiting ancient Palestine and claiming descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; an Israelite.
2. a Semitic language of the Afroasiatic family, the language of the ancient Hebrews, which, although not in a vernacular use from 100 B.C. to the 20th century, was retained as the scholarly and liturgical language of Jews and is now the national language of Israel. Abbr.: Heb

Is·ra·el, n.
1. a republic in SW Asia, on the Mediterranean: formed as a Jewish state May 1948. 5,534,672; 7984 sq. mi. (20,679 sq. km). Cap.: Jerusalem.
2. the people traditionally descended from Jacob; the Hebrew or Jewish people.
3. a name given to Jacob after he had wrestled with the angel. Gen. 32:28.

Bubble
May 4, 2005 - 11:34 pm
post#565 - Le Beau, you say

"they moved into someones home and refused to speak their language, obey their laws "

why don't you also mention that they were not allowed to have the same occupations and priviledges as others? They were a good source for additional taxes...

You play nicely with words when you ask if Jews were discriminating against others. Discrimination has an undertone of causing wrong or harm to others, as in anti-semitism. By keeping to themselves you see Jews causing harm to the English?

Why are they no Jews living in Iraq, Arabia, Yemen, Syria, Iran? There are some still there, although most keeping a very low profile or they would be slaughtered. You are surprised that in those conditions no more are "returning" there? No, the arabs don't call themselves anti-semitic, now they call it anti-zionist. I am not at all sure they ever considered the Jews as kinfolk, whatever the Biblical kinship.

The Europeans seemed to have accepted the Jews, but the Jews have refused to accept the European or his laws or language.

False. The Jews have always respected the laws of each country they were in, except those going counter to their faith, such as considering the ruler as their god. They accepted to pay higher taxes for that priviledge. Would you say that Jews are anti-Dutch, anti-American or anti-French today? I don't think they were different in the Middle Age.

Sorry to say but IMO some views are biaised. Bubble

Bubble
May 4, 2005 - 11:46 pm
March of the Living

Jews are returning to live in Poland, maybe a new page is being written.

CheshireCat
May 5, 2005 - 12:46 am
I think Fifi you are just trying to be inflamatory, I can't see anything here that relates back to the piece I just read in Durant?

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 03:31 am
Welcome, Cheshire Cat! I am pleased to hear that you are an interested reader and hope you will change that to an "interested participant."

We are on an emotional sub-topic at the moment and I thank all of you for withholding yourselves from going over the line. Our ground rule here is to address issues, not personalities. We do not attack individual participants in this discussion group. There is nothing, of course, which prevents us from disagreeing with Durant himself. He was, himself, a human being like the rest of us and subject to having his own points of view.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 03:49 am
"In northern Spain the Jews at first found a royal tolerance as magnanimous as that which they had enjoyed for four centuries under Islam.

"Alfonso VI and VII of Castile treated the Jews well, made Jew and Christian equal before the law, and sternly repressed an anti-Semitic outbreak in Toledo (1107), where there were then 72,000 Jews.

"A like entente between the mother and daughter religions prevailed for a century in Aragon. Indeed King James I invited Jews to settle in Majorca, Catalonia, and Valencia and in many cases gave Jewish settlers free homes and lands. In Barcelona they dominated commerce in the twelfth century and owned a third of the soil.

"The Jews of Christian Spain were severely taxed but they prospered and enjoyed internal autonomy. Trade flowed freely between Christian, Jew, and Moor. The three exchanged gifts on holidays. Now and then a king contributed to a synagogue building fund.

"From 1085 even to 1492, Jews could be found in high public office in Spanish Christian states as fiscal agents and diplomats, sometimes as ministers.

"During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the Christian elergy joined in this Christian amity.

"The first outbreak of intolerance was among the Jews themselves.

"In 1149 Jehuda ibn Ezra, steward of the palace to Alfonso VII of Leon and Castile, turned the powers of his master's government against the Qaraite Jews of Toledo. The details are unknown but from that time the once numerous Spanish Qaraites are heard of no more.

"In 1212 some Christian crusaders entered Spain to help free it from the Moors. For the most part they treated the Jews well. One group attacked the Jews of Toledo and killed many of them. But the Christians of the city rose to the defense of their fellow citizens and stopped the persecution.

"Alfonso X of Castile included anti-Judaic legislation in his law code of 1265 but the code was not put into effect until 1348. Meanwhile Alfonso employed a Jewish physician and treasurer, presented to the Jews of Seville three mosques to be turned into synagogues and basked in the splendor that Jewish and Moslem scholarship shed upon his genial reign.

"In 1276 the military enterprises of Pedro III of Aragon required insufferable taxes. His finance minister and several other officials were Jews. A revolt of nobles and cities against the monarchy compelled the King to dismiss his Jewish aides and to confirm a resolution of the Corres (1283) against further employment of Jews in the government.

"The era of toleration ended when the ecclesiastical Council of Zamora (1313) decreed the imposition of the badge, the segregation of the Jewish from the Christian population, and a ban against the employment of Jewish physicians by Christians, or of Christian servants by Jews."

There is much here to discuss as history in Spain moved on.

Robby

Bubble
May 5, 2005 - 04:40 am
From my own genealogical research about my maternal family Castel or Castell.

Vidal de Castell del Burros in Terraga (Spain) was the object of an official act from Don Alfonso III, king of Aragon, dated abd signed on 7 July 1283

Another Castell of Tarragona was invited to a party by Don Alfonso III, king of Aragon, on the 21 March 1283.

Mahir Castell of Saragossa is mentionned in a notarised act of Barcelone in 1372.

Samuel Castel had a meatshop in the subbub of Sevilla in 1386.

I wish they had left some personal diaries as well.

Bubble
May 5, 2005 - 05:26 am
My real continuous family tree starts with the death of an ancestor, Yehuda Castel also known as Cashtiel, in mid 1730. it is interesting to note how first names return again and again every two generations.

JoanK
May 5, 2005 - 06:22 am
FIFI: ""I was not writing about anti-Semitism, but anti-European ism or anti-western ism by the Jews. You have erected a straw man, to divert my discussion of anti-western ism as practiced by the Jews".

You are right in that I said anti-semitism, when I meant to say discrimination against Jews. Certainly some Muslims, as some people of many religions and nationalities have practiced discrimination against Jews. That is what I meant to talk about.

"It would not have mattered if they were little green men from Pluto, they moved into someones home and refused to speak their language, obey their laws (they paid off the king) "

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. It seems clear from the bulk of the discussion that the Jews were very much part of the society, whenever they have been allowed to be so. Certainly, Jews have always obeyed the laws of the country whose citizens they were, except where the laws required them to renounce their religion.

I don't remember the specific instance where they "paid off the king". Perhaps you can quote it. In any case, it is one incident in a long and troubled history, and does not characterized the total history of all Jews.

More.

JoanK
May 5, 2005 - 06:37 am
"So were the Jews anti-English? That is my question. I say that they were discriminating against their hosts, which would be the English people".

Again, please quote the specific instance you are talking about. I'm confused: I thought we were talking about Spain.

As Far as discriminating against their hosts: people who have no power cannot discriminate. Discrimination in the sense it is used here does not simply mean differentiating It means according fewer privileges and rights: if you have no privileges or rights to accord then you can't discriminate in this sense.

Of course the Jews treated their hosts differently: they were required to. This is a classic case of what Historians call "blaming the victim". The people in power isolate the Jews and treat them as inferiors, and then the Jews are blamed for being isolated, and not treating the people in power as equals.

The term "hosts" is not appropriate here. Jews have always contributed to every society where they lived to the extent that they wee allowed, and, when allowed, contributed more than their numbers would lead one to expect. In what sense, then, are they guests, and not citizens?

winsum
May 5, 2005 - 06:41 am
Robby it's allowed to agree with each other in noninflamatory terms? Because I want to say to JOanK and Bubble. . RIGHT ON. certainly their posts cover the territory and I don't want to have to repeat it. . . . Claire

JoanK
May 5, 2005 - 06:50 am
"The Europeans seemed to have accepted the Jews, but the Jews have refused to accept the European or his laws or language.

That is clearly contradicted by everything we have read. European rulers, by the posts we have just read, alternated between "accepting" the Jews and limiting them, driving them out, or killing them. You have provided no evidence that the Jews have refused to accept the Europeans.

"The Jewish allegiance and political aims were in question then (Dark ages) by the king and his subjects.

Today after reading this article, those questions rise again. Where is the allegiance and what are the political aims of this group? "

Your point her seems to be that one or a few people, who I assume are Jewish, are traitors. From this you conclude that all Jews may be traitors. This is the essence of racial and ethnic prejudice: to find a person of a given race, ethnicity, or religion who did something bad and then assume that all people of that race are bad. I don't know what your race and ethnic background is -- if I did, are you telling me I could never find someone of the same background who did anything bad?

This game, and it is a game, is virulent. It could be played with ANY group, and lead to a cycle of endless hate. I'm sure you don't want that!

Éloïse De Pelteau
May 5, 2005 - 07:05 am
Joan, "The people in power isolate the Jews and treat them as inferiors, and then the Jews are blamed for being isolated" I can't agree more.

All my life no matter where I lived, I did everything I could to find a Jewish GP. Even if they graduate from the same schools, there is something different about how they treat their patients that is unique to their race I find. I am speaking in general here. We are very fortunate to have the Jewish General University Hospital in Montreal and they speak both French and English like locals.

Of course Jews tend to live in the same district, Italians do that too and if an ethnic group is a minority, it is only normal that they want to live in proximity of others of the same group as it gives them a strength they need to deal with discrimination.

JoanK
May 5, 2005 - 07:10 am
Sorry to take so much space in the posts, but I think these issues are important, and need to be addressed.

I've left the question of the slaughtering of the Jews for last. FIFI, you pointed out that the slaughter we were talking about at the minute was done by Muslims, and doesn't fit the definition of anti-semitic. You are right, and I confused the issue by using the wrong word.

But let's not miss the point. THE JEWS HAVE BEEN SLAUGHTERED OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY DIFFERENT GROUPS. It could be the Muslims one year, the French another, the Germans another. Another year, it could be US!!

The Jews are not the only victims: the history we read records over and over senseless slaughter of innocent victims. The details vary: who did it, why, who was slaughtered. But one thing remains the same in all these stories: the attitude of hatred, seeing people as a group instead of as individuals, and assigning without proof the worst characteristics of human nature to them. DO WE WANT TO NOURISH THAT ATTITUDE HERE IN OUR FORUM?

No one in this forum wants to kill anyone. But we need to be very aware of ourselves. Hatred of groups is a seed, and from that small seed can grow evil almost beyond imagining. Please, please, let's not give that seed ANY nurturing here.

kiwi lady
May 5, 2005 - 09:39 am
Lets get some rationality back into the discussion. It is becoming a bit hysterical.

It is fact that the Jewish nation became a nation of migrants. They spread all over the world. It is fact that they tended to live in enclaves. It is fact that until fairly recent times a lot did not assimilate into the community. I think perhaps the rituals of the Jewish religion such as Shabbat may have caused some suspicion in the eyes of non Jews. It does not mean this suspicion was right but it was there.

It is not much different today. We have ethnic groups living in their own neighbourhoods speaking their own language in stores and even in some schools. Here we have our Asian suburb. Howick. It is nicknamed Chowick because it has a huge population of Chinese immigrants. These are not poor people- Howick is a wealthy suburb. There is still a lot of suspicion here about Asian immigrants and one of the things most often said is that many of the immigrants have not assimilated into the Community.

Pointing out these facts is not anti semitic. I, for one, are definately NOT anti semitic!

Please get a grip everyone!

Bubble
May 5, 2005 - 09:42 am
Joan, I wish I could express myself as clearly as you did. You seem to have read my mind. Thank you for this.

Carolyn, it is also a fact that until recently they were not always allowed to get assimilated since so many things were forbiden to them by the country they were in.

moxiect
May 5, 2005 - 10:43 am


Yes, I'm still here even though when I speak others tend to ignore what I say. I'm here to learn and observe and I often repeat myself because I believe that man interprets what is said and written in a manner which pleases themselves.

All this time we have been discussing an idealogoy that has survived over thousands of years and no one has been able to come up with a better idea.

When one dares to be different it seems that the masses stomp them down no matter who they are.

Also when a power hungrey absolute leader needs a scapegoat they find one they have no fear of.

This is what I have been learning. "Live and Let Live"

JoanK
May 5, 2005 - 11:16 am
CAROLYN: you're right -- I did get carried away in my last post. But I've known too many people whose lives, bodies, and minds have been broken by the kind of attitudes we are talking about. I remember your pain at some of the things you saw being done to the Maoris, and I'm sure you understand.

We can't reach the true haters of this world, but maybe we can reach those who have not experienced the hate themselves, and so don't recognize it. I remember talking to you once on this subject when both our sons had come out with angry remarks about other groups of people -- we talked about how much it hurt.

kiwi lady
May 5, 2005 - 11:39 am
Joan, I still get abused for defending our Maori people. There are still some real rednecks about! However there are some Maori who have prejudice toward Pakeha. Gosh do you think human nature can ever change regarding suspicion and prejudice?

winsum
May 5, 2005 - 11:41 am
let it show. There are strong feelings and strong minds and strong experiences due to our advanced? ages. We're being reasonagly polite about it, but don't try to turn it off. Fifi has started a storm and it needs to be attended.



The facts she presents are not all true and her interpretation is strongly biased agains Jews as a group. It must be addressed. I"m proud that we are doing it. . . . . Claire

Fifi le Beau
May 5, 2005 - 02:39 pm
My use of the word Hebrew to describe the immigrants to England is natural to me as I have always used that word to describe the Hebrew speaking people. Judaism is a religion. Perhaps the leaders of the Hebrews preferred to identify with their religion, rather than their language.

All Hebrews were not Jews. The majority were, but not all. The first Hebrews I remember knowing were not Jews, but atheist. I have always differentiated between the Hebrew people as a group and their religion which mainly was Judaism. There were Hebrews who were muslim, Christian, Buddhist, atheist, and other faiths.

Being baptized an Episcopalian as a baby does not make me one today. To identify my self as such would be false. I once was, now I am not. Most groups are identified by the language they speak, hence English speaking people are called English, Hebrew speakers Hebrews.....etc.

Durant uses Hebrews throughout this text.

Fifi

Justin
May 5, 2005 - 03:09 pm
We are covering three hundred and fify years of Jewish life in Spain and trying to make sense of it in a few paragraphs. Here is a capsule chronology of the period to help shed light.

1149 - A Jewish AA turns Alfonso's government against
Qaraites in Toledo and apparently wipes them out.


1212 - Christian towns people prevent Crusaders from
persecuting Jews.


1265 - Alfonso X includes anti Jewish laws in legislation
but delays implementation. He has a Jewish Physician
and gives elaborate gifts to the Jews. I think he
compromised with his political enemies by giving them
the anti Jewish laws.


1276 - War brings high taxes and Jewish AAs collect them.
The nobles (taxpayers) revolt and force the Jewish AAs
out of government.


1283 - The Resolution of Corres adopted to prevent Jews from
entering government.


1313 - Eclesiastical Council of Zamorra rules that Jews wear
wear yellow badges and not be allowed Christian
servants. Further Jewish physicians might not work for
Christians.


1348 - Alfonso X 's legislation against Jews implemented.


1492 - Inquisition launched by Church and Monarchy.

I conclude from this sequence that ordinary Christians and the throne found Jews acceptable citizenry but the nobles and the Church opposed them. Why? The nobility found in them natural animosity toward tax collectors and the Church clerics found their old enemies. I'm simplifying here because there is so much left unsaid in this sequence of events.

winsum
May 5, 2005 - 03:38 pm
How did you know what to select. . .?

Rich7
May 5, 2005 - 03:56 pm
tells the story of the history and massacre of Toledo's Jews.Scroll down to the second image to see the interior of Toledo's synagogue, built in 1336, now a museum.

http://isfsp.org/sages/toledo.html

I visited Toledo a few years ago and found it to be a beautiful city. Wish I had read Durant before going, because all my spiritual touring of Toledo involved visiting strictly Christian sites.

Rich

winsum
May 5, 2005 - 04:13 pm
one of my favorite artists mostly because of this image which should be greener, but it's a print so ,the sky just blows me away. . .. . . Claire

TOLEDO by El Greco

and

the real thing re: Rich's link.

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 04:24 pm
We are all acquainted with the phrase "cooling off period." Let us have one of those and give thanks that no one here out-and-out attacked another participant and your DL did not have a cardiac arrest. It is easier to pause and breathe when new topics are introduced and that is what we are about to do.

Following the line of direction of the GREEN quotes under the title "Medieval Jews," we are now going to enter the third sub-topic.

Let us begin afresh.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 04:26 pm
Jewish Life in Christendom

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 04:28 pm
Government

robert b. iadeluca
May 5, 2005 - 04:36 pm
"Excepting Palermo and a few towns in Spain, the cities of medieval Christendom required no segregation of their Jewish population.

"Usually, however, the Jews lived in a voluntary isolation for social convenience, physical security, and religious unity. The synagogue was the geographical, social, and economic center of the Jewish quarter, and drew most Jewish dwellings toward it. There was in consequence much overcrowding, to the detriment of public and private sanitation.

"In Spain the Hebrew sections contained handsome residences as well as hovels and tenements. In the rest of Europe they verged on slums."

Yes, folks, I know Durant says "voluntary isolation" but let us not beat a dead horse. Let us give that a rest (at least for a while) and concentrate on such things as the "synagogue being the center of the quarter" or the fact that Hebrew sections in Spain seemed to be better kept than in the rest of Europe.

Robby

3kings
May 5, 2005 - 06:58 pm
I think the discrimination against the Jews is because of their religious practices, such as followed by the "Orthodox Jews'. Here in NZ there is no dislike of Jewish folk, (except from a tiny minority of 'Neo-nazi skin heads')and I think the reason is that there seem to be no Orthodox adherents among our local population, or if there are I have never seen them

My wife, born in Poland agrees. She has Jewish blood, if you like, in her family, but she regards herself as Polish. There are quite a few families in Poland like hers, who while making no secret that some of their ancestors were Jewish, live in Poland as Polish citizens, and are accepted as such. There was no discrimination.

However there is some, not hostility, but unease among Poles of those Jews who are bent on "in your face" religious and social activity. Such as the attempt by Israeli organizations to tell the Polish Catholic Church and Government that they must not build a chapel in Auszwitch (Polish territory) in which to pray and meditate on the lives of the millions of Poles who died there. In the interest of good neighbourliness, the late Pope John Paul acquiesced to such atrocious behaviour by the Jews.

Interestingly, these Orthodox folk tend to be among the poorest Jews. Jews in professions, who take a full part in the daily lives of the Poles, quietly practicing their religious beliefs, if they have any, pass for the most part, unnoticed. My wife's family were doctors and lawyers, and no one treated them any differently because of their Jewish connections.

In this view, discrimination is brought about by the insistence of a small minority taking every opportunity to insist on their differences, often with a haughty or arrogant attitude. If folk do that, there will always be a backlash..... Trevor

Fifi le Beau
May 5, 2005 - 09:13 pm
I wrote the short post explaining my use of the word Hebrews in an earlier post while my three year old grand took her nap, and quickly came in and posted it without time to read todays posts.

I have company and it is now ten o'clock at night, and I have just finished reading all the personal attacks against me that are both insulting and degrading.

Joan attacked my post while admitting she didn't know what I was talking about because she had not read it. It does not seem possible to discuss Durants writing with those who do not read the book.

The personal attacks against me will not go unanswered.

Fifi

kiwi lady
May 5, 2005 - 09:49 pm
Please everyone lets not turn this discussion into a free for all. Please!

Jan Sand
May 5, 2005 - 10:20 pm
One of the inherent problems of religion is that each religion and each subsect of religion is convinced that it has the absolute truth and that all other religions somehow violate this rigid view. This is bound to create trouble.

Justin
May 5, 2005 - 10:37 pm
Trevor: There is something to be said for the Israeli position on the Catholic chapel at Auszwitch.On the one hand the lives of thousands of Jews went up in smoke in that crematorium and while the initiating cause was the action of a mad man the exciting cause was, at a minimum, a tendency by the Church clergy to let it happen and centuries of passion plays blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus. Now the clergy wants to pray for the poor victims they sent up the chimney and to do it on these sacred precints. That's a bit much as they say in Britain. John Paul must have backed off because he realized he was pushing the envelope. I realize that some non Jewish Poles died in Auchwitz, as you have said, but one can pray for those victims without intruding on the killing field. .

Justin
May 5, 2005 - 11:32 pm
I know that it is very difficult to stand outside history's window and to view events as happening to others, unrelated to ouselves. I hope we are all able to do that for it is the only way we can safely negotiate difficult topics.The more objective and analytical we are the easier it is to comment on sensitive historical events. The topics we will be dealing with in the future will be more and more sensitive to some of us and unless we can play as third parties we are lost.

Bubble
May 5, 2005 - 11:47 pm
Sorry Trevor, There is a difference between "build a chapel in Auszwitch (Polish territory) in which to pray and meditate" and the reality of establishing a Carmelite convent at the former death camp located at Auschwitz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relations_between_Catholicism_and_Judaism

Bubble
May 6, 2005 - 01:54 am
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson, third US president, architect and author (1743-1826)

robert b. iadeluca
May 6, 2005 - 03:44 am
Unless some words are softened and personal attacks (either proactive or reactive) are completely eliminated, I may have to report certain participants to the Director of Education. I dislike this but will do it if it means the survival of this discussion group. Removal means removal from Story of Civilization permanently. In the 3 1/2 years existence of this forum, participants were removed only twice. That is a tribute to the maturity and forebearance of the great majority of those who speak in this forum.

Here are the ground rules which everyone here is already acquainted with:-

Quoting Durant:-"The preponderant bequest of the Age of Faith was religion."

For this reason, it will be impossible to participate in this forum without discussing "religion" from time to time.

"The following guidelines will be enforced by the Discussion Leader to avoid confrontations and digressions about personal religious views.

"1 - You may make one post describing your own beliefs related to religion (whether you have a religious faith or do not) in order to explain your viewpoint toward the topic at hand. Making additional posts about your religious beliefs or faith is not permitted.
2 - Do not speak of your religion or absence of religious beliefs as "the truth."
3 - Do not attempt to change another's conviction about religion. "Comments about issues are welcomed. Negative comments about other participants are not permitted.

"Those participants who do not believe they are being treated fairly in this respect always have the right to contact Marcie, Director of Education. I will follow her guidance."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 6, 2005 - 03:54 am
"Allowing for the universally greater influence of the rich in elections and appointments, the Jewish communities were semidemocratic enclaves in a monarchical world.

"The taxpaying members of a congregation chose the rabbis and officers of the synagogue. A small group of elected elders sat as a Beth Din or communal court.

"This levied taxes, fixed prices, administered justice, issued ordinances -- not always observed -- on Jewish diet, dancing, morals, and dress. It was empowered to try Jewish offenders against Jewish law and had executive officers to carry out its decrees.

"Penalties ranged from fines to excommunication or banishment. Capital punishment was rarely within the power or custom of the Beth Din. In its stead the Jewish court used the herem or full excommunication -- a majestic and frightening ceremony of charges, curses, and candles extinguished one by one as a symbol of the culprit's spiritual death. The Jews, like the Christians, used excommunication too frequently, so that in both faiths it lost its terror and effectiveness.

"The rabbis, like the Church, prosecuted heretics, outlawed them, and on rare occasions burned their books."

We are now on the subject of Government. Let us, please, remain within this sub-topic.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 6, 2005 - 03:59 am
Here is a message given yesterday by Mal's daughter, Dorian.

"Hi all, Mal's doing well still, and sat in her wheelchair for an hour today! She is exhausted this afternoon from the effort, but as most of you know, it's one of those very important things to get moving as soon as possible after surgery. Once again, thank you all for your good wishes via email and postings, cards, flowers, gifts, etc. She feels well loved.

Bubble
May 6, 2005 - 04:07 am
No capital punishment, no, but something that the orthodox would see as much worse: a Pulsa diNura.

http://www.adago.com/Pulsa_diNura.html

As you can read here, it is still evoked today.
For Prime Minister Rabin, his murderer took it very seriously.

robert b. iadeluca
May 6, 2005 - 04:32 am
This ARTICLE may be of interest to those here who participated in Durant's third volume, "Caesar and Christ."

Robby

Bubble
May 6, 2005 - 04:39 am
I bet that exhibition will also be on the net and we can all see it. How exciting.

Scrawler
May 6, 2005 - 08:59 am
I came across this passage while doing some research I thought you folks might be interested in reading:

"But what is history? How is it written? How is it read? Is it a dispassionate chronicle of events scientifically determined and set down in the precise measure of their importance? Is this ever possible? Or is it the transmutation of the ordinary into the celebrated? Or the cunning distortion which gives a clearer picture than accurate blueprints?

It seems to me facts are primary and interpretations come after...If we can find out the facts we can form our individual opinions on them.

No two people see exactly the same thing; too many witnesses have contradicted each other.

Truth is absolute and for all time. But one man cannot envisage all of truth; the best he can do is see a single aspect of the whole..."

~ "Bring the Jubilee" by Ward Moore

robert b. iadeluca
May 6, 2005 - 02:43 pm
I assume people here are still examining Post 604 more in detail so they can react accordingly, so I will hold off on printing further paragraphs.

Robby

Justin
May 6, 2005 - 03:25 pm
Excommunication has been a powerful weapon for Christians and for Jews. It is similar to "shunning" in the Menonite society. One is expelled from the community and ostracized.

I am aware of some incidents that indicate the power of the decree. During the Middle ages a Holy Roman Emperor was threatened with it and as an alternative agreed to stand in his bare feet in the plaza outside the church in the dead of winter with snow on the ground for twenty four hours. He took the alternative. In another incident Henry 11 of England, threatened with excomunication for his complicity in the death of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Beckett, accepted a blow well laid on by each member of the monestery of Canterbury as an alternative. There were about two hundred members and each thought he was the only one to repay the debt.

Justin
May 6, 2005 - 03:35 pm
The Rabbis prosecuted heretics. That must have been the job of the Sanhedrin during the period of the Temple. That's why Jesus was brought before the Sanhedrin for blasphemy. They had the power to hear the case but not the power to punish with capital punishment. I wonder if any of the records of the procedings of the Sanhedrin have been preserved.

Justin
May 6, 2005 - 03:41 pm
If any Jew were a heretic,Paul was that man. He lived during the Rabbinical period when rabbis had the power to excommunicate. I wonder about Maimonides too. He was outside the pale for much of his life. He must have run afoul of the Rabbis. So was Saarda. Are there any well known cases involving Jewish heretics?

Rich7
May 6, 2005 - 03:48 pm
The following article (written in an alternative newspaper at the University of Notre Dame) shows some perspective on the new pope and a modern excommunication.

Also interesting is the reference to an upcoming rewrite on the Catholic view of the Spanish Inquisition. As the author says: "These people don't apologize, they re-write."

http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/may97pettifer.html

Rich

Jan Sand
May 6, 2005 - 11:02 pm
Considering the sensitivities and problems of this discussion group it might be worth noting (without prejudice in any direction) that some integrated philisophical concepts have a rather feral life of their own and within the environment of human interaction can be rather aggressive in preserving their domain. An article on memes is revealing.

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MEMIN.HTML

Bubble
May 7, 2005 - 12:55 am
Jan, interesting idea

Justin I am looking for those Jewish heretics, I know they are some but my memory is on strike at present.

Robby, local rabbis have much clout in their own religious community and I know fir a fact that many people there would not take a single step in life without consulting them. At times it even seems like reading into tarot. I remember when my kids were at school,some afternoon courses could be chosen for a price, to enrich their cultural life. One of the kids was a sensation musically and I told the parents it should be encouraged, with the help of the excellent music teacher at the school. They recognize the truth of his talent but said that the raabi should decide what to do: he could read the will of God better. Telling them that that talent came from God did not help the argument.
That child did not get to learn music, but he was moved to a religious institution for more Torah lessons.

kiwi lady
May 7, 2005 - 01:36 am
Bubble I guess its not much different for kids of fundamentalists of all religions. For instance the Closed Bretheren. What a shame that talent was unable to be fostered.

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 03:19 am
Jan:-I find that concept fascinating. Something to ponder.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 03:33 am
"Normally the Jewish community was not subject to local authority.

"Its only master was the king. Him it paid liberally for a charter protecting its religions and economic rights. Later it paid the liberated communes to confirm its autonomy.

"The Jews, however, were subject to the law of the state and made it a principle to obey it. Said the Talmud:-'The law of the kingdom is law.' Said another passage:-'Since but for fear thereof men would swallow one another alive.'

"The state laid upon the Jews a poll or head tax, property taxes running up to 33%, and taxes on meat, wine, jewelry, imports, and exports. In addition it required 'voluntary' contributions from them to help finance a war, a coronation, or a royal 'progress' or tour.

"The English Jews, numbering in the twelfth century one quarter of one percent of the population, paid eight per cent of the national taxes. They raised a fourth of the levy for the crusade of Richard I, and donated 5000 marks toward his random from German captivity -- thrice the amount given by the city of London.

"The Jew was also taxed by his own community and was periodically dunned for charity, education, and the support of the harassed Jews from Palestine.

"At any moment, for cause or without, the king might confiscate part or all of the property of 'his Jews' for in feudal law they were all his 'men.' When a king died, his agreement to protect the Jews expired. His successor could be induced to renew it only by a large gift. Sometimes this was a third of all Jewish property in the state.

"In 1463 Albrecht III, Margrave of Brandenburg, declared that every new German king 'may according to old usage, either burn all the Jews, or show them his mercy, and, to save their lives, take the third penny' (i.e. one third) 'of their property.'

Bracton, the leading English jurist of the thirteenth century, summed up the matter simply:-'A Jew cannot have anything of his own because whatever he acquires he acquires not for hmself but for the king.'"

"Man's inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn." (Robert Burns).

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 03:45 am
Here is the complete poem, "MAN WAS MADE TO MOURN" by Robert Burns.

Robby

winsum
May 7, 2005 - 10:12 am
this quote from durand "'A Jew cannot have anything of his own because whatever he acquires he acquires not for himself but for the king.'" until recently has applied to women as well only substitute HER HUSBAND for KING. . . .Claire

Scrawler
May 7, 2005 - 10:33 am
"I also began to understand the central mystery of historical theory. When and what and how and where, but the when is the least. Not chronology but relationship is ultimately what the historian deals in. The element of time, so vital at first glance, assumes a constantly more subordiante character. That the past is past becomes even less important. Except for perspective it might as well be the present or the future or, if one can conceive it, a parallel time...

"For the participants history is a haphazard affair, apaprently aimless, produced by human beings whose concern is essentially with the trivial and irrelevant. The historian is always conscious of destiny. The participants rarely - or mistakenly. ~ "Bring the Jubilee" by Ward Moore

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 10:42 am
Makes one to think, Scrawler. So in this forum are we talking about the past or the present or the future?

Robby

monasqc
May 7, 2005 - 11:31 am
The fact that capital punishment wasn't in the Jewish law proves a fact: Jesus Christ was not killed by the Jews. Only the Romans are accountable for it. It is a grave church misconception given to its members which caused great harm to that people.

A long time I questioned myself; my own ability to recognize an avatar he be it and came before me, one of my own race for example. Or one of them. Why Jesus was not recognized by the Hebrews? Why Mohammed was not recognized by the Israelis? Why Moses was not recognized by the Egyptians? Why Buddah was not recognized by the Indians? Finally, I found that I would never blame anyone for not seeing. Each and everyone has to look for the truth within.

Bubble
May 7, 2005 - 11:41 am
Justin, about heretics, Shabbetai Zvi is considered one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/loc/False.html

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 11:55 am
Does every Jew (or Christian or Muslim) obey the law? Are there any Jews on death row? Does the fact that a law exists "prove" that an individual is innocent?

Robby

Bubble
May 7, 2005 - 12:13 pm
what law? moral law? the biblical law? the country's law?

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death... if that relates to the question.

http://www.studyworld.com/Rosenberg_Espionage_Case.htm

Justin
May 7, 2005 - 01:08 pm
Monasqc: Yes, and John Paul has made a beginning, however slight, in bearing the burden. A Vatican mandated closing prayer at every Mass, for years into the future, asking for forgiveness for the sins of the Church, clergy, and laity against the Jews would be helpful in driving the message home to Catholics. It would set a fine example for other Christians who have inherited the burden. Public revision of the message of the Passion would also help. Make it clear to the Oberamagau people that their false message is harmful and excise it. Publicly chastise those who, like the star of Lethal Weapon, persist in carrying this false message to an unsuspecting faithful. It is time for Christianity to stand up and take it's lumps but I think the new Pope will not follow John Paul's lead.

Justin
May 7, 2005 - 01:18 pm
I hope Fifi and Joan read Robby's 619 from Durant for it contains much of what their exchange was about. You two are among our brightest posters and I have not seen anything from either of you for too long.

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 01:36 pm
This ARTICLE about Oberammergau presents the problem in telling the story of the crucifixtion of Jesus without being anti-Judaic.

Robby

winsum
May 7, 2005 - 02:26 pm
History is open to interpretation. Yes, and so are the interpretors.

winsum

JoanK
May 7, 2005 - 03:27 pm
Justin: I'm here, as always. There is a lot to think about in Robby's post, and in the poem which he quoted.

Scrawler has also given us a lot to think about: in history as relationships.

As always, I'm glad to be part of such an interesting, varied, and intelligent discussion.

Justin
May 7, 2005 - 03:49 pm
John Paul apparently went further in his effort to correct some of these problems than I thought. Revisions at Oberrammergau are worthy of applause. The old script was a millennium old and was so effective that Hitler, who saw it in 1934, praised it as a useful tool in his plan to rid the world of Jews.

winsum
May 7, 2005 - 06:24 pm
I sent the Meme to a friend who looked it up on google and came out with this. . Painted cows, but there is a connection. Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 06:30 pm
Message from Dorian:-

Saturday Mal Update

Well, it looks like Mal's going to be released within the next two days. Probably the main thing that has to happen before they can release her is to arrange for home health care, since she still needs quite a bit of help getting around still. We're excited!

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 07:08 pm
Economy

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 07:19 pm
"To these political inconveniences were added economic restrictions.

"The Jews were not legally or generally prevented from owning land. At one time or another in the Middle Ages they owned considerable tracts in Moslem or Christian Spain, in Sicily, Silesia, Poland, England and France.

"But circumstances made such ownership increasingly impractical. Forbidden by Christian law to hire Christian slaves and by Jewish law to hire Jewish slaves, the Jew had to work his holding with free labor, hard to get and costly to retain.

"Jewish law forbade the Jew to work on Saturday, Christian law usually forbade him to work on Sunday. Such leisure was a hardship. Feudal custom or law made it impossible for a Jew to find a place within the feudal system. Any such position required a Christian oath of fealty and military service. But the laws of nearly all Christian states forbade the Jews to carry arms.

"In Vsigothic Spain King Sisebut revoked all grants of land made to Jews by his predecessors. King Egica 'nationalized' all Jewish holdings that had at any time belonged to Christians.

"In 1293 the Cortes of Valladolid prohibited the sale of land to Jews. The ever-present possibility of expulsion or attack persuaded the Jews, after the ninth century, to avoid landed property or rural solitude.

"All these conditions discouraged Jewish agriculture and inclined the Jew to urban life, to industry, trade, and finance."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 7, 2005 - 07:33 pm
How JEWISH CLOTHING originated in the Feudal system.

Robby

Justin
May 7, 2005 - 10:46 pm
How is it Christians and Muslims adopt so much from Jewish tradition and yet hate the people who gave them all they have. It's a strange world.

Jan Sand
May 7, 2005 - 11:31 pm
Perhaps it's the same psychological syndrome as parents and teen-age children

Bubble
May 7, 2005 - 11:51 pm
A parenthesis: everything the least different from "norm" is frowned upon and discriminated against especially when it is found in a minority.

Examples? we just named Jews and Gypsies. There is also also discrimination against the Blacks by the Whites, Kurds or Greeks in Turkish countries, the disabled of course be their limitations mental or physical, all are "not favored" or unworthy of equal rights.

Is deviation to norm considered that dangerous that it requires strong anti-reflexes? Caused by a hidden gene, as I heard recently?

Post #637-638
It explains so clearly the why of certain differences and for me was an eye opener: I took all those rules for granted with "traditions dictates garbs and practices" or "it is written in the Torah somewhere". Now of course it becomes clear that it had much to do with local laws as well and survival as an ethnic group.
Bubble

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 03:45 am
We read about church versus state. How about CLASS STRUGGLES WITHIN THE CHURCH?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 06:42 am
"In the Near East and in southern Europe the Jews were active in industry.

"Indeed in several cases it was they who brought advanced handicraft techniques from Islam or Byzantium to Western lands. Benjamin of Todela found hundreds of Jewish glassworkers in Antioch and Tyre.

"Jews in Egypt and Greece were renowned for the excellence of their dyed and embroidered textiles. As late as the thirteenth century Frederick II called in Jewish craftsmen to manage the state's silk industry in Sicily.

"There and elsewhere Jews engaged in the metal trades, especially in goldsmithing and jewelry. They workd the tin mines of Cornwall until 1290.

"Hebrew artisans in southern Europe were organized in strong guilds and competed successfully with Christian craftsmen. But in northern Europe the Christian guilds acquired a monopoly in many trades.

"State after state forbade the Jews to serve Christians as smiths, carpenters, tailors, shoemakers, millers, bakers, or physicians, or to sell wine, flour, butter, or oil in the markets, or to buy a home anywhere except in the Jewish quarter."

More discrimination in Northern Europe than in the south?

Robby

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 01:48 pm
As in all previous class struggles within the Church the Vatican and the Holy Office will win. Opus Dei will stamp out Liberation Theology.Fr. Gutteriez will wiggle as a Dominican but the Inquisition will get him in the end. They may not be able to burn heretics at the stake anymore but they will add the rebellious Father to their star studded illustrious list of heretics. That list includes Savonarolla, and Gallileo, among many others. .

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 02:14 pm
My daughter, who has been engaged in genealogy work for us, told me this morning that she thinks the reason the family moved from Austria, to Switzerland, to Holland, to New York in the Sixteenth, Seventeenth, and early Eighteenth centuries was because the family in Austria was Jewish. They were Dutch Reform Christians when they came to early New York. There are baptism and marriage certificates in Dutch Reform churches all over New York. It's going to be fun to figure out how all that happened and if its true to observe the reactions from those of my larger family who have other religious allegiances.

winsum
May 8, 2005 - 02:57 pm
that could have really have confused Hitler and company. If your family is blonde and blue eyed mostly from the dutch and Swiss input you'd all be ARYAN JEWS. good thing you made it to here when you did. .

Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 03:04 pm
My middle name is Bancker, originally, I am told Van Banckert. My mother and her sister, when young, attended the Dutch Reformed Church in Kingston, New York, I believe. One time while riding near Albany, New York, I saw one of those historical markers stating that a man named Bancker was the first mayor of Albany.

I don't know if there are any Jewish genes in me but the way people inter-marry over the centuries, I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

Robby

winsum
May 8, 2005 - 03:11 pm
makes for universal distribution of dna. we could all be gypsies as well , especially those of us with a european background. . . . Claire

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 03:37 pm
And I love Flamenco.

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 03:49 pm
Robby: According to my daughter I have rellies buried and on the rolls of the Dutch Reformed Church in Kingston. Yours and mine may be dirt mates. Our ancient bones are intermingled.

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 03:57 pm
Is GOD controversial?

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 04:01 pm

Mal posted this in WREX forum a short time ago.

"I arrived home about an hour ago. Later than we thought because I had trouble getting in and out of the car. Bibby Baben is miffed because I left her for so long, and is teling me all about her adventures.

Briefly, the Colonoscopy I had one morning was not a success, and the CT scan at 10:30 that night after I drank even more of the clean-out preparation, showed I had Diverticulitis that was blocking my intestine. It also had infiltrated my bladder. The gastroenterologist resectioned my bowel, and a urologist did his job, and a gynecologist tackled a fallopian tube that also was invaded. I guess the surgery took about 5 hours with me left with an ostomy, which we hope weil be temporary. Right now the idea of the surgery that would be involved with putting me back together does not appeal very much.

Someday I'll write something about probably the worst hospital experience I've ever had, but not tonight. In a huge hospital "plant" like UNC is there is too much of a lack of communication, and I sinceely believe many, many problems arise because of a shortage of nurses. The doctors I had seem good and competent, so I can't complain on tha score. When Dorian had a bowel resection in 2001, I'd have said you were crazy if you had suggested that I'd have one four years later.

I had little rest in the hospital, which has a nasty habit of admitting people at 3 a.m.and making them my roommate with noisy doctors and relatives in attendance, as if it had been high noon.

I thank you all for the flowers and cards you sent to me and thr thoughts you've posted here.. I'm grateful to all of you.

angelface555
May 8, 2005 - 04:13 pm
Hello from Angelface555!

winsum
May 8, 2005 - 04:18 pm
first it's good that Mal has enough energy to tell us ALL ABOUT IT. . .or at least SOME OF IT. I hate hospitals too.

as to the God guiddance councelor program it upsets me that God is being made so human and so pervasive. It's even become soap opera material and invaded prime time. . .I didn't know about the show or Imight hae watched it. . . you never know it might have been something like the John Denver version OH GOD, which was amusing anyhow. Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 04:40 pm
Angelface:-Now that you have found me - - -

Don't go away!

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 8, 2005 - 04:52 pm
Back to "Jewish Life in Christendom." Durant tells us --

"The Jews turned to finance.

"In a hostile environment where popular violence might destroy, or royal cupidity confiscate, their immovable goods, the Jews were forced to the conclusion that their savings should be in liquid and mobile form.

"They took first to the simple business of money changing, then to receiving money for commercial investment, then to lending money at interest. The Pentateuch and the Talmud had forbidden this among Jews, but not between Jew and non-Jew.

"As economic life grew more complex, and the need for financing became more acute with the expansion of commerce and industry, the Jews lent one another money through a Christian intermediary, or through silent partnerships in an enterprise and its profits -- a device allowed by the rabbis and several Christian theologians.

"Since both the Koran and the Church forbade the charging of interest, and Christian moneylenders were consequently scarce before the thirteenth century, Moslem and Christian borrowers -- including ecclesiastics, churches, and monasteries -- applied to Jews for loans, so Aaron of Lincoln financed the building of nine Cistercian monasteries and the great abbey of St. Albans.

"In the thirteenth century Christian bankers invaded the field, adopted the methods that had been developed by the Jews, and soon surpassed them in wealth and range. The Christian usurer, although he did not have to safeguard himself to anything like the same extent against the chances of murder and pillage, was no less exacting than the Jews.

"Both alike pressed the debtor with Roman severity and the kings exploited them all."

As my father used to say:-"There's more than one way to skin a cat."

Robby

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 06:35 pm
Durant makes a good case for the availability of liquidity among the Jews. Immovable assets were vulnerable to confiscation by royalty and to destruction by violent Christian mobs. The solution was obvious.Liquidity was the answer. That solution allowed others to use the asset without giving up title. The Jew had been forced into a very lucrative position- banker to the Christian world. Jewish partnerships formed. The Christians built churches and the Jews made money.

MeriJo
May 8, 2005 - 06:53 pm
This is my first time here. I have been looking in for awhile. Your discussions are interesting.

A footnote to reference of Aaron of Lincoln: Aaron's house is still standing, and there is a picture at this site.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=66&letter=A

Best wishes.

MeriJo

Éloïse De Pelteau
May 8, 2005 - 07:26 pm
It must be nice to be home Mal, take it easy and don't do too much, you have to get well now.

Robby, "The Jews turned to finance." which they are very good at, but who can blame them, it is small compensation for what they always have been going through.

Justin
May 8, 2005 - 09:11 pm
Merijo: It's a fine article that you gave us about Aaron of Lincoln. I wondered what happened to Aaron's heirs, particularly his wife who probably did not predecease him. It was an interesting way for the crown to acquire Church property. You will recall that issue as one causing problems between Henry ll and Thomas, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Thomas was Henry's Chancelor of the Exchequer before his ordination.

robert b. iadeluca
May 9, 2005 - 02:59 am
MeriJo:-I see you accepted my invitation to visit us. Welcome! As you can see, we have a lively group of participants here and I hope you will become one of us.

If you have not yet done so, please read the Heading above in detail. It tells you exactly who we are and what we do. Some of our group have one or more of Durant's volumes of The Story of Civilization and some do not. If you do not, you will not lose out as I regularly print out almost every paragraph. We are currently in his fourth volume, "The Age of Faith" and in the section entitled "Judaic Civilization."

If you will look at the GREEN quotes in the Heading under Medieval Jews, you will see the third sub-topic, "Jewish Life in Christendom" which covers Government, Economy, Morals, Religion, and Anti-Semitism. At the moment we are discussing Economy. Following that we will move on to the next major topic, "The Mind and Heart of the Jew." Then comes "The Byzantine World."

Now and then we get temporarily off topic, but try our best to hold to the words of Durant. Our ground rules here are simple -- courtesy and consideration to each other. None of us here pretend to be an expert and we learn not only from Durant but from each other.

Again -- WELCOME!

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 9, 2005 - 03:14 am
"In the uneasy intervals between confiscations, the Jewish bankers prospered and some became too visibly rich.

"They not only advanced capital to build castles, cathedrals, and monasteries, but they raised for themselves substantial houses. In England their homes were among the first dwellings built of stone.

"There were rich and poor among the Jews, despite Rabbi Elezar's dictum that 'all men are equal before God -- women and slaves, rich and poor.' The rabbis sought to mitigate poverty and check profiteering wealth by a variety of economic regulations. They emphasized the responsibility of the group for the welfare of all and softened the stings of adversity with organized charity.

"They did not denounce riches but they succeeded in giving to learning a prestige equal to that of wealth. They branded monopoly and 'corners' as sins. They forbade the retailer to profit by more than a sixth of the wholesale price. They watched over weights and measures. They fixed maximum prices and minimum wages.

"Many of these regulations failed. The rabbis could not isolate the economic life of the Jews from that of their neighbors in Islam or Christendom.

"The law of supply and demand of goods and services found a way around all legislation."

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 9, 2005 - 03:15 am
Morals

robert b. iadeluca
May 9, 2005 - 03:21 am
"The rich tried to atone for their accumulations by abundant charity.

"They acknowledged the social obligations of wealth and perhaps they feared the curse or fury of the poor. No Jew is known to have died of hunger while living in a Jewish community.

"Periodically, and as early as the second century after Christ, each member of the congregation, however poor, was assessed by official overseers for a contribution to the kupah or 'community chest' which took care of the old, poor, or sick, and the education and marriage of orphans. Hospitality was accorded freely, especially to wandering scholars. In some commnities incoming travelers were billeted in private homes by officers of the congregations.

"Jewish philanthropic societies grew to a great number as the Middle Ages advanced. Not only were there many hospitals, orphanages, poorhouses, and homes for the aged but there were organizations providing randoms for prisoners, dowries for poor brides, visits to the sick, care for destitute widows, and free burial for the dead.

"Christians complained of Jewish greed and tried to stir Christians to charity by citing the exemplary generosity of the Jews."

Robby

Bubble
May 9, 2005 - 05:40 am
Here it is the norm: more retired people are active in voluntary organizations than not. I wonder if it is the same elsewhere? I was too young when living in Europe to even ask that question.

As for philantropy, I remember that at home, like in every Jewish house, we had a special pale-blue metallic box with a slot on top and a key locked little door under. Every holiday when we were exchanging presents, or on the eve of a big family event, some money was put in there by one of us. This was the special fund for rebuilding Israel and to help the the needy new arrivals. Special delegates from Israel visited us once a year to empty the boxes and tell us what was needed and what was done in the previous year.

Every big association has an official date or month in the year when they can organize a national collection. The Anti Cancer association, the Deaf association, the Down Association are only a few of them. The drive is aired on TV and radio, one gets reminders by post and highschool childrens go from door to door with receipt books to collect donations. Of course there are many other unofficial demands as well, when someone needs a transplant or needs a drastic treatment only possible abroad.

MeriJo
May 9, 2005 - 06:15 am
Thank you, Robby: This is a very good place.

Thank you, too, Eloise, for your welcome, and Justin, I'm glad you liked that article. I liked the house. That was quite a house for the 12th century!

winsum
May 9, 2005 - 09:32 am
equating knowledge with material riches is still working in some of us; so I felt really good about exchanging my comfortable middle class economy for that of a teachers wife. Unfortunely the teacher was christian although an agnostic and didn't share those values. He always felt inadequate about his ability to MAKE MONEY. His first cousin was a very rich famous movie star with lots of MONEy which didn't help. So we fought over our economic/social status for twenty seven years. . .I guess I should have married a Jewish school teacher. . . . Claire. . .

JoanK
May 9, 2005 - 11:22 am
MAL: great to see you back. We have really missed you!!!

Bubble
May 9, 2005 - 11:24 am
Hurrayyyy Mal is back!!!

Claire, you never thought of becoming a teacher yourself?

JoanK
May 9, 2005 - 11:26 am
Money: my Jewish mother-in-law told me a story about the meaning of money growing up poor in Poland. She said "you may think that as Jews, we put too much emphasis on money. But to my family, money was life. During the pogroms, the Cossack soldiers would come through. If you had money to give them, they would spare you: if you didn't, they would kill you". She remembers hiding while this was going on. She was 7.

winsum
May 9, 2005 - 11:36 am
I sorta was for a while. We both taught in the CULVER CITY SCHOOL CAMP system and I had a special certificate so that I could which out me in the classroom as a sub during times when the camp was closed. A subs life is tough, but I brought the guitar which defanged the kids and we sang etc. plus some art stuff I did on the black board at lib to maintain control They never knew what I'd do next. Neither did I. Later I spent nine years teaching groups of teenagers folk guitar in my living room and adults at night. I liked to teach and am pretty good at it, but conditions are tough. Teachers really earn the pay they get which is only ten months of the year and very limited by administration policies. . . . . Claire

Rich7
May 9, 2005 - 03:47 pm
On the subject of the practice of charitable giving by different cultures, the Charities Aid Foundation, states that the average American gives 1.9% of their income to charity, the British contribute 1.0%, and the French a mere 0.4%.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1384050,00.html

I'm not sure what this means, other than there is a different attitude toward charity among different cultures.

Rich

3kings
May 9, 2005 - 05:20 pm
Bubble I agree it is good for the retired to do voluntary work, but I feel that organizations sometimes use this voluntary labour to reduce their wages bill, which I think is a bad thing.

For instance, in this country we have a fire service that is staffed by about 30 % volunteers, persons who work at every day pursuits, but drop everything and rush to attend house and scrub fires when the alarm is raised.

Very good, but they are not as capable as professional firemen, for all their good intensions. Also, they are depriving someone else of full time employment. For these reasons, I don't think volunteer workers in some services are always the best solution.

Also, I don't think voluntary giving of cash, will ever adequately replace the funds and services that Governments, ( i.e. taxpayers ) can and should provide to the needy. ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
May 9, 2005 - 05:37 pm
Durant continues:-

"The hygienic features of the Law alleviated the effects of congested settlements.

"Circumcision, the weekly bath, the prohibition of wine or putrid meat as food, gave the Jews superior protection against diseases rampant in their Christian vicinities.

"Leprosy was frequent among the Christian poor who ate salted meat or fish, but was rare among the Jews. Perhaps for like reasons the Jews suffered less than Christians from cholera and kindred ailments.

"But in the slums of Rome, infested with mosquitoes from the Campagna marshes, Jew and Christian alike shivered with malaria.

"The moral life of the medieval Jew reflected his Oriental heritage and his European disabilities.

"Discriminated against at every turn, pillaged and massacred, humiliated and condemned for crimes not his own, the Jew, like the physically weak everywhere, resorted to cunning in self-defense. The rabbis repeated again and again that 'to cheat a Gentile is even worse than to cheat a Jew,' but some Jews took the chance. Perhaps Christians too bargained as shrewdly as they knew. Some bankers, Jewish or Christian, were ruthless in their resolve to be paid, though doubtless there were in the Middle Ages, as in the eighteenth century, moneylenders as honest and faithful as Meyer Anselm of the rote Schild.

"Certain Jews and Christians clipped coins or received stolen goods. The frequent use of Jews in high financial office suggests that their Christian employers had confidence in their integrity.

"Of violent crimes -- murder, robbery, rape -- the Jews were seldom guilty. Drunkenness was rarer among them in Christian than in Moslem lands."

I'm beginning to see the advantages of being a Jew.

Robby

kiwi lady
May 9, 2005 - 07:39 pm
As I said before Robbie I was fascinated when I was reading through those Levitical laws they were all for a reason not just ritualistic! That is what makes me very sure they were from a divine source.

Carolyn

Justin
May 9, 2005 - 09:05 pm
Carolyn: What does He ra tino ataahua tenei represent?

kiwi lady
May 9, 2005 - 10:11 pm
Justin its Have a nice day or Have a good day in Maori.

Carolyn

Justin
May 9, 2005 - 11:28 pm
Carolyn: Thank you and a He ra tino ataahua tenei to you too.

Bubble
May 10, 2005 - 12:13 am
Trevor - most of the voluntary work could be classified as "social working". For most it is done with the full backing of governement services: they refer cases to us when it is in our field of expertise and we refer to them those cases which need more than our ressources. Very simplistically put, there are not enough working hands and volunteers usually are more sympathetic.

All the cafeterias in hospitals for example have two paid workers and six or ten or twelve volunteers in rotation. There are volunteer helpers who help feed those after surgery, they sell news papers and magazines, they look after the comfort of the patients with an additional pillow or a straightening of sheet, they even make phone calls for those who cannot move from their beds.

Same with kids after school with help for homework or extra-lessons.

My library even could be classed as such: I cater for the old French speaking population who does not master Hebrew enough to read it. My customers find here books I recommend for each according to their tastes; I even buy when more than two people show an interest in a special book they remember of old. I take a symbolic US$ 0.20 per book which barely suffice for buying the plastic red covers I use and the transparent tapes for repairs.

Carolyn, most of these rules today seem to be common sense, after the knowledge we gained in science, biology, etc. It was very advanced for that time. I am sure that some of those rules which seem totally unpractical in a modern world will one day show that they have a reasonable motive behind them.

"Meyer Anselm of the rote Schild" is that the first of the Rotschilds?

Robby, think twice: it is hard to be a Jew!

robert b. iadeluca
May 10, 2005 - 03:07 am
"The Jew's sex life, despite a background of polygamy, was remarkably wholesome.

"They were less given to pederasty than other peoples of Eastern origin. Their women were modest maidens, industrious wives, prolific and conscientious mothers.

"Early marriage reduced prostitution to a human minimum. Bachelors were rarities. Rabbi Asher ben Yehiel ruled that a bachelor of twenty, unless absorbed in study of the Law, might be compelled to marry by the court.

"Marriages were arranged by the parents. Few girls, says a Jewish document of the eleventh century, were 'indelicate or imprudent enough to express their own fancies or preference.'

"But no marriage was fully legal without the consent of both parties. The father might give his daughter in marriage in her early years, even at six. But such child marriges were not consummated until maturity. When the daughter came of age the she could annul it if she wished. The betrothal was a formal act, making the girl legally the man's wife. They could not thereafter separate except by a bill of divorce.

"At the betrothal a contract (ketuba) was signed for the dowry and the marriage settlement. The latter was a sum set aside out of the husband's estate to be paid his wife in case the husband should divorce her or die.

"Without a marriage settlement of at least 200 zuzus (which could buy a one-family house) no marriage with a virgin bride was valid."

I don't see anything about buying on credit or bankruptcy or foreclosures or going back to live with parents.

Robby

Rich7
May 10, 2005 - 07:26 am
Bubble, Good catch on the rote schild/ Rothschild connection. Rote schild stood for the red shield that Meyer Anselm had over the door of his place of business. Rote schild ultimately evolved into Rothschild.

I tried to find a site that would be usable to demonstrate this connection, but after Googling "Rothschild," I entered a world of kooks and conspiracy theorists.

It seems that, on the net, the name "Rothschild" is an attraction for a wide range of oddballs.

Rich

Bubble
May 10, 2005 - 07:41 am
sorry about the Spanish... it is (tongue in cheek) what Ketuba should mean for a new bride.

LA KETUVA ES UN DOCUMENTO MUY IMPORTANTE QUE LAS MUJERES DEBEN GUARDARLO MUY BIEN PARA NO OLVIDAR NINGUNA DE ESTAS OBLIGACIONES:

KE TU VA... A FREGAR

KE TU VA...A PLANCHAR

KE TU VA.. A LABURAR

KE TU VA.... A CRIAR A LOS NIÑOS

KE TU VA.... A MENEARTE CUANDO TU MARIDO LO PIDA.

KE TU VA ....A DEJAR A TU MARIDO, JUGAR A LAS CARTAS, TOMAR , Y FUMAR NARGUILA

KE TU VA.... A AGUANTAR A TU MARIDO CUANDO ANDA MAL AHORA................

The Ketuba is a very important document which wives should keep preciously to remind themselves of their obligations.

That You will have to cook
That You will have to wash
That you will have to work
That you will have to produce children
That you will have to move when your husband command it (I think?)
That You will have to let your husband play cards, take and smoke the narguila
That You will have to endure your husband when it goes bad ....

winsum
May 10, 2005 - 09:34 am
Jan says he's building a new computer. his old one is kaput. . .he buys components and arranges them into whatever he wants. I guess it takes a while. he'll be back.

MeriJo
May 10, 2005 - 02:26 pm
Rich7:

Try this link for Rothschild family. It seems to be what you were looking for.

http://www.answers.com/Rothschild%20Family

robert b. iadeluca
May 10, 2005 - 04:54 pm
Any comments about Durant's remarks in Post 680?

Robby

3kings
May 10, 2005 - 05:06 pm
Durant writes :- Drunkenness was rarer among them in Christian than in Moslem lands." I wonder why ? And also, I wonder how anyone could measure it ?

Durant goes on to say :-"Marriages were arranged by the parents. Few girls, says a Jewish document of the eleventh century, were 'indelicate or imprudent enough to express their own fancies or preference.'

He then ' muddies (sp?) the water ' by saying :- When the daughter came of age she could annul it if she wished. ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
May 10, 2005 - 05:28 pm
Mal update for Tuesday

Hi all,

Mal asked me to post and let you know she's fine, just exhausted, and has been in bed since she last wrote you. She'll do her best to pop in tomorrow!

Dorian

Rich7
May 10, 2005 - 05:53 pm
of at least 200 zuzus (which could buy a one family house) no marriage with a virgin bride was valid."

Don't believe it. I just made an offer on a house, and my bid of 200 zuzus was turned down.

Rich

kiwi lady
May 10, 2005 - 06:09 pm
LOL Rich!

Justin
May 10, 2005 - 09:41 pm
It is hard to understand how Durant can say that maidens who are modest and men who practice pederasty less than others are wholesome.When he says that he is also saying that immodest maidens and pederasts are not wholesome. Pederasty had the blessings of the Greeks who thought the practice quite wholesome. It also seems to have the blessing of the RC Church Bishops who simply move their pederasts from one parish to another. More than that the new Pope does not seem much interested in the effects of this modern western religious practice on western society. He too appears to choose to ignore the practice in order to protect the traditions of the Church.

Bubble
May 11, 2005 - 12:33 am
Drunkenness was rare because wine was usually reserved for kiddush, the four prescribed glasses for the Seder or other felicious blessings.

As a child, I had rarely seen Jewish men drinking alcoolic beverage unless they had to when in company of "Goy-s" and even then it was moderately. In Israel there has been a drastic change, not for the best, since the arrival of the Russian immigrants. Now we find Vodka sold in every food shop.

Trevor, it is hard for a girl of 18 or less not to be delicate and accepting when she has been sheltered all her life and the only adult male she could talk to was her father. Even siblings over 5 or 6 are segragated with different orientations or occupied in different parts of the house. A "khatan" or groom chosen by parents and the rabbi could not be a bad match, could it? **tongue in cheek**
Of course in deep antipathy at first sight, the arrangements are invalidated.

Rich, I am searching for my Ketubah... I wonder where my parents kept it secure? I do remember that the amount written there would have been plenty to buy a house and half. Of course Ben never had that kind of money, and if he had been able to raised it, he would have been in deep debt all his life.

Don't Christians have similar arrangements? Arabs used to buy their wives with 20 camels, 40 sheep, etc. and this was given back if the wife was returned to her family. I don't know about today's arrangements.

In some communities, mostly North Africans, the mother of the bride still displays the blood stained sheet "after consumation" to show the world that she raised her daughter properly and that the groom was not swindled.

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 03:33 am
"Polygamy was practiced by rich Jews in Islamic lands but was rare among the Jews of Christendom.

"Post-Talmudic rabbinical literature refers a thousand times to a man's 'wife,' never to his 'wives.' About the year 1000 Rabbi Gershom ben Judah of Mainz decreed the excommunication of any polygamous Jews. Soon thereafter, in all Europe except Spain, polygamy and concubinage became almost extinct among the Jews.

"Cases confinued to occur, however, where a wife barren for ten years after marriage allowed her husband to take a concubine or an additional wife. Parentage was vital. The same decree of Gershom abolished the old right of the husband to divorce his wife without her consent or guilt.

"Divorces were probably less frequent in medieval Jewry than in modern America.

"Despite the comparative looseness of the marriage bond in law, the family was the saving centr of Jewish life.

"External danger brought internal unity. Hostile witnesses testify to the 'warmth and dignity, thoughtfulness, consideration, parental and fraternal affection' that marked and mark the Jewish family. The young husbnd, merged with his wife in work, joy, and tribulation, developed a profound attachment for her as part of his larger self. He became a father, and the children growing up around him stimulated his reserve energies and engaged his deepest loyalties.

"He had probably known no woman carnally before marriage and had, in so small and intimate a community, few chances for infidelity afterward. Almost from their birth he saved to provide a dowry for his daughters and a marriage settlement for his sons. He took it for granted that he should support them in the early years of their married life. This seemed wiser than to let youth prepare with a decade of promiscuity for the restriction of monogamy.

"In many cases the bridegroom came to live with the bride in her father's home -- seldom to the increment of happiness. The authority of the oldest father in the home was almost as absolute as in republican Rome. He could excommunicate his children and might beat his wife within reason. If he seriously injured her, the community fined him to the limit of his resources.

"Usually his authority was exercised with a sternness that never quite concealed a passionate love."

We will, of course, compare these mores with those of our own culture, but how often we have reminded ourselves in this discussion group that we try our best to see the reasons for their behavior through ancient eyes. Furthermore, can we see the mote in our own eye?

Robby

Bubble
May 11, 2005 - 05:39 am
There is at least one country where until the 50s Jews could and did have more than one wife. That is in Yemen. In the operation to bring them to Israel, quite a few arrived with a second wife and this caused quite a lot of bureaucratic problems.

winsum
May 11, 2005 - 08:13 am
was probably a lousy lover. But then Women weren't supposed to enjoy sex then and for some cultures even now. The ten year time period in which to bear children related only to her fertility and said nothing about his. nuff said. . . Claire

MeriJo
May 11, 2005 - 01:34 pm
If there is a stereotypical modern culture with which to compare the medieval way of a Jewish Family, I would think it is the family in the United States that would be of the same nationality as the medieval Jewish family, for example, a German Jewish family with a German-American family. There would be some similarities in living that had been inherited.

There was little traveling around in the medieval times and customs held fast for decades. There was little traveling here until after World War I, but after that event, there was much immigration and intermarriage here. This tendency toward mobility has increased even more so since then. Many of the customs have been lost or modified.

Justin
May 11, 2005 - 01:42 pm
It is hard for me to understand a society that allows a husband or father to beat members of his family within reason. I have never beat my wife nor my children with reason or without. I will admit there were times when I wanted to beat some of them but did not. Any man who can not control himself enough to avoid beating a woman or child is not much of a man in my eyes. Control freaks are sick and need help but they are also weak men who are full of fear that women will control them if they don't dominate with brutality.

winsum
May 11, 2005 - 02:29 pm
were in when I was a child and believe me I got lots of them. It had to do with my big mouth mostly. . .sassing parents wasn't allowed unless you were willing to bear the consequences. Now I sass everyone but no one spanks me. . . (G) except maybe Robby now and then. . . . Claire

3kings
May 11, 2005 - 03:11 pm
Reading the old testament, it is clear that the Jews of those days behaved sexually much the same as all other races, and I would be amazed if modern Jews acted any differently to their counterparts today.

People are just that: People. In any collection, whether of race, economic or social status, one can find examples of the whole spectrum of human attitudes and practices. Justin speaks often of the excuses for pederasty offered by some members of the Catholic community.

There is at present a very disturbing case in NZ, in which a admired war hero and leader ( now dead )of the Presbyterian Church, has been accused of sexually attacking both young boys and girls in his care. It seems accusations have been made for the last 20 years, but the church hid his wrong doing, and left him as headmaster of their "School for children at Risk" This beggars the mind, and leads one to acknowledge that dastardly behaviour occurs everywhere, and everywhen. ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 04:42 pm
"The parental relation was more nearly perfect than the marital.

"The Jew, with the vanity of the commonplace, prided himself on his reproductive ability and his children. His most solemn oath was taken by laying his hand upon the testes of the man receiving the pledge, hence the word testimony.

"Every man was commanded to have at least two children. Usually there were more. The child was reverenced as a visitor from heaven, a very angel become flesh. The father was reverened almost as a vicar of God. The son stood in his father's presence until bidden to be seated, and gave him a solicitous obedience that fully comported with the pride of youth.

"In the ceremony of circumcision the boy was dedicated to Yahveh by the covenant of Abraham. Every family felt obligated to train one son for the rabbinate. When the boy had completed his thirteenth year he was received into manhood, and into all the obligations of the Law, by a solumn ceremony of confirmation.

"Religion cast its awe and sancitity over every stage of development and eased the tasks of parentage."

Any comments about family and/or parentage?

Robby

Justin
May 11, 2005 - 04:43 pm
Trevor: the problem of pederasty is not just one of "some members of the RC Church. It is a problem confined to the clergy and the hierarchy but as you indicate it is not just Catholic. The Presbyterians are also in it. They don't deserve to be let off the hook if for no other reason than hypocracy.It doesn't really matter to me how priests get their jollies. What does matter is their open opposition to sex which is the unversal method of racial survival. That opposition is absurd. Celibacy is absurd and is the cause of their problem. What can the hierarchy expect of the poor priests who must give up the most powerful driving force in nature? Celibacy. If the hierarchy is concerned about the children let them remove the exciting cause. If the parents are concerned about their children let them remove them from exposure to the effects of the absurdity.

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 04:43 pm
Religion

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 04:47 pm
"In like manner religion stood as a spiritual policeman over every phase of the moral code.

"Doubtless loopholes were found in the Law and legal fictions were concocted to restore the freedom of adptation indispensable to an enterprising people. But apparently the medieval Jew accepted the Law, by and large, as a bulwark saving him not only from eternal damnation but more visibly from group disintegration.

"It harassed him at every turn but he honored it as the very home and school of his growth, the vital medium of his life."

Robby

winsum
May 11, 2005 - 04:49 pm
became a ritual for women too in my youth my sister who was five years older was confirmed and I had to argue my way out of it when my time came. No thank you I don't want to be confirmed. and I didn't;t know why I just didn't want it. . . I was just beginning to question religion and god and it was part of all that questionable stuff. . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 05:28 pm
Mal's Wednesday Story

Hi All,

Mal has asked me once again to let you know that she's resting right now, after a very big workout today!

We had the PT and the nurse over, and she spent all her energy on them. Tomorrow we have a doctor's visit in the morning. I found a transport service which will allow her to stay in her wheelchair for the ride.

We'll keep you posted tomorrow!

Take care, Dorian

MeriJo
May 11, 2005 - 06:31 pm
From what I understand re the pedophiles found among the priests of the Catholic Church, their behavior was their own guilt and responsibility. If these men confessed these sins, the confessor was obligated never to break the seal of the confessional. This put a terrible dilemma in place. If the offender told the bishop outside the confessional - in the Catholic Church, it is the priest's bishop who decides what to do with the offending priest - the bishop would move them to another parish. It is important to understand here that there was a time when child molestation was not received well in police stations. The officers did not think that it was an important infraction, and so nothing was done by the church except to move them around, enroll them in a pyschiatric program or have them admitted to a hospital for therapy.

The dynamics of society are such that offenses sometimes take awhile to be considered serious enough for law enforcement or some of an older generation to think child molestation traumatic. Knowledge was disseminated in bits and pieces until it finally appeared full-blown as a result of medical studies and public outrage. It has now reached the point of absolute intolerance and it is about time, but I think that this is the result of society's actions to do something about this at last.

Celibacy is voluntary. A candidate for the priesthood who enters into priesthood knowing that that is a qualification is given time to decide if this is a sacrifice he wishes to make. There are orders such as the Christian Brothers who take vows of celibacy for a year at a time. I don't know of others, but there may be.

robert b. iadeluca
May 11, 2005 - 06:36 pm
Any comment about Jewish parental vs marital relationships as Durant discusses it in Post 699?

Robby

JoanK
May 11, 2005 - 06:48 pm
It is difficult for us to put ourselves in the place of the people we are studying at the time and place we are studying. We need a better sense of how the Jewish family was different from families around them.

In all cultures at that time, I think, women had a subordinate position and were married off young in arranged marraiges. The Jewish culture is portrayed as more family centered, perhaps, than the Christian (although we haven't yet studied the Christian families of this period). This makes sense for a people that were isolated in small commumities.

One thing I am a little confused about (perhaps through careless reading). Are we talking mainly about urban Jewish communities? When did the small Jewish towns typical of Eastern Europe develop?

MeriJo
May 11, 2005 - 07:45 pm
I think Jewish life was far more structured and somewhat rigid, but I think that may have been because of the laws of the land - which relegated Jewish families to a ghetto. In this structured way there was purpose and progress as a family. It would be interesting to know how the expectancy of one son becoming a rabbi affected both the son and the family? Also, what if there were just daughters? Would that have a derogatory effect upon the reputation of the father?

Justin
May 11, 2005 - 09:20 pm
At one point in American jurisprudence, those who gave testimony swore to its truth upon the Bible. Today, of course,in our enlightenment, one may affirm that testimony given is true. Can you imagine a time when the court clerk representing the state would open his pants to allow a witness to lay hold in an expression of honest intent. If I were the Testee rather than the Testor, I would be scared to death. Men are so peculiar.

Jan Sand
May 11, 2005 - 09:37 pm
Justin

The peculiar gestures demanded of people to demand truthful testimony strike me as having little to do with the nature of testimony. The accepted current gesture of raising one's right hand to guarantee against lies is extremely odd and I fail to see how it guarantees anything. What would happen in court if someone agrees to tell the truth but refuses to raise his right hand?

winsum
May 11, 2005 - 10:36 pm
TESTICLES?

If I were the TESTEE rather than the TESTOR, I would be scared to death. Men are so peculiar
as is the word TESTIMONY

Tradition. is very BASIC and as well as offering this most personal equipment most people are right handed and that hand is very precious too. In some cultures a thief loses it when caught.. . a most precious thing is at stake. another way of puttng it is "on my mothers honor", or "my children's head". . serious stuff.. . Claire"

Bubble
May 12, 2005 - 12:09 am
# 699 and 702 - This feels as if I am reading a description of today's family life in Mea Shearim or in Bnei Braq, our two most important "religious Ghettos" in Israel. I find it hard to remember it is not so familiar elsewhere.

#708 - a son becoming a rabbi brings the blessing of God to the family and especially to his father who was his first mentor. Unlike priesthood, he is not cut from his family since he will also marry and bring forth -God Willing - numerous kids of his own.

A dad of daughters only, as in arabic culture, will be teased a lot and be titled "Abu banot" father of daughters instead of his rightful name.

Did you know that the first born, after there are many more siblings is called proudly "Behor (or Behora for a girl) which means First Born. My grand pa lost his first name of Abraham and was called Behor all his adult life. Likewise my grand ma was often refered to as Behora instead of Joya. It can complicate, or in some case ease, genealogy when the same first name is often repeated in the extended family.

#711 - I often heard the oath "my children's head". On My mother's grave is also used a lot. Here in Israel, I also hear "on the Sages'grave", and it is not said lightly.
Bubble

robert b. iadeluca
May 12, 2005 - 03:37 am
And then there is that children's act of crossing ones fingers behind one's back which negates everything that is "sworn" to in front. I wonder if there is any adult equivalent.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 12, 2005 - 03:54 am
"Every home in Judaism was a church, every school was a temple, every father was a priest.

"The prayers and ritual of the synagogue had their briefer counterparts in the home. The fasts and festivals of the faith were celebrated there with educative ceremonies that bound the present with the past, the living with the dead and the yet unborn.

"Every Friday eve of the Sabbath the father called his wife, children, and servants around him, blessed them individually, and led them in prayer, religious readings, and sacred songs. To the doorpost of each major room was attached a tube (mezuzah) containing a parchment roll inscribed with two passages from Deuteronomy (vi.4-9; xi, 13-21) reminding the Jew that his God is one and must be loved 'wth all thy heart and soul and strength.'

"from the age of four the child was brought to the synagogue. There religion was impressed upon him in his most formative years.

"The synagogue was not merely a temple, it was the social center of the Jewish community. Synagogue, like ecclesis, synod, and college, meant an assemblage, a con-greg-ation. In pre-Christian days it had been essentially a school. It is still called Schule by Ashkenazie Jews.

"In the Dispersion it took on a strange variety of functions. In some synagogues it was the custom to publish, on the Sabbath, the decisions reached by the Beth Din during the week -- to collect taxes, advertise lost aticles, accept complaints of one member against another, and announce the coming sale of property so that any claimant on it might protest the sale. The synagogue dispensed communal charity, and in Asia, served as a lodging for travelers.

"The building itself was always the finest in the Jewish quarter. Sometimes, especially in Spain and Italy, it was an architectural masterpiece, espensively and lovingly adored. Christian authorities repeatedly forbade the erection of synagogues equaling in height the tallest Christian church in the city.

"In 1221 Pope Honorius III orderd the detstruction of such a synagogue in Bourges. Seville had twenty-three synagogues in the fourteenth century, Toleo and Cordova almost as many.

"One built in Cordova in 1315 is now maintained as a national monument by the Spanish government."

Robby

Bubble
May 12, 2005 - 07:48 am
I wonder if it is the reason why some old synagogues have been found in underground of buildings?

Scrawler
May 12, 2005 - 08:31 am
When we raise our right hand in a court of law and promise to tell the truth and nothing but the truth SO HELP ME GOD! To which God are we referring to? What if we don't belive in any God; does this absolve us from telling the truth? And what does telling the truth mean any way? There's truth and there's truth!

MeriJo
May 12, 2005 - 08:42 am
I think that one may affirm that what one is about to say is the truth if one does not wish to make an oath to that effect.

Jan Sand
May 12, 2005 - 09:15 am
Obviously, since men have been seeking the truth since the beginning of philosophy, the act of raising one's right hand must align the human nervous system with the puzzles of the infinite in such a way that prevarication thereby becomes impossible. Subconsciously, wise people instinctively know that the nervous system becomes an antenna to absolute truth and all legal systems are thereby protected. Or at least, that is the current belief.

Justin
May 12, 2005 - 01:15 pm
"Raise your right hand. I, (name), do solemnly affirm that I will tell the truth. (as I know it)"

The failure to do so is to perjure oneself.

Why the right hand and why is it raised?

Jan says, "it alligns the nervous system with puzzles of the infinite." The Arabs cut off the right hand of theives because it is the hand one uses to eat.Such a person will starve at a communal bowl. Westerners shake hands with the right hand. When one speaks of "my good right arm" one refers to the full physical power of man.

What is it about the right hand that gives it so much significance?

Rich7
May 12, 2005 - 01:24 pm
hand, from Latin and Old French is "sinistre" or "sinister" -Evil,, wrong, of the devil.

Rich

JoanK
May 12, 2005 - 03:08 pm
In many, if not most cultures, there is some distrust of left handed people. (I'm aware of this, being left handed). In Arab countries, one eats from the communal bowl with the right hand, and wipes oneself with the left. No wonder, people didn't want to eat with left-handers.

I remember in Shakespeare, too, a sinister left-handed villain (was it in Much Ado?).

In the Saint Joan discussion, we are learning that illegitimate children had to wear a "bar sinister" on their shield. My savvy sister tells me that means that while others had a diagonal stripe going from right to left on their shield, "bastards" had one going from left to right.

I even had a friend who once told me her daughter was handicapped. Turns out she meant she was left-handed.

I don't know if these ideas are found in Jewish culture or not.

MeriJo
May 12, 2005 - 04:23 pm
There is a story that says that when cavemen went out to hunt they carried their clubs to kill the animals they were stalking in their right hands.

When the first caveman met another caveman - the first of their own species each had encountered - one tentatively put his club in his left hand and extended his right hand to the other who did the same gesture of placing his club in the left hand and extended his right hand. This indicated no harm was intended to the other.

Justin
May 12, 2005 - 04:53 pm
In Italian, "Sinistre" means to the "left".

robert b. iadeluca
May 12, 2005 - 05:17 pm
Perhaps THIS is the answer to the question in the Heading - "What are our Origins?"

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 12, 2005 - 05:30 pm
Here is another CHURCH VS STATE situation.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 12, 2005 - 05:33 pm
This is a FOLLOW-UP of the previous posting.

Robby

Jan Sand
May 12, 2005 - 10:17 pm
The several recent posts about the differences in belief that various people hold and the strong reactions that they demonstrate in holding and disseminating thse beliefs indicate how fundamental (in the general sense) these beliefs are to the foundations of human personality. When someone of firm strong belief confronts someone else of beliefs equally strong but of different basis, there can only be strong conflict as these beliefs are (at least in the mind of the believers) a challenge to the veracity of something very very basic and perhaps even life threatening, if "life" can mean the eternal life offered by many religions. The request for tolerance in these circumstances can only propose that the believers accept a compromise for something very basic upon which their entire world view resides and I wonder if this is possible.

Justin
May 12, 2005 - 10:19 pm
The first migration doesn't sound much like the Garden of Eden and the expulsion. Where is Cain and Able in all this genetic DNA stuff and what about the fella who had to start things over again with his daughters because his wife was dead and everyone else was wiped out.Are we writing another creation story? Gosh! I don't know what to think about this.

Justin
May 12, 2005 - 11:15 pm
Jan: you make a very relevant observation;that a request for tolerance proposes compromise which some believers are not likely to accept. I think there is some reason to hope that as people are taught to think they will, more readily, recognize superstition and reliance upon faith as a response to the unknown will diminish. This phenomenon occurred in Europe after the French Revolution. It could happen here in the US, but unfortunately, we don't teach many students to think. We teach subject matter and expect rote responses. Thinking is something one does after one masters subject matter. The SAT was an effort to test that power before learning subject matter but the skill was not taught before the test. Thinking is thought to be a skill one absorbs like osmosis and photosynthesis.

Justin
May 12, 2005 - 11:29 pm
Globaization may help the US overcome its reliance upon religion. More Gods will join the fray. Now there is only one God, a Christian God. He has no cometition. Asians, Indians, Middle Easterners,comimg to the US with Gods of their own, will bring him competition. Just wait till we have an Islamic Supreme Court judge or an Islamic caucus in the Congress.

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 12:10 am
Justin.

In my experience in schools it is not just thinking as an organized and formulated process that is neglected in society but the very process of presenting and absorbing and integrating any new system of knowledge.

Simple repetitive processes can be useful (although terribly boring) in transferring knowledge but the integration of new material into previous material so that a deep understanding of relationships is acquired to modify total outlooks is unfortunately a rare experience in formal education. And many times the application of acquired knowledge is rarer still. How many times have any of us utilized the theory of quadratic equations in our daily lives. The knowledge may be useful but I have yet to discover how.

Bubble
May 13, 2005 - 01:05 am
Jan - above post- I was told by my math teacher that Geometry, Algebra, etc might seem pointless in our daily life, but that they were an excellent tool to teach how to look at a problem, how to analyse the different factors given, how to develop a cohesive thinking pattern. In fact it should be the tool to hone our intellect.

post 724- what an interesting research about the first migration out of Africa. I wish I were knowledgeable enough to do more than read the reports.

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 01:32 am
Bubble

My experience with mathematical instruction has been that it is presented as a series of mysterious arrangements of numbers within patterns wherein certain positions initiate elemental arithmatic interactions with particular numbers and if this odd mental dance is performed accurately a correct solution will result. It has little to do with an understanding as to why these particular matrices are chosen to operate in the manner indicated. Conceptual thinking does not seem to be involved. I tolerated this series of intricate mental contortions through to advanced calculus and finally gave up out of boredom, confusion and frustration.

robert b. iadeluca
May 13, 2005 - 03:44 am
An interesting interchange. And now back to Durant.

"Hebrew and Pentateuch were the primary studies.

"At the age of ten the student took up the Mishna, at thirteen the major tractates of the Talmud. Those who were to be scholars continued the study of Mshna and Gemara from thirteen to twenty or later.

"Through the diversity of subjects in the Talmud the student received a smattering of a dozen sciences but almost nothing of non-Jewish history. There was much learning by repetition. The chorus of recitation was so vigorous that some localities excluded schools. Higher education was given in the Yeshibah or academy

"The graduate of such an academy was called talmid hakam -- scholar of the Law. He was usually freed from community taxes and although he was not necesarily a rabbi, all nonscholars were expected to rise on his coming or going.

"The rabbi was teacher, jurist, and priest.

"He was required to marry. He was paid little or nothing for his religious functions. Usually he earned a living in the secular world. He seldom preached. This was left to itinerant preachers (maggidim) schooled in sonorous and frightening eloquence.

"Any member of the congregation might lead it in prayer, read the Scriptures, or preach. Usually, however, this honor was granted to some prominent or philanthropic Jews.

"Prayer was a complex ceremony for the orthodox Hebrew. To be properly performed it required that he should cover his head as a sign of reverence, strap upon his arms and his forehad samall cases containing passages from Exodus (xiii, 1-16) and Deuteronomy (vi, 4-9; xi, 13-21) and wear on the borders of his garments fringes inscribed with the basic commandments of the Lord.

"The rabbis explained these formalities as necessary reminders of the unity, presence, and laws of God. Simple Jews came to look upon them as magical amulets possessed of miraculous powers.

"The culmination of the religious service was a reading from the scroll of the Law, contained in a little ark above the altar."

Comments?

Robby

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 05:37 am
I remember that scroll I think. It was taken from it's place in the ark with due ceremony but what happened next is forgotten except that it was known as the TORAH. . wilshire blvd temple in the late 1930's. I spent the required religious schooling time which didn't last long in the library on the floor reading Oz books. It wasn't hard to get excused from class. nobody noticed me much in those days. I was "quiet". (G).

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 05:45 am
Jan -- "integration of new material into previous material so that a deep understanding of relationships is acquired to modify total outlooks "

Not all minds are able to do this. some are very linear and learn rote matériel well, while others are more associative and learn it more slowly because of the distractions, but that's where the creative processes take over. The association of one thing with another to produce something new.

I've never had any use for quadratic equations or I'd know what they are.

Bubbles. I found geometry to be not at all abstract like other forms of math.. It dealt with actual shapes of things and laws required in their manipulation. I thought of it as having something to do with LAW. The abstract thinking that is supposed be part of the math process still escapes me.

Claire

Rich7
May 13, 2005 - 06:51 am
polynomial having a single variable "x".

The equation is solved by using the Quadratic Formula.

You may never need to use a quadratic equation to write a poem or paint a landscape, but those who build dams, and design semiconductors solve quadratic equations all the time.

Where mathematics lost me was a graduate course in Non-Euclidian Geometry. Remember Euclid? You know, parallel lines do not intersect? You can be comfortable with that concept.

Non Euclidian Geometry teaches that parallel lines DO intersect. (At infinity.)

Whew!

Rich

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 07:08 am
It seems that the Jewish religion (like others) has some roots in magic with the little messages on paper in cases to be strapped on and the little scroll in the doorway to (perhaps) keep out demons. Not too different from spinning prayer wheels and prayers seem to be, after all, not too different from spoken spells to evoke good effects.

Insofar as polynomials are concerned, nobody has ever asked me to build a dam (or even a damn)and semiconductors may be lively little things in my computer just as the cells in my digestive system are very active and I have no hopes of controlling them either. I would like to construct a FTL interstellar coupe but I see no courses offered in that direction. I have used the quadratic equation to solve equations and can easily substitute values for letters in the proper place but am no more aware of what goes on than I am as to what ocurrs when I drop a quarter in a candy machine to get a few gumdrops.

Bubble
May 13, 2005 - 09:29 am
post #743 - Comments, Robby? only that nothing has changed. Each sentence is true as it was then.

I have an uncle now retired, who takes his pleasure in leading the service daily in the nearby synagogue. He never was religious before, certainly never had time to study Torah or whatever when he was a storekeeper. Now he is well appreciated for his good voice in leading the prayers. I see many people getting more religious and taking interest in the Bible when they get on in years.

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 10:02 am
how is it different from this which is simple algebra. I did well in algebra.

if X=5, then 14-X=9. Ok I get that. so is it an equation with a Y factor as well or a bunch of factors. . .shoot!!!

Claire

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 10:06 am
that meet at infinity which is an abstraction. infinity is NO WHERE so it remains more true than that . . . that parallel lines never meet. . thusly: Some truths are more true than other truths. . . for-sooth. . . .. Claire

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 10:17 am
But when you get into f(X) where the f is rather vague or undefined and then ramifications of that function are specified in relation to other undefined functions I get rather lost no matter how many constants you scramble into the mess. That's where I blow a fuse.

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 10:21 am
that little "f" attached to the X as in fX is where the creeativity can come in dealing with association upon association upon associat which is really the way some people think and why information can get so scrambled that the basic facts are often lost. Of course new ideas can grow in such an invironment and that is why mathematical wizards are said to be creative geniuses. . . Einstein???. . . . Claire

should dI fix the spelling and put in those parenthesis? nope I"ll just be creative today.

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 10:27 am
Perhaps we had better get back to f(JR) where (JR) has to do with Jewish religion rather than a character from Dallas.

MeriJo
May 13, 2005 - 10:47 am
Re comments for Durant's piece:

It may describe a way of life that is comforting and purposeful. It was also secure for medieval times to have a method of behavior.

OFF_TOPIC:

Re: "Critical thinking" I taught critical thinking to a group of upper elementary students (6th Grade, oldest group) in 1972-73. These were students who had qualified as mentally-gifted. I taught this after school at the request of the school district, but it failed to become part of the regular curriculum as money became unavailable for the MG program. It was a rewarding program both for the teacher and the students.

JoanK
May 13, 2005 - 11:24 am
Mathematics: as an ex-mathematician, daughter of an ex-mathematician, married to (guess what) an ex-mathematician, I would like to defend mathematics, but am not sure how. I do know that mathematics taught me to think logically, and evaluate what I think of as "standards of evidence".

Galileo said something like: the book of nature is written in the language of mathematics. He seems to have believed that it was through mathematics that we would come finally to understand how the universe works. Mathematicians I know still believe that. We haven't achieved that yet, maybe never will, but a lot of our understanding of the universe, and the forces in it which impinge our lives, comes through mathematics.

You may never want to build a dam, but you sure don't want to drown because the dam doesn't work. We would never even be able to talk to each other without the computers and Internet, which would not be possible without mathematics.

If quadratic equations didn't make sense to you, it may have been the teacher's fault, not the equation's. Or it may have been because you weren't taken to the point where you saw what Newton did, when that old apple hit him on the head: namely that the things around us that we see with our eyes can be expressed in terms of those equations. And that once we do that we have a tool thousands of times more powerful than our eyes, and can learn things we could never learn with our eyes.

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 11:39 am
I am lousy with languages. Math is a language. I don't deny the power and the utility of math. But when it is taught as a series of mysterious formulas to be stuffed with constants to gain utility it is an ugly subject full of meaningless mental gestures. That is how it was taught to me. Fill in the godamned formulas and get the answers and to hell with comprehending how the formulas were created. I am very good at understanding relationships and discerning patterns (which is why I am good at graphics and building new kinds of machines) but formulas which have to be memorized go down the tubes for me. I do OK with geometry and visualization. Formulas are as meaningless to me as mumbo-jumbo voodoo prayers and equally distasteful. Their virtue is in their utility.

Which is (to return to religion) probably why I find religion so offensive as its coercions and rewards and procedures and mechanical requirements for acceptance have very little if any rational sense for me. And unlike mathematics, they mostly don't work.

Bubble
May 13, 2005 - 12:08 pm
Jan, you reject what doesn't work for you, but it might work for others. Let's give to everyone the choice ofwhat is suited to them.

I agree with you Joan, I found maths a great gymnastic of the mind that helped me develop ways of analysing. Latin and Greek grammar did that too for language skills.

I suppose that Mishna and Gemara are also in a sense similar tools. Pilpul certainly is. Bubble

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 12:45 pm
I am in no way advocating the denial of mathematics to anybody. I have never heard of mathematicians becoming physically violent in their arguments over methods or proofs. Their behavior has, in general, been exemplary although I have heard of some difficulties between Newton and Liebnitz.

Rich7
May 13, 2005 - 02:43 pm
"The culmination of the religious service was a reading from the scroll of the Law, contained in a little ark above the altar."

The reference to the ark above the alter reminded me of something: The Ark of the Covenant.

You all have probably covered this at a time when I was not a participant, but this is something that I have often wondered about:- Why is there so much made, in the Old Testament, of the Ark up to and during Solomon's time, then suddenly the Bible stops referring to it? What happened to the Ark of the Covenant, and why was it suddenly not so important to the Jews?

Now, stand by for an incredible segue from Solomon to mathematics. Possibly the earliest reference to the concept of "pi" is in the Old Testament, where Solomon's temple is described as 3 times as far around as it was across. Remember, the formula (sorry Jan) for the circumference of a circle is pi times the diameter. Pi is 3.14....

Rich

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 02:59 pm
that 3.14 is abbreviated. the whole thing too long to be practical. I'm pretty good at languages but no one ever taught me the LANGUAGE of math.....only how to do it. got lost in trig, could process but not understand. did anyone yet explain the process of quadratic equations. . or maybe it should be in an e-mail. . .I used math in drafting and rendering architectural subjects where it was not abstract. I need a for instance in its use in order to understand it. . . claire

Scrawler
May 13, 2005 - 04:34 pm
I can't help wonder how the ancients managed to educate themselves and their families and the "modern" educators continue to say that they have "no money" in which to educate our children. Just recently we got letters from the "Public" Library Services that they will reduce their hours and won't be able to buy new books because the "bonds" did not pass in the last election. Yet, they managed to buy new furniture and several new computers for the library.

robert b. iadeluca
May 13, 2005 - 04:54 pm
Of course you mathematicians realize you have just scared away 10 potential participants. The only math I know related to the Bible was where Noah told the animals to go forth and multiply and two snakes couldn't because they were Adders.

May we continue?

Robby

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 05:16 pm
Math and religion

As a kid I found numbers somewhat repellant since their relationships were rigidly determined by mathematical regulations. They had a life of their own and seemed to do their thing independent of the fact that they were mere mental conceptions. They were alien artifacts moving through my mind and taking charge of their territory whether I liked it or not. I found this very disturbing.

But mathematics intrinsically has little to do with reality. Disciplines like geometry and topology present the appearance of reality as their original derivation came out of pragmatic structures and their relationships. But once launched on the sea of ideas they moved to territories unlimited by pragmatic data and shaped themselves to internal consistencies not necessarily related to reality. Transformation from geometry to algebraic notation permitted numerical manipulation to move the conceptions into areas beyond normal capabilities of visualization where multidimensional structures interacted beyond human visual conceptualization. And this freedom of theory from physical data permitted exploration of theoretical areas outside of accepted science. This is extremely useful as new data arrived in science which demanded new mathematics and it permitted scientists to shop through theoretical mathematics to discover the necessary tools to understand and explore the new data.

But nobody within mathematics felt violated by the theoretical explorations in mathematics although the ancient Greeks did have a problem with irrational numbers. And in the course of mathematical development various new ideas like negative and imaginary numbers made mathematicians uncomfortable for a while.

But nothing like the violence religion has presented and still presents when conflicting concepts arise. Because religion is similar to mathematics in that it constructs within its theoretical view of the world a kind of self consistency which it accepts as fixed tenets of its doctrines. Religion is somehow floating between the rigidity of mathematics and the necessity of facing up to changing reality which is characteristic of science.

And to bring this comment into the realm of current local discussion it might be interesting to inquire as to the advantage of maintaining a rather rigid system of beliefs under the horrific bombardment of general social forces. The Jews have suffered horribly through the centuries for their beliefs. Whether or not this was worthwhile is probably unanswerable and might be taken as offensive although no offense is intended. But humans are humans, whatever their beliefs and survival is an issue of overwhelming importance. Therefore the question arises as to whether the survival of a belief is more important than the survival of the individual. I cannot pretend to know.

robert b. iadeluca
May 13, 2005 - 05:28 pm
RELIGION takes many forms.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 13, 2005 - 05:43 pm
"The synagogue never fully replaced the Temple in the heart of the Jew.

"The hope that he might some day offer sacrifice to Yahveh before the Holy of Holies on Zion's hill inflamed his imagination and left him open to repeated deception by false messiahs.

"About 720 Serene, a Syrian, annointed himself to be the expected redeemer and organized a campaign to recapture Palestine from the Moslems. Jews from Babylonia and Spain abandoned their homes to join his adventure. He was taken prisoner, exposed as a charlatan by the Caliph Yezid II, and was put to death.

"Some thirty years later Obadiah Abu Isa ben Ishaq of Isfahan led a similar revolt. 10,000 Jews took up the sword and fought bravely under his lead. They were defeated, Abu Isa was slain in battle, and the Isfahan Jews suffered indiscriminate punishment.

"When the First Crusade excited Europe, Jewish communities dreamed that the Christians, if victorious, would restore Palestine to the Jews. They awoke from this fantasy to a succession of pogroms.

"In 1160 David Alrui aroused the Jews of Mesopotamia with the announcement that he was the Messiah and would restore them to Jerusalem and liberty. His father-in-law, fearing disaster for the Jews from such an insurrection, slew him in his sleep.

"About 1225 another Messiah appeared in southern Arbia and stirred the Jews to mass hysteria. Maimonides, in a famous 'Letter to the South,' exposed the imposter's claims and reminded the Arabian Jews of the death and destruction that had followed such reckless attempts in the past.

"Nevertheless he accepted the Messianic hope as an indispensable support to the Jewish spirit in the Dispersion and made it one of the thirteen principal tenets of the Jewish faith."

Further comments relative to the Judaic Civilization?

Robby

Justin
May 13, 2005 - 07:24 pm
The task of a Messiah-Redeemer in the period after the destruction of the Temple was to restore the Jews to Palestine. In the period prior to the destruction of the Temple the task of a Messiah-Redeemer was to free the Jews of Roman domination. The Messiahs were all put to death as dangerous rabble rousers who were injurious to the peace and well being of society.

One of these fellows was turned into a God after his crucifixion as a criminal by an ambitious charlatan who capitalized on the Jewish desire for a happy life. That it was promised after death did not seem to matter to a people deprived of an earthly fulfillment.

The real Messiah came to the Jews in 1948 and they were able to make the best of the opportunity.I'm not sure who it was but it was someone very powerful in the UN who pushed the measure to a successful conclusion. .

JoanK
May 13, 2005 - 07:45 pm
JAN: as usual, your post has much for me to think about:

"But nobody within mathematics felt violated by the theoretical explorations in mathematics although the ancient Greeks did have a problem with irrational numbers. "

If I remember, the Greeks had even more trouble with the concept of zero. A Greek mathematician (I forget which one) was put to death, because he proposed introducing "zero" into the number system. The idea of "nothingness" violated the Greek sense of the nature of the universe.

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 08:02 pm
Now -- a new book on the NYTimes best seller list discusses the framers' intent in the separation of church and state. . . .

HERE

Claire

JoanK
May 13, 2005 - 08:02 pm
JAN says: "the question arises as to whether the survival of a belief is more important than the survival of the individual. I cannot pretend to know".

I quoted the Sociologist Max Weber on this in another discussion. He said that all societies have two sides. In every society, people try to stay alive, and to get the material goods they need to do so. But a life spent staying alive is meaningless, because it always fails. So in every society, people strive to find ways to make life meaningful in the face of death.

He spent much of his career studying the ways in which people do this. He studied religion, of course, but he also studied other ways -- the thrust to increase knowledge, to make the world a better place, to pass on what one has to ones children, or to create a sense of self that was broader than the mere person.

The last particularly interested him. As we discussed a lot when reading "The Iliad", this sense of "who we are" can become more important than life itself: rather than lose it, humans often chose death, as soldiers often do going into battle, since, if this sense is lost, life becomes meaningless.

This, then, must be what motivates many of those who suffer for their religion: forced conversion representing not necessarily the loss of belief (since one can always continue to believe secretly, as indeed many Spanish Jews did) but a denial of who one is.

Of course, many Jews who suffered or were killed did not even have this choice.

winsum
May 13, 2005 - 08:11 pm
my own survival or that of my belief in a democratic system of govt and the survival of individual freedoms. Naturally, my first instinct is for personal survival but on second thought, considering which is more important to me . . . I think the latter since I wouldn't want to live or have my children and their children have to live in a society which doesn't have those freedoms . . . . Claire

Jan Sand
May 13, 2005 - 09:13 pm
No good and rational soldier chooses to die for his cause except in very rare and extreme situations. He chooses to put his life under severe peril to gain the ends of his cause and hopes to survive the experience. To decide to die for the good of one's future children is an odd choice for one who has yet to have them. Mostly the circumstance of chosing death is no guarantee that one's successors will survive. Circumstances change and to choose to survive permits the possibilty that one's beliefs can be re-established.

Justin
May 13, 2005 - 09:52 pm
Durant says the Jews of the Dispersion at first frowned on music as being unsuited to their mood of grief for their lost home. However, gradually, and through the introduction of poetry, music entered synagogue ritual.

The new religions- Christianity and Islam- drew much from Judaism but in the case of music the cultural transfer reversed itself. The chant of the cantor was heavily influenced by singing at St Gall Monastery in Switzerland.

Bubble
May 14, 2005 - 01:00 am
Explain Justin? which cantor???

If I remember correctly about my short stay in St Gall, they speak Switzer Dutsch (sp) there and it was very harsch to my ears.

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 03:02 am
Anti-Semitism

500-1306

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 03:11 am
"What were the sources of the hostility between non-Jew and Jew?

The main sources have ever been economic but religious differences have given edge and cover to economic rivalries. The Moslems, living by Mohammed, resented the Jewish rejection of their prophet. The Christians, accepting the divinity of Christ, were shocked to find that His own people would not acknowledge that divinity.

"Good Christians saw nothing unchristian or inhuman in holding an entire people, through many centuries, responsible for the actions of a tiny minority of Jerusalem Jews in the last days of Christ. The Gospel of Luke told how 'throngs' of Jews welcomed Christ into Jerusalem (xix, 37. How, when He carried His cross to Golgotha, 'there followed Him a great company of people, and of women, who also bewailed and lamented Him' (xxii,27) and how, after the crucifixion, 'all the people that came together to that sight and smote their breasts' (xxiii,48)).

"But these evidences of Jewish sympathy for Jesus were forgotten when, in every Holy Writ, the bitter story of the Passion was related from a thousand pulpits. Resentment flared in Christian hearts.

"On those days the Israelites shut themselves up in their own quarter and in their homes, fearful that the passions of simple souls might be stirred to a pogrom."

Robby

Rich7
May 14, 2005 - 07:31 am
I have had a hard time understanding how, in the centuries after Christ, people who worked in an agrarian culture from dawn to dusk, with no education, and no confident knowledge of where their next meal would come from, would be inspired into dropping their plows and joining a pogrom because of an abstraction such as the thought of the Jewish people not accepting their own Messiah.

Having said that, I read in today's newspapers that there are riots in Afganistan over reports that the Koran was desecrated by Americans during interrogations in Guantanamo. The photos of the rioters show many of them in rags, often with no shoes and few teeth. Perhaps religious outrage and hatred is a mechanism for people to forget their own problems, and Machiavellian leaders have learned to use that reflex to their own advantage.

Rich

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 08:15 am
Some here may be interested in comparing this article on THE CAUSES OF ANTI-SEMITISM with what Durant is about to tell us. As usual, consider the source.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 08:39 am
"Around that central misunderstanding rose a thousand suspicions and animosities.

"Jewish bankers bore the brunt of the hostility aroused by interest rates that reflected the insecurity of loans. As the economy of Christendom developed and Christian merchants and bankers invaded fields once dominated by Jews, economic competition fomented hate. Some Christian moneylenders actively promoted anti-Semitism.

"Jews in official positions, especially in the finance department of governments, were a natural target for those who disliked both taxes and Jews. Given such economic and religious enmity, everything Jewish became distasteful to some Christians and everything Christian to some Jews.

"The Christian reproached the Jew for clannish exclusiveness and did not excuse it as a reaction to discrimination and occasional physical assault.

"Jewish features, languages, manners, diet, ritual all seemed to the Christian eye offensively bizarre.

"The Jews ate when Christians fasted, fasted when Christians ate.

"Their Sabbath of rest and prayer had remained Saturday as of old, while that of the Christians had been changed to Sunday.

"The Jews celebrated their happy deliverance from Egypt in a Passover feast that came too close to the Friday on which Christians mourned the death of Christ.

"Jews were not allowed by their Law to eat food cooked, to drink wine pressed, or to use dishes or utensils that had been touched by a non-Jew, or to marry any but a Jew. The Christian interpreted these ancient laws -- formulated long before Christianity -- as meaning that to a Jew everything Christian was unclean. He retorted that the Israelite himself was not usually distinguished by cleanliness of person or neatness of dress.

"Mutual isolation begot absurd and tragic legends on both sides. Romans had accused Christians of murdering pagan children to offer their blood in secret sacrifice to the Christian God. Christians of the twelfth century accused Jews of kidnaping Christian children to sacrifice them to Yahveh, or to use their blood as medicine or in the making of unleavened bread for the Passover feast.

"Jews were charged with poisoning the wells from which Christians drank and with stealing consecrated wafers to pierce them and draw from them the blood of Christ.

"When a few Jewish merchants flaunted their opulence in costly raiment, the Jews as a people were accused of draining the wealth of Christendom into Jewish hands.

"Jewish women were suspected as sorceresses. Many Jews, it was thought, were in league with the Devil. The Jews retaliated with like legends about Christians and insulting stories about the birth and youth of Christ.

"The Talmud counseled the extension of Jewish charity to non-Jews. Bahya praised Christian monasticism. Maimonides wrote that 'the teachings of Christ and Mohammed tend to lead mankind toward perfection' but the average Jew could not understand these courtesies of philosophy and returned all the hatred that he received."

All this, or course, existed over a thousand years ago as compared to today's beliefs.

As we react, courtesy and consideration will continue to prevail.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 09:06 am
Our mysterious attraction to THE MYSTERIOUS.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 10:02 am
What is the current CATHOLIC-JEWISH RELATIONSHIP?

Let us choose our words carefully.

Robby

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 10:09 am
Bubble: All we have on the topic of chanting comes from page 384 in Durant. He refers to the singing School at St. Gall as the source for Kol Nidre sometime before the eleventh century.

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 10:21 am
Including the American people and the govt. of the United States. The Japanese finely forced us to act. We were and are again an isolationist country. The sins of omission are plentiful. . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 10:35 am
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

- - - Edmund Burke

Bubble
May 14, 2005 - 11:14 am
You will find here about music and chanting in the early days after the destruction of the Temple.

http://www.biblelessons.com/origins.html

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 11:15 am
Manfred Davidmann's use of language is so clumsy I can't make head or tail of what he is trying to convey. It looks as though he is saying the Jews can blame themselves for anti-semitism by folllowing or not following the Law.

kiwi lady
May 14, 2005 - 12:12 pm
I guess all of those reasons Durant gives remind me of the necessity for interaction between different ethnic groups. Communication cooperation and interaction are powerful weapons against prejudice.

These days when I am out shopping I make a point of smiling and chatting to new immigrants or people of other ethnic groups. I have prejudices and getting to know others in my neighbourhood is breaking down my preconceived ideas and nobody so far has snubbed my advances. Its a difficult thing to admit one has prejudices. I have to freely say I had hysterics when Vanessa told me she was in love with a Muslim boy. (comes from progressive family not a fundamentalist) I imagined him to be one of those stereotypes. He would expect her to be subserviant, he would steal my grandchildren ( if they got married and had children!) He was a foreign student when she met him. Nothing could have been further from the truth! Everyone in the family admit he is the kindest and nicest beau Vanessa ever had. ( even my red neck mother!)

I bet there is not one person in here who is entirely without prejudice of one kind or another! The thing is to recognise prejudice from truth.

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 12:22 pm
Carolyn: Sometimes the truth hurts -- in other words, goes against the "truth" we already possess.

Robby

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 12:23 pm
I recognized it as being directed at me first and then realized that I had some directed at others and started to deal with it. this was over fifty years ago and I"ve been aware of it ever since. it takes time. . . .but I do recognize it in myself as well as others when it occurs and take steps. . . . Claire

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 12:27 pm
All you ever wanted to know about TRUTH.

Robby

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 12:32 pm
I went and looked although at first I thought .why bother there is no such thing. and sure enough where something definable in so many ways and has so many uses it becomes INDEFINABLE IN ITSELF. The is no such thing as an absolute truth. . . . Claire forsooth

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 12:33 pm
Chew on THIS for a while. It has plenty of thought-provoking ideas about religion, science, and lots of other stuff if you want to sort out the cobwebs in your brain before examining anti-semitism and other forms of prejudice.

Robby

Bubble
May 14, 2005 - 12:36 pm
Can my truth ever be identical to your truth?

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 12:37 pm
Claire; I beg to differ on question of an isolationist USA. Our current policies are interventionist and preemptive. What is worse, we tend to go it alone, to intervene in places like Russia, and then there is Iraq. We can't seem to see the mote in our own eye anymore.

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 12:38 pm
"to thine own self be true" froM somewhere assuming that we all know who our selves are. That is very SUBJective and subject to revision. . .it is a bit indigestible. . . . others? Claire

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 12:41 pm
don't believe in Bushes retoric. . .wanting to save the world is jus flimm and flam to cover his posterior which is hanging out there in the wind just now. Look at history. remeeber politcal saying like "He kept us out of war" etc. and what about the african problems. we hardly know anything about them except for the occassional documentary which is so horrible it's hard to conceive of our turning our backs but we DO . . . CLAIRE

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 12:45 pm
Remember, folks. We are a historical discussion, not a political one.

Robby

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 12:49 pm
Claire

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 12:52 pm
Claire you make a worthwhile observation about Africa. I wish Clinton had done more about his African problem. Thousands upon thousands perished while we watched from the sidelines. But in the main we have certainly been more interventionist than isolationist.

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 01:52 pm
What is truth, Pilate asks Jesus. Is a meaningful response available? Who knows what is true? We can measure likelihood in terms of probability but not truth. Truth is certainty,and there is very little in this world that is certain. Descartes tried to express truth by saying, "I think, therefore I am." Is that a certainty? Can eye witnesses tell the truth? Probably not.They can tell only what they saw and even that may be distorted by many conditions.

Rich7
May 14, 2005 - 04:26 pm
Rich's second law of living:

Never trust a prophet who has a gift shop which he invites you to visit.

Rich

kiwi lady
May 14, 2005 - 05:14 pm
I am glad I live in a country where not much importance is placed on where one goes to church temple or synagogue. In fact it was only 9/11 and the world panic that set in that we had some problems with people ( only a handful) being very nasty to our Muslim citizens.

Recently the skin heads ( only a few in the South Island in NZ) desecrated a Jewish Cemetary). The whole community got up in arms about the mattter. My mums neighbour is a Muslim and her husband was arrested in the US over 9/11. He was there on a student visa and doing advanced aircraft maintenance course at the same time. He works for Air New Zealand. Mum and the rest of the neighbours went to the Muslim ladies house and took cards and flowers and all his work mates spoke on air about his character. A good man they said. A good workmate. Our Govt intervened and he was released.

It does not mean there is nobody here who has prejudices but in general there is no extremist behaviour by the general population. We like to live and let live.

It is hard to be objective sometimes but in order to live in a fair society we must really try.

Carolyn

robert b. iadeluca
May 14, 2005 - 05:57 pm
In every single culture we have examined through the four volumes so far __ with no exceptions -- Durant has brought up the topic of class. More often than not there were class wars. That topic is exceedingly important in this forum. We have found that we cannot discuss the forward movement of Civilization without discussing class.

The New York Times has started a series on this subject. We will continue to discuss in detail the Judaic Civilization and the following sections in the volume (with your help in remaining on topic) but I feel it is relevant to insert this ARTICLE and subsequent articles as we move along. Hopefully we can relate the Times articles with what Durant is discussing at the moment.

Robby

Jan Sand
May 14, 2005 - 08:35 pm
This article from the NY Times is worth reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/opinion/15kristof.htm

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 09:43 pm
Bubble: Durant's message is much clearer when read with glasses. It is as follows: "From the singing school of the monastery at St Gall, at some time before the the eleventh century, came the complex chant for the famous Hebrew song'Kol Nidre.'" He took that from the Oxford History of Music, page 60.

"Fiddler on the Roof" is on the Telly tonight. I'm sure it was scheduled to coincide with our reading of this particular section of Durant.

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 09:44 pm
what channel? or is it hbo etc.

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 10:09 pm
Claire: Channel 9 but it is finished. Sorry about that.

Justin
May 14, 2005 - 10:14 pm
Kristof's "The Sins of Scripture" won't be as popular as the recent publication of "Intelligent Design" among the evangelicals but it reads like a good opening salvo.

winsum
May 14, 2005 - 11:57 pm
CLASS which one?

My sense of class is something like noblesse oblige. . people should be authentic and never apologize for being who and what they are. This is one way to avoid confusion as to which class a person belongs. Whatever class it is requires its members to fulfill the obligations of it's group.

Just my first thought on the subject and may change as we go along. I haven't thought much about it . . . . YET. Claire

Bubble
May 15, 2005 - 12:13 am
Justin, I did not manage to have this volume of Durant, so I go along only with what is posted today. I wish I could compare the Kol Nidre you talk about and the one my ear is used to, probably the Max Bruch version.

See here: http://www.bj.org/par_00fall/examining_mystery.html

http://www.chazzanut.com/bruch.html

Here you can hear different versions of the Kol Nidrei. I did not succeed in getting there yet, but will try later and maybe I can single out the familiar one here.

http://www.jhom.com/calendar/tishrei/kolnidrei.html

robert b. iadeluca
May 15, 2005 - 04:26 am
Bubble:-Here is the paragraph I left out (back when we were talking about religion) and to which Justin referred.

"The Jews of the Dispersion at first frowned upon music in religion as hardly suited to a mood of grief for their lost home.

"But music and religion are as instinctly related as poetry and love. The deepest emotions require for their civilized expression the most emotional of the arts.

"Music returned to the synagogue through poetry. In the sixth century the paitanim or 'Neo-Hebraic' poets began to write religious verse, confused with acrostic and alliterataive artificialities, but uplifted with the resounding splendor of Hebrew, and filled with the religious ardor which in the Jew now served for both patriotism and piety.

"The crude but powerful hymns of Eleazar ben Kalir (eighth century) still find a place in some synagogue rituals.

"Similar poetry appeared among the Jews of Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.

"When such piutim or sacred poems were introduced into the synagogue service they were sung by a precentor, and music re-entered the ritual. Furthermore the scriptural readings and the prayers were in many synagogues chanted by a cantor or by the congregation in a 'cantillation' whose musical tones were largely improvised but occasionally followed patterns set in the plain song of the Christian chant.

From the singing school of the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland, at some time before the eleventh century, came the complex chant for the famous Hebrew song Kol Nidre -- 'All Vows.'"

Robby

Bubble
May 15, 2005 - 05:01 am
Thank you Robby, that reference is clearer in my mind now.

The chanting of prayers developped in parallel in West and East and is much different in each community although the words of prayers are the same. I, of course, being from Sephardic descent, find the Spanish rythm more familiar to the ear.

In Israel there are synagogues for the Moroccan, the Tunisians, the Spaniards, the South Americans, the Bulgars, all only in the Sephardic community. I am sure it would be the same in the Eshkenazy side.

The public in the Sephardic communities is more apt to joying in and be noisier too. You could call it the Latin enthusiasm.

robert b. iadeluca
May 15, 2005 - 05:13 am
Continuing on with Anti-Semitism and what Durant calls "suspicions and animosities" - -

"There were some lucid intervals in this madness.

"Ignoring state and Church laws that forbade it, Christians and Jews often mingled in friendship, sometimes in marriage, above all in Spain and southern France. Christian and Jewish scholars collaborated -- Michael Scot with Anatoli, Dante with Immanuel,

"Christians made gifts to synagogues. In Worms a Jewish park was maintained through a legacy from a Christian woman.

"In Lyons the marker day was changed from Saturday to Sunday for the convenience of the Jews.

"Secular governments, finding the Jews an asset in commerce and finance, gave them a vacillating protection and, in several cases where a state restricted the public movements of Jews, or expelled them from its territory, it was because it could no longer safeguard them from intolerance and violence."

Robby

Scrawler
May 15, 2005 - 08:20 am
I came across this interesting article. It's a little off the mark as far as the dates go, but it illustrates who were fighting the American Civil War and what they thought of class.

"On both sides,the men brought along with them to war their own ethinic and racial stereotypes. The industrious drive of some of the Northerners made them look down on the Southerners as a slothful lot. Some of the fastidious Germans and Scandinavians were appalled at what they termed "squalor" and laziness-until they experienced their first deep South summer, and learned why life takes a slower pace in other climates. The Southerners, on the other hand, were by turns annoyed or amused at the incessnt busyness of their Northern brethren, believing that gentlemen did not need to always "have something to do." ~ http://civilwarhome.com

An interesting note in this paragraph points out that sometimes our pre-conceived notions are changed by the likes as simple as the "weather." If it were only that easy.

robert b. iadeluca
May 15, 2005 - 08:33 am
Fascinating point, Scrawler. I wonder if the Iraqi heat is causing Northern American soldiers to become more slothful. Heat and class -- an interesting relationship. Southern European Jews vs Northern European Jews?

Bubble speaks of the Sephardic (Spanish) Latin enthusiasm.

Robby

Jan Sand
May 15, 2005 - 09:01 am
I would be a bit suspicious of attributions of laziness. The upper classes have always attributed laziness and stupidity to people who work with their hands even as far back as the ancient slaveholding Greeks who disdained the idea that their theories might be dirtied by pragmatic testing of their concepts. In all likelihood science was held back for centuries by contempt for people who worked with their hands.

Perhaps the slaveholders could doodle with mint juleps but the slaves had a hard time of it. Even today the really tough agricultural work is done by hordes of illegal immigrants from Mexico because the "industrious" northerners will not do the low paying backbreaking work.

Which is not to say that there are still very many hardworking northerners. Nevertheless newly arrived immigrants (whatever their origin) to the US always have done the dirty low paying hard work.

JoanK
May 15, 2005 - 10:34 am
Durant says the Jewish singing was "uplifted with the resounding splendor of Hebrew."

I was glad to read that, as I think Hebrew is a splendid language. Before I learned Hebrew, I always thought the poetry of the King James version of the Old testament was due to the translation. No, it's in the Hebrew.

robert b. iadeluca
May 15, 2005 - 10:56 am
That's informational to me, Joan. I thought the poetry of the King James version resulted from following the Elizabethan style.

Robby

Justin
May 15, 2005 - 01:11 pm
Bubble: Thanks for the renditions of Kol Neidre. Jews who converted to RC at the time of the Spanish inquisition must have felt greatly pained by the experience. It is understandable that something like Kol Neidre would help them past that blow to their self esteem. It seems to me that clearing the conscience before beginning the Atonement process makes sense.

Bruch's work, if it is anything like his G Minor Violin it should be outstanding.

3kings
May 15, 2005 - 02:59 pm
I too, think the poetry of the English translation of the bible derives from its Elizabethan style. Versions other than the King James, do not have that rich poetic style that is so loved by many, even non religious folk like me.

This is not say the Hebrew works are not also poetic. Not knowing Hebrew I must confess my ignorance on any Israeli claims regarding this matter.++ Trevor

Justin
May 15, 2005 - 04:14 pm
The King James is a revision of the Tyndale translation. Tyndale was hung and quartered or quartered and hung for daring to provide a translation other than the vulgate. The poetics may have come from either source because both revisions were Elizabethan.

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 03:46 am
"The attitude of the Church varied with the place and time.

"In Italy she protected the Jews as 'guardians of the Law' of the Old Testament and as living witnesses to the historicity of the Scriptures and to 'the wrath of God.' But periodically church councils, often with excellent intentions, and seldom with general authority, added to the tribulations of Jewish life.

"The Theodosian Code (439), the Council of Clermont (535), and the Council of Toledo (589) forbade the appointment of Jews to positions in which they could impose penalties upon Christians.

"The Council of Orleans (538) ordered Jews to stay indoors in Holy Week, probably for their protection, and prohibited their employment in any public office.

"The Third Council of the Lateran (1179) forbade Christian midwives or nurses to minister to Jews.

"The Council of Beziers (1246) condemned the employment of Jewish physicians by Christians.

"The Council of Avignon (1209) retaliated Jewish laws of cleanliness by enjoining 'Jews and harlots' from touching bread or fruit exposed for sale. It renewed Church laws against the hiring of Christian servants by Jews. It warned the faithful not to exchange services with Jews but to avoid them as a pollution.

"Several councils declared null the marriage of a Christian with a Jew.

"In 1222 a deacon was burned at the stake for accepting conversion to Judaism and marrying a Jewess.

"In 1234 a Jewish widow was refused her dower on the ground that her husand had been converted to Christianity, thereby voiding their marriage.

"The Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215), arguing that 'at times through error Christians have relations with the women of Jews or Saracens and Jews or Saracens with Christian women,' ruled ' that Jews and Saracens of both sexes in every Christian province and at all times shall be marked off in the eys of the public from other people through the character of their dress.' After their twelfth year they were to wear a distinctive color -- the men on their hats or mantles, the women on their veils. This was in part a retaliation against older and similar laws of Moslems against Christians and Jews. The character of the badge was determined locally by state governments or provincial Church councils. Ordinarily it was a wheel or circle of yellow cloth, some three inches in diameter, sewn prominently upon the clothing. The decree was enforced in England in 1218, in France in 1219, in Hungary in 1279. It was only sporadically carried out in Spain, Italy, and Germany before the fifteenth century when Nicholas of Cusa and San Giovanni da Capistrano campaigned for its full observance.

"In 1219 the Jews of Castile threatened to leave the country en masse if the decree should be enforced and the ecclestiastical authorities consented to its revocation. Jewish physicians, scholars, financiers, and travelers were often exempted from the decree.

"Its observance declined after the sixteenth century and ended with the French revolution."

And so this was the attitude of the Church.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 04:20 am
As I indicated in a previous posting, we will continue examining Durant's remarks about the Judaic Civilization but will insert these NY Times ARTICLES about "class" because that topic came up in every one of the cultures that Durant covered.

Robby

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 04:40 am
Is CHILD ABUSE a problem of Roman Catholic priests or is it endemic among clergymen of all religions?

Robby

Rich7
May 16, 2005 - 07:53 am
of the types of badges developed after the Fourth Lateran Council, and their evolution into the yellow Star of David under the NAZIs.

http://ddickerson.igc.org/jewish-badge.html

Rich

winsum
May 16, 2005 - 09:17 am
other religions don't require celibacy from their priests. . . I would imagine the instance of child abuse would me much lower. . . . Claire

Jan Sand
May 16, 2005 - 09:43 am
I doubt that there are accurate statistics about child abuse in the general population and I wonder how much more frequent it might be in celibates.

MeriJo
May 16, 2005 - 09:43 am
Child abuse seems prevalent among Roman Catholic priests because when it is discovered it is so shocking. The fact, I think, that it has been brought to light is a result of more awareness in the public and changing culture. It used to be thought insignificant as recently as the mid-twentieth century, and dealt with privately which, of course, was wrong and completely ignored the harm done to the victims. However, among all the priests in the Church the number so accused amount to about 1% of the number of priests in the church.

Even, apart from the Church, when a woman was assaulted and raped and reported it to the police authorities she was abused by them instead of being taken seriously. This, now, has changed, and for the better.

Celibacy is known as a requisite in the western rite of the Catholic Church. A candidate for the priesthood has many years to consider such a vow. Priests in the eastern rite of the Catholic Church may marry before taking major orders. It is a church rule, however, and I imagine it may be eliminated one day.

Jan Sand
May 16, 2005 - 09:56 am
Although the French lately seem upset by religious groups identifying themselves there is nothing pejoritive in the custom unless it performs the function of making the person a target for nasty impulses. It is the nasty impulses fostered by the Catholic Church and the Nazis that makes the problem. Orthodox Jews and Gypsies and observent Muslims voluntarily costume themselves to be identified - as do soldiers in combat and, of course, as did the old knights with their symbols and flags and many professions in the middle ages and even today.

kiwi lady
May 16, 2005 - 11:18 am
Judging by the number of prosecutions here for possessing or selling child pornography in recent years it seems to be endemic. The dreadful thing is that people in positions such as school principals. Judges and police officers have been identified in these world wide rings. The internet makes it easy for them to keep in touch with each other and coordinate activities as well as to contact and groom children.

We have numerous cases in other church groups coming to the fore from as far back as the seventies. One is involving a Presbyterian childrens orphanage in the sixties and seventies. The perpetrator died before he could be charged but the evidence was overwhelming and the police were about to make an arrest, The man concerned was a pillar of the church and even had a church building named after him. His victims are demanding the building be renamed. The church is trying to avoid compensation and behaving in a thoroughly disgraceful manner in my opinion.

No I have to say abuse is not confined to any one religion or to any one organisation.

carolyn

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 12:26 pm
Sexual child abuse is clearly not limited to the Catholic priesthood. Carolyn told us about a Prebyterian clergyman doing similar things to kids a few posts back. The Catholics seem to be encouraging the practice, however, by insisting on the perjorative celibacy for their priests. That particular brand of clergy knows there is a correlation between their policy and pederasty. Studies probably have not been undertaken to uncover the degree of correlation but I don't think the hierarchy has reason to doubt that such correlation exists.

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 12:31 pm
Caralyn: My town here in California yesterday celebrated New Zealand Day. Folks rubbed foreheads in the Maori way while shaking hands and our arboretum was stocked with New Zealand native plants. A Maori procession and music finished the day. It was a pleasant and informative day.

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 12:50 pm
The record of the RC Church has been so abysmal, so sociopathic over the years and continuing to be so it is difficult for me to understand how any thoughtful person can associate oneself with it. It has been and continues to be a hateful organization that parades a charade that not all are able to recognize because it is cloaked in God's message. The history of this organization should be exposed daily to its adherants so they know the evil they support. The list of their evil producing counsels,eclesiastical meetings, synods, etc. is too long to be ignored by a civilized society.

MeriJo
May 16, 2005 - 01:25 pm
It does seem when one reads history that the Catholic Church has a very negative aura. However, and this is difficult to understand, people who say they are Catholics disobey the guidelines set down by the Church. It is they who are visible, and their behavior is not condoned by the Church. It is too bad, but it is the way of human nature to assign a group as being culpable when in fact it is the individual or individuals of like mind who are culpable not the Church.

Jan Sand
May 16, 2005 - 01:36 pm
How is one to judge an organization if the organization says one thing and it's members do something else? It seems reasonable to examine the proclaimed policies and how the hierarchy carries out those policies to come to a conclusion. The official policy obviously does not condone mistreatment of children but the actions of those empowered by the church seem to do otherwise. The church also condemns the use of protection against a very dangerous disease but many of the adherents ignore this condemnation. It seems a very mixed bag.

winsum
May 16, 2005 - 01:57 pm
How do good practising catholics break out from the bonds of this all invasive force ...the church. . . and does it result in personal psychological trauma when they do? Justin how has it been for you? . . . Claire

Rich7
May 16, 2005 - 02:44 pm
I remember, as a youngster, being lectured that the Catholic church was not brick and morter buildings, papal edicts, paintings, prayer books, etc., it was the people; the clergy doing good deeds and leading us through this world of temptation with their teaching and good example.

Now we hear that the Church is not the people, it's the institution. (Oops, guess we're back to brick and morter, and papal edicts.)

An earlier post was right. These people don't apologise, they rewrite.

Rich

kiwi lady
May 16, 2005 - 03:10 pm
Justin - How nice to have some of our culture in California. However the greeting was incorrect. One rubs noses on one side then on the other side . Its called a Hongi. Maybe the organisers thought Californians might be put off with the Hongi! LOL

MeriJo
May 16, 2005 - 04:16 pm
The Church is the people. The teachings of the Catholic Church are the guidelines for living for those who are baptized Catholics.

If one says he/she is a Catholic, it applies only to that individual's behavior.

The so-called organization is purely for administrative purposes for the temporal needs of the Church. The Pope speaks authoritatively only on matters of faith and morals for members of the Catholic Church.

If one is a Catholic and is a practicing Catholic he/she is a member of a parish for the purpose of attending Mass, and receiving the Sacraments and receiving instruction in the faith at a central place. Each Catholic ought to know what the tenets of his/her faith are and those are the things to which he/she adheres. There is no organization in the sense of it being a representative group speaking for others.

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 04:54 pm
If you folks are ready, we will continue on with Durant and the Judaic Civilization.

Robby

3kings
May 16, 2005 - 04:54 pm
I would plead for a more balanced attitude among the would be opinion makers here. I refer to the expressed view that because Catholic priests have taken a vow of chastity, and some have then gone on to become child abusers, then all Catholic clergy should be suspected of longing to indulge in such crimes.

My Brother in Law is a Catholic teaching brother. As part of his acceptance into the order, he had to take a vow of chastity.

I, as an agnostic, regard him as having some strange beliefs, but to suspect him of harbouring evil thoughts about little children is plainly ridiculous. And to say that such thoughts, should he have them, could be caused by his church vows, is an absurdly twisted view.

There are many practicing child abusers out there, in many churches, and in many walks of life, who have never taken any vow, anytime, any where.

I think we have here a reflection of the "Christian" mode of thinking that has brought the Jews so much pain in the last 2000 years. The twisted thought mode that says, "some Jews sought, and achieved the crucifiction of Christ. Therefor all who profess the Jewish faith are foul murderers of the Christian God." ++ Trevor

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 05:00 pm
Well said, Trevor!!

Robby

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 05:06 pm
Marijo: We are mixing things a little. Sure there is an administrative arm headed by cardinals and at the diocesan level by bishops and arch bishops.They are the pen pushers. But the "Church" is an organization that functions as a body with a chief who has the power of Peter.

He is infallible in issues of faith and morals. When he issues a Bull or an encyclical he is acting as the church. He is in fact "the church." When Councils are called and their actions are endorsed by the Pope the pronouncements are included in faith and morals and the infallibility rule applies. When that happens the organization goes into full gear. The clerical organization moves to ensure the laity are aware of the new rules and that they are implemented in policy and action. The poor parishioner either does what he is told or he is excommunicated. There is no room for argument.

The many eclesiastical councils called over the centuries (some are mentioned in post 812) have advocated little but hate messages for one group or another including the poor parishioners. The guilt for these sins belongs to the clerical force of the "Church", not to the laity. They are the victims of this ruse.

Rich7
May 16, 2005 - 05:15 pm
Well said, Justin!

(I don't know how to write big.)

Rich

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 05:23 pm
Can we turn the spotlight on (pick on) ANOTHER RELIGION (CULT)? Or, is child abuse endemic everywhere?

Robby

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 05:32 pm
Trevor. You are reading into the material posted. You generalize ideas and them translate them in terms of particular people. Clearly not every person who takes an oath of celibacy is going to break the oath. Those who do violate the oath may well be a small percent of the total. But that does not absolve the policy makers of enforcing a rule that correlates well with undesirable actions.

Nothing that I have posted should lead one to think that I tar all with the same brush. I am condemning policy, nothing more and I am certainly not suggesting that your brother or my brother, or my Aunt, for that matter, violates a vow.

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 05:38 pm
And then there was this book by Durant in which he tried to explain the Judaic Civilization -- a topic apparently not of interest at this time.

Robby

Justin
May 16, 2005 - 05:45 pm
Robby, I thought we were talking about Judaic issues as expressed in your 812. I am surprised you thought Trevor's generalization and particularization was an ok position to take. I try hard to deal with policies and to leave people out of the message. I know I don't always succeed but I thought I did that time.

Rich7
May 16, 2005 - 05:54 pm
Robby, thank you for keeping us on Durant. We do tend to go off on tangents.

Jan, you know what a tangent is. You know, sine, cosine, tangent, trigonometry?

Rich

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 05:55 pm
Well said, Justin!

robert b. iadeluca
May 16, 2005 - 06:38 pm
Yes, we have been on topic because Durant has been talking about, to use his words, "the attitude of the Church." Let us now continue:-

"By and large, the popes were the most tolerant prelates in Christendom.

"Gregory I, though so zealous for the spread of the faith, forbade the compulsory conversion of Jews and maintained their rights of Roman citizenship in lands under his rule. When bishops in Terracina and Palermo appropriated synagogues for Christian use, Gregory compelled them to make full restitution. To the bishop of Naples he wrote:-'Do not allow the Jews to be molested in the performance of their services. Let them have full liberty to observe and keep all their festivals and holydays, as both they and their fathers have done for so long.'

"Gregory VII urged Christian rulers to obey conciliar decrees against the appointment of Jews.

"When Eugenius III came to Paris in 1145 and went in pomp to the cathedral, which was then in the Jewish quarter, the Jews sent a delegation to present him with the Torah, or scroll of the Law. He blessed them, they went home happy, and the Pope ate a paschal lamb with the king.

"Alexander III was friendly to Jews and employed one to manage his finances.

"Innocent III led the Fourth Lateran Council in its demand for a Jewish badge and laid down the principle that all Jews were doomed to perpetual servitude because they had crucified Jesus. In a softer mood he reinterated papal injunctions against forcible conversions and added:-'No Christian shall do the Jews any personal injury or deprive them of their possessions or disturb them during the celebration of their festivals or extort money from them by threatening to exhume their dead.'

"Gregory IX, founder of the Inquisition, exempted the Jews from its operation or jurisdiction except when they tried to Judaize Christians, or attacked Christianity, or reverted to Judaism after conversion to Christianity. In 1235 he issued a bull denouncing mob violence against Jews.

"Innocent IV (1247) repudiated the legend of the ritual murder of Christian children by Jews. This noble appeal was widely ignored.

"In 1272 Gregory X had to repeat its denunciation of the ritual murder legend and to give his words force he ruled that thereafter the testimony of a Christian against a Jew should not be accepted unless confirmed by a Jew. The issuance of similar bulls by later popes until 1763 attests both the humanity of the popes and the persistence of the evil.

"That the popes were sincere is indicated by the comparative security of the Jews, and their relative freedom from persecution, in the Papal States. Expelled from so many countries at one time or another, they were never expelled from Rome or from papal Avignon.

"Writes a learned Jewish historian:-'Had it not been for the Catholic Church, the Jews would not have survived the Middle Ages in Christian Europe.'"

Perhaps the Church was not as hard against the Jews as had been thought.

Robby

Jan Sand
May 16, 2005 - 07:46 pm
Ah yes. The sine qua non of the cross. (and there are many cross words here)

MeriJo
May 16, 2005 - 08:55 pm
Justin:

I would be glad to respond to you, but I think I shall continue on with the discussion as Robby suggests.

MeriJo
May 16, 2005 - 09:04 pm
That is the exact point. The behavior of the individual shows whether or not he/she follows the guidelines for living as taught by our Lord's teachings.

There were some papal imposters and bad popes as well as legitimate popes and good ones.

winsum
May 16, 2005 - 09:30 pm
I have to quote the whole article since it came as part of my e-mail subscriptio without a url. . . Claire.

"The British Association of University Teachers Must Reverse Its Israel Boycott Policy

On April 22nd, the British Association of University Teachers (AUT) struck a blow AGAINST academic freedom, AGAINST fairness, AGAINST open debate and AGAINST Israel when it voted to boycott two Israeli universities. While remaining silent on human rights abuse all over the world, the AUT decided to single out the Jewish State as the global villain.

ADL has been fighting the AUT decision, but we need your help. The AUT has now been forced to hold a Special Council on 26th May when it will debate whether to maintain the boycott. ADL Letter to AUT

Tell the AUT there’s only one right thing to do: Revoke the boycott!

Sign the Letter to the AUT Executive Committee

* Tell the AUT that we condemn this assault on academic freedom. * Let the AUT know that a vote in favor of the boycott on the 26th is a vote in favor of discrimination and intimidation. * Let the AUT know that the boycott is fostering extreme anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism inside and outside Britain.
  • Let the AUT know that the boycott is an ugly stain on the reputation of British universities.

    sign and forward



  • Justin
    May 16, 2005 - 09:52 pm
    Marijo: We are on topic here.All the posts since Robby's 812 have been related to that posting. You may respond to me if you wish. There is no reason to hold back.That is not our custom. If it were we would not be discusants. Post 812 brought the issue to the table and we should work our way through it.

    Of course you are right there were good Popes and bad. The Borgias were particularly bad. There were a few others. But it was not the bad Popes we were talking about in 812. It was the "good" ones who called the Councils to straighten out those pesky Jews.

    In 841 Durant calls attention to the Popes who tried by papal Bull to curb the evil set loose by others in the Passion Play and the New Testament and from thousands of pulpits during Holy week and particularly on good Friday. The admonitions of the Popes addressed to the laity have been ineffective in controlling the evil and it continues to be so. John Paul made an effort and few think it is going to be enough to quell the problem. We all think it is a start but look at all the starts made in 841. If any were effective we would not be having this discussion to day. Nor would the Holocaust have occurred.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 17, 2005 - 03:24 am
    "Before the Crusades the active persecution of Jews in medieval Europe was sporadic.

    "The Byzantine emperors continued for two centuries the oppressive policies of Justinian toward the Jews.

    "Heraclius (628) banished them from Jerusalem in retaliation for their aid to Persia and did all he could to exterminate them.

    "Leo the Isaurian sought to disprove the rumor that he was Jewish by a decree (723) giving Byzantine Jews a choice between Christianity or banishment. Some submitted. Some burned themselves to death in their synagogues rather than yield.

    "Basil I (867-86) resumed the campaign to enforce baptism upon the Jews.

    "Constantine VII (912-59) required from Jews in Christian courts a humiliating form of oath -- more Judaico -- which continued in use in Europe until the nineteenth century.

    "When, in 1095, Pope Urban II proclaimed the First Crusade, some Christians thought it desirable to kill the Jews of Europe before proceeding so far to fight Turks in Jerusalem.

    "Godfrey of Bouillon, having accepted the leadership of the crusade, announced that he would avenge the blood of Jesus upon the Jews and would leave not one of them alive. His companions proclaimed their intention to kill all Jews who would not accept Christianity. A monk further aroused Christian ardor by declaring that an inscription found on the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem made the conversion of all Jews a moral obligation of all Christians.

    "The Crusaders planned to move south along the Rhine where lay the richest settlements in northern Europe. The German Jews had played a leading part in the development of Rhenish commerce and had behaved with a restraint and piety that had won the respect of Christian laity and clergy alike. Bishop Rudiger of Sspayer was on cordial terms with the Jews of his district and gave them a charter guaranteeing their autonomy and security.

    "In 1095 the Emperor Henry IV issued a similar charter for all the Jews of his realm. Upon these peaceful Jewish congregations the news of the crusade, its proposed route, and the threats of its leaders, broke with paralyzing terror.

    "The rabbis proclaimed several days of fasting and prayer."

    As we react to Durant's relating of Christian cruelty, we will of course continue to choose our words carefully in due respect to our fellow participants.

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 17, 2005 - 03:31 am
    Here is the MORE JUDAICO which Durant say remained in use in Europe until a hundred years ago or so.

    Robby

    winsum
    May 17, 2005 - 08:24 am

    Justin
    May 17, 2005 - 01:04 pm
    It is difficult to contain oneself in the face of so much evil. It cannot be ignored so one can be nice to nice people. If it is allowed to continue to propagate itself the evil will never be overcome.

    The Holocaust is only the latest in a long history of evil caused by Christianity. I don't know how to stop it. I would if I could.Good people without religion would then simply find it necessary to follow the golden rule and to practice it.

    One does not require a priesthood and a hierarchical church to tell them to treat one's neighbor as thyself.The rest should be done away with.

    If people must believe in a god, then pick one from all the many gods we have known who advises us to treat our neighbors as we wish to be treated.Invent a new one if necesary.( We might do a better job than our ancestors) But certainly not one who violently throws his neighbors out of the Temple, nor one who advocates invading one's neighbor, nor one who punishes severely those who do not pay him homage. Pick one who loves everyone including all deviants for we are all deviants in one way or another.

    Jan Sand
    May 17, 2005 - 01:53 pm
    Justin

    Although I sympathise with your horror, I wonder to whom you are speaking. In the last few days people have died over a few pieces of paper that might have been disposed of in a toilet. I am sure there will be objections to your statements which some people will find objectionable on this site. You are requiring sensible action where it does not seem to be possible.

    MeriJo
    May 17, 2005 - 04:33 pm
    In reading these historical segments it is truly necessary to place one's self in that period of medieval history. It is necessary to realize that thoughts about things do not change in an instant or as a result of some advice. This medieval period was unsettled in many ways. There was incipient government. There were kings and emperors and dukes and then there was the Catholic Church which at that time was also a powerful temporal state. Information through life's experiences was being applied, tried, rejected or retained in the hope that a fair government would develop.

    The Christian Church was sorting out its tenets and the secular nations were either accepting or rebelling. There were wars. There were infamous acts done by one group upon the other. Did the world need to experience these things?

    Superstition was rampant and it not only affected a secular king, but a religious Pope, along with his Cardinals, and Bishops.

    The Jewish people could not take an oath upon a Christian Holy Book. Those that forced this didn't want truth necessarily, but humiliation, to impart a deep sense of guilt for the crucifixion of Christ upon the whole of Judaism.

    There was little or no objective thinking during those years of darkness, and when a little light broke through, there were those who whiffed it out.

    We need to be grateful to those who recorded these deeds for those who came later who then could dismiss the superstitions, relate the annals of events, learn from the wrongs that were done and bring about the beginning of some rational order to the development of a society.

    Justin: To answer: Things are different today.

    Today: The Church in the Vatican occupies itself with the temporal needs of the small papal state. The Curia attends to the various explanations of canon law. The magesterium which continues to study and explore the teachings of Christ and supervises the preparation of teachings of the Church for the faithful is also in the Vatican. It is not directly responsible for the governing of the worldwide Church.

    The Pope has appointed Archdiocesan/Diocesan leaders to be available to the parishes within these areas. Some Cardinals are Archbishops in charge of a large group of parishes. Bishops have a smaller area, but are available to the people of the parishes in his area. Catholics look to their parish priests and/or bishop for information about the governance of the parish, any new liturgy or in seeking help from the various ministries within the diocese.

    Responsibility for Church government is under the aegis of these diocesan leaders. These are administrative titles. Essentially, all clergy are priests. Other titles are honorific or governmental. The Pope is a priest.

    The maintenance of Church property is the responsibility of the diocese. Schools are under the aegis of the parish or diocese. All funds raised by the parish or diocese supports schools. The Vatican does not. (The Catholic University of America in Washington D. C. is supported financially by the Vatican. Possible oher places in other countries are so supported.)

    Hospitals are supported by the order of nuns or brothers who run the hospital, and the same is true for Universities and colleges. That's why there are so many fundraisers for these projects.

    Justin
    May 17, 2005 - 05:49 pm
    MariJo; We are looking at different parts of the elephant. Administration of the organization and its financing is trivia. The meat and potatoes are in the Curia,in the Propagation of the Faith, in the Holy Office, and in the Pope himself. We have been discussing policy not administrivia.

    The difference in Church policy between that of the Middle Ages and today is very slight. The barbarism of the Holocaust represents an improvement over the killing power of the Medievalists but the policies that allowed it to happen had not changed one iota over the centuries. This organization is nothing if not constant.

    Vatican ll is simply a change in window dressing and it is not likely Benedict will implement any more of that than one sees now. Women are still second class humans, deviants are not human, The unborn are still more worthy of life than the mother. Celibacy is still required of the priesthood. Child abuse is ignored and excused.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 17, 2005 - 06:28 pm
    This is a reprint of a message from Mal posted in WREX (from Monday night)

    Hi Folks,

    Dorian relays the messages to me when she can.

    Tomorrow I go to the urologist, this time in the Orange County public transportation wheelchair van. Monday I have an appointment with the GI surgeons. I improve daily, but it's a slow hard grind and often painful.

    I think of all of you often and hope soon damn it all to be back at my computer.

    This is short and sweet tonight because I am very tired. The PT and two social workers were here today. It's enough to knock anyone out - especially diddley doodley delicate me.

    Mal

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 17, 2005 - 07:07 pm
    "Arrived in Speyer, the Crusaders dragged eleven Jews into a church and ordered them to accept baptism. Refusing, the eleven were slain (May 3, 1096).

    "Other Jews of the city took refuge with Bishop Johannsen, who not only protected them but caused the execution of certain Crusaders who had shared in the murders at the church.

    "As some Crusaders neared Trier, its Jews appealed to Bishop Egilbert. He offered protection on condition of baptism. Most of the Jews consented. But several women killed their children and threw themselves into the Moselle (June 1, 1096).

    "At Mainz Archbishop Ruthard hid 1300 Jews in his cellars. Crusaders forced their way in and killed 1014. The Bishop was able to save a few by concealing them in the cathedral (May 27, 1096). Four Mainz Jews accepted baptism but comitted suicide soon afterward.

    "As the Crusaders approached Cologne, the Christians hid the Jews in their homes. The mob burned down the Jewish quarter and killed the few Jews upon whom they could lay their hands. Bishop Hermann, at great danger to himself, secretly conveyed the Jews from their Christian hiding places to Christian homes in the country. The pilgrims discoverd the maneuver, hunted their prey in the villages and killed every Jew they found (June, 1096).

    "In two of these villages 200 Jews were slain. In four others the Jews, surrounded by the mob, killed one another rather than be baptized. Mothers delivered of infants during these attacks slew them at birth.

    "At Worms Bishop Allebranches received such of the Jews as he could into his palace and saved them. Upon the rest the Crusaders fell with the savagery of anonymity, killing many and then plundering and burning the homes of the Jews. Here many Jews commited suicide rather than repudiate their faith.

    "Seven days later a crowd besieged the episcopal residence. The Bishop told the Jews that he could no longer hold bck the mob and advised them to accept baptism. The Jews asked to be left alone for a while. When the Boishop returned he found that nearly all of them had killed one another. The besiegers broke in and slew the rest. All in all, some 800 Jews died in this pogram at Worms (August 20, 1096).

    "Similar scenes occurred at Metz, Regensburg, and Prague."

    I am confused. Who are the Christians, the attackers or those who hid the Jews?

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 17, 2005 - 07:47 pm
    Justin:

    I do not consider myself a second class human. I have no idea where you got that idea.

    The Curia deals with canon law - most of the laity doesn't have to worry about that unless they want an annulment.

    Each Catholic individual is responsible for his/ her own actions. What must one do? Follow the ten commandments and remember that there are different degrees of sin. The Fifth Commandment for example says "You shall not kill." but "You shall not gossip" is also against the fifth commandment.

    The sixth commandment is against adultery and impure acts. This is where those child molesters came under. I am appalled as much as a non-Catholic that such people slipped through the seminary. But, I am not surprised because as I pointed out a lot has changed. People do not think the same as they did in the mid-twentieth century.

    There are also some specific Church precepts - all of which may be changed or eliminated.

    The life of the child and the life of the mother are equally important and each must be saved if possible.

    Celibacy is not required in the eastern rite of the Catholic Church and it is a sacrifice one willingly takes when entering the priesthood of the western rite. It is a church law, and may very well be eliminated. It is not a given.

    Homosexuals are human and worthy, and recognized as having been born that way. It is their sexual practices that are condemned.

    I remember WWII and as I recall the news of things was pretty sparse. The papers didn't talk too much about what the Nazis were doing to Jews. One had to go to the movies to see the Pathe News or the Fox Movietone News to see Hitler Youth marching around - certainly never saw or heard anything else. As the war wore on, we learned that Catholics were sent to concentration camps and there were stories of people escaping Germany via various means. It is unfortunate that today's possibilities have been superimposed upon the world of the thirties and forties. In those days people didn't talk for fear of causing trouble to others. "Loose lips sink ships" were on posters all over. It wasn't until well after the war was over that people heard of the attempts to save the Jews and others from the Nazis.

    The Catholic hierarchy would give the same response as a priest or that one could find in a catechism regarding any matter of faith or morals. The Catholic Church is not an organization whose voice must be obeyed except by Catholics, and then only in matters of faith or morals.

    When John Paul told Bush that his contemplating beginning a war with Iraq was wrong because it could not be categorized as a just war in the eyes of the Church, Bush did not follow his advice. He did not need to do so. Bush isn't a Catholic.

    It is a fallacy to think that the Church acts as an entity. People within the church may attain political power, but they act completely on their own in changing policy or in setting policy - not in the name of the Church. Many people think otherwise, but that is not so - In medieval times it may have been and probably was. The thinking was different.

    MeriJo
    May 17, 2005 - 07:54 pm
    Robby:

    How best to sort this out? It was correct and moral to save another human being and the Christian hierarchy should have left it at that.It was wrong to insist on Baptism. It would not have been a valid Baptism anyway because it was under duress.

    Much had yet to be though through.

    Justin
    May 17, 2005 - 08:00 pm
    Urban ll let this evil loose. But as MariJo points out the Church is also people and they can't all be evil. Some must recognize the inhumanity of the Crusade and the Crusaders. It is important not to tar all with the same brush for some were exposed to the idea of the Golden Rule and thought it worthwhile observing.

    winsum
    May 17, 2005 - 10:24 pm
    Merijo I don't think you are really understanding the present as well as the past. It's not an organic growth situation at all. Scape goats will always be employed by those seeking power and historically it's OK TO UTILIZE JEWS for this purpose.

    I share Justin's outrage and actually feel sick with it so that I had to stop reading. . . . . Claire

    Jan Sand
    May 17, 2005 - 10:29 pm
    Just a note about my former post attributing the death of Muslims to the Newsweek report about Koran mutilation. I have just discovered that apparently the Bush administration used an unrelated instance of violence caused by local political affairs (as noted by Air Force General Myers) to punish Newsweek and force the retraction of its story. Related reports by FBI agents substantiated mistreatment of Guantanamo prisoners well before the Newsweek report.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 18, 2005 - 03:45 am
    "The Second Crusade (1147) threatened to better the example of the First.

    "Peter the Venerable, the saintly Abbot of Cluny, advised Louis VII of France to begin by attacking the French Jews. 'I do not require you to put to death these accursed beings. God does not wish to annihilate them but, like Cain the fratricide, they must be made to suffer fearful torments and be preserved for greater ignominy for an existence more bitter than death.'

    "Abbot Suger of St. Denis protested against this conception of Christianity and Louis VII contented himself with capital levies on rich Jews.

    "But the German Jews were not let off with mere confiscation. A French monk, Rodolphe, leaving his monastery without permission, preached a pogrom in Germany.

    "At Cologne Simon 'the Pious' was murdered and mutilated. At Speyer a woman was tortured on the rack to persuade her to Christianity.

    "Again the secular prelates did all they could to protect the Jews. Bishop Arnold of Cologne gave them a fortified castle as refuge and allowed them to arm themselves. The Crusaders refrained from attacking the castle but killed any unconverted Jews that fell into their clutches.

    "Archbishop Henry at Mainz admitted into his house some Jews pursued by a mob. The mob forced a way in and killed them before his eyes. The Archbishop appealed to St. Bernard, the most influential Christian of his time. Bernard replied with a strong demunciation of Rodolphe and demanded an end to violence against the Jews. When Rodolphe continued his campaign, Bernard came in person to Germany and forced the monk to return to his monstery.

    "Shortly thereafter the mutilated body of a Christian was found at Wurzburg. Christians charged Jews with the crime, attacked them despite the protests of Bishop Embicho and killed twenty.

    "Many others, wounded, were tended by Christians (1147). The Bishop buried the dead in his garden. From Germany the idea of beginning the Crusades at home passed back to France and Jews were massacred at Carentan, Rameru, and Sully.

    "In Bohemia 150 Jews were murderd by Crusaders.

    "After the terror had passed, the local Christian clergy did what it could to help the surviving Jews. Those who had accepted baptism under duress were allowed to return to Judaism without incurring the dire penalties of apostasy."

    And so I wonder -- were the Crusaders Christian? If not, then was it a Christian Crusade?

    Robby

    Bubble
    May 18, 2005 - 04:49 am
    I knew of the Crusades, I never realized it was that bad.

    At school, the nuns taught us of Jerusalem delivery from the hands of the pagans and heretics and how so many crusaders paid the price with their lives. So this is the other side of the coin...

    Jan Sand
    May 18, 2005 - 05:05 am
    The latest Durant section reveals that the label of Christianity has small relevance to the humanity of the labeled. All of the major religions have basic doctrines proclaiming kindness, compassion and generosity and all of the fiercest exponents of these exhibit sadistic vengeful cruel callous behavior which no animal but man seems to exhibit. It does not speak well for religion. For centuries the Jews seemed to be the exception to this debased behavior but apparently the possession of a viable nation has overcome this anomaly.

    winsum
    May 18, 2005 - 10:09 am
    the worm turned. Modern Israel produces fierce fighters and much determination to remain whole. . . Some of us applaud even while hating the required violence. . . Claire

    Bubble
    May 18, 2005 - 10:11 am
    Jan, Israel is getting to be like any other normal nation?

    MeriJo
    May 18, 2005 - 10:53 am
    "Religion," the word, comes from the Latin as many here no doubt know, meaning "to bind over and over" "religio", "religare". Many did understand and accept the guidelines set up by Catholicism, but others just put them aside and continued to live as they had before. This is so even today.

    I am sorry, winsum, it is a sickening part of history and difficult to understand how a human being can be so cruel to another. If there were any scapegoats these events occurred outside the parameters of one's faith.

    In reading, "1421" by Gavin Menzies, one sees that the Ming emperor in sending off his fleet to find other countries from whom he could gather tributes, advised his admirals to treat any new peoples with the utmost kindness and respect. They did. How far advanced into civilization were the Chinese in recognizing the need for civility and kindness toward others! What would the world have been like had the Chinese continued in their explorations? The western peoples had not moved far enough away from barbarism when they entered into medieval times. We can see that some had achieved civility, but that others had not.

    The Jews brought with them thousands of years of developing civility as well. The events of history just pressed down upon them.

    Justin
    May 18, 2005 - 12:00 pm
    Robby: The crusaders were Christian or more specifically, Catholic. The first group were French Catholics, many of whom have been raised to Sainthood for their brave deeds in defending the Faith. The Second Crusade,was headed by King Louis Vll of France, now known as Saint Louis and Saint Bernard of Clairvaux. These two Crusades were launched by Popes Urban and Eugenius, The Crusades were a Catholic affair in every respect. They were a fine example of a religion taking revenge for imagined past slights as well as an opportunity for the Church to convert more pagans to their way of looking at life. They did that by burning, raping, pillaging, and crucifying every man,woman,and child they laid their hands on.

    Bubble
    May 18, 2005 - 12:07 pm
    Saint Louis's crusade sailed from South of France, from Sete I think, and his life sized stuatue is still standing in the main square of the town.

    I think there was also a crusade called "Children crusade"?

    Justin
    May 18, 2005 - 12:18 pm
    Marijo: You seem to be saying that the guidelines of Catholicism were good things and that those who followed the guidelines were good people. The others, those who did not follow the guidelines, were barbarians.

    Durant and many in this discussion think the guidelines you speak of are the cause of this mayhem. It would be nice of you would try to clear that up. One of the guidelines I see, for example, is that of taking revenge on the Jews for crucifying Jesus. The message is a derivative of the ritual.

    Justin
    May 18, 2005 - 12:22 pm
    Bubble: Yes, There were eight Crusades in all, one of which was a Children's Crusade. It was a terrible thing. Tens of thousands of Children were killed or sold into slavery in that Crusade..

    MeriJo
    May 18, 2005 - 05:29 pm
    Justin:

    Yes, I think if one were to look at the tenets of the Catholic faith one would see that they point to civilized living, caring for others, being respectful and kind, but at that time in our history I am convinced that too much of the old superstitions still affected the new Christians (by the way they were not called Catholic during the Middle Ages). Some of the things they believed they needed to do was a violent solution which was an early way of dealing with perceived wrong. They reverted to barbaric actions.

    What was the rationale of these people's behavior if not as a result of woeful ignorance?

    Off hand, I am trying to remember some of the saints of the medieval period who attempted to present an alternate solution to societal problems, but I cannot remember too many. St. Francis of Assisi is one who focused on the goodness of all creatures. St. Dominic, (Dominican philosophy) who developed the Rosary along with St. Clare and who founded a philosophy that vies with the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas (Scholastic Philosophy). There were others, of course.

    I don't recall of any guidelines for taking revenge on the Jews for having crucified Jesus. First of all, revenge is a sin.

    We were always taught the story of the Passion in a straightforward manner. Judas knew that the Sanhedrin was upset with Jesus. - Jesus had said that he would destroy the temple and in three days rebuild it, and Jesus had said that he was the Messiah, and the Jewish elders thought he was a blasphemer. So, Judas went to them and asked what they would give him if he delivered Jesus and they responded thirty pieces of silver.

    As far as we knew these particular Jews were the ones responsible for his crucifixion. I was never taught otherwise. If others wove additional stories around the event they were in error and not in keeping with either the Church's view or history.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 18, 2005 - 06:41 pm
    Justin, you say:-"The crusaders were Christian or more specifically, Catholic."

    In those days weren't the Catholics the only Christians?

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 18, 2005 - 06:53 pm
    Message from Mal

    I woke this morning very depressed. In my hours of sleeping between 11pm and 4am, I'd had the revelation that all I could do flat on my back the rest of my life was lead a second rate vaudeville troupe.

    Directing such a group of motley actors and hams wasn't all that discouraging. It was the realization that they'd all have "I Won't Be Directed" as their middle name.

    Regardless, I put together the first act in my head - songs and comic routines - and yelled at somebody standing nearby that black pants, orange shirts with big white polka dots and straw hats for the men would be fine. The women would wear short, full orange skirts with white polka dots, puffed sleeves and black tap shoes.

    Having gotten that far, I went on with my day. I almost succeeded in sitting up without help in bed and almost transferred myself from bed to wheelchair. My physiotherapist Jack said I did a great job. It was a superior day!

    Mal

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 18, 2005 - 07:05 pm
    "These pogroms began a long series of violent assaualts which continued until our time.

    "In 1235 an unsolved murder of Baden was laid to the Jews and a massacre ensued.

    "In 1243 the entire Jewish population of Belitz, near Berlin, was burned alive on the charge that some of them had defiled a consecrated Host.

    "In 1283 the accusation of ritual murder was raised at Mainz and despite all the efforts of Archbishop Werner, ten Jews were killed and Jewish homes were pillaged.

    "In 1285 a like rumor excited Munich. 180 Jews fled for refuge to a synagogue. The mob set fire to it and all 180 were aburned to death. A year later forty Jews were killed at Oberwesel on the charge that they had drained the blood of a Christian.

    "In 1298 every Jew in Rottingen was burned to death on the charge of desecrating a sacramental wafer. Rindfleisch, a pious baron, organized and armed a band of Christians sworn to kill all Jews. They completely exterminated the Jewish community at Wurzburg and slew 698 Jews in Nuremberg. The persecution spread and in half a year 140 congregations were wiped out.

    "The Jews of Germany, having repeatedly rebuilt their communities after such attacks, lost heart, and in 1286 many Jewish families left Mainz, Worms, Speyer, and other German towns and migrated to Palestine to live in Islam.

    "As Poland and other German towns were inviting immigrants and had not yet experienced pogroms, a slow exodus of Jews from the Rhineland began to the Slavic East."

    Robby

    Justin
    May 18, 2005 - 10:10 pm
    Robby: Yes, in the period of the undivided Church all were one. But there also were many Christian cults, in great variety, operating in this period. We have seen many of these groups declared heretical and wiped out.Just when the eclesiastical center of Christianity became catholic, apostolic, and Roman, I am not certain but I am seeking the knowledge.

    I suspect the Roman identity to have come from two possible sources. It could have come when the Roman Pontiff secured supremacy or it could have come at the time of the great east west schism.

    I am not sure when the universality label was tacked on.

    The apostolic label may have come from either the Council at Nicene or the Council at Chalcedon.

    Justin
    May 18, 2005 - 10:43 pm
    MariJo: St. Francis of Assisi was a gentle person who saw the world in a way that was clearly different from the perceptions of others. His father thought he was a nut to give up the good life for a life of wandering in poverty. He wasn't in the grave before the Franciscans split over continuing to follow his prescription for the order he founded.The split persists but hands down I think the conventuals dominate the order.

    Clare was Francis's female counterpart. She out lived him as I recall.

    We will come to Thomas Aquinas and later to the great Scholastic debate between Abelard and Bernard of Clairveau, and I look forward to discussing the topic with you in this discussion but for now let's put it on ice.

    The question of whether St Dominic is a good one or a bad one should also be put off until we come to that topic.

    winsum
    May 19, 2005 - 02:35 am
    isn't anymore. it's now focused on early Catholicism of which I'm totally ignorant and have no interest other than a developing dislike. . . primitive creatures weren't they. . . . Claire

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 03:49 am
    "During the civil war that disordered England between 1257 and 1267, the populace got out of hand and pogroms almost wiped out the Jewish communities of London, Canterbury, Northampton, Winchester, Worcester, Lincoln, and Cambridge.

    "Houses were looted and destroyed, deeds and bonds were burned and the surviving Jews were left almost penniless. The English kings were now borrowing from the Christian bankers of Florence or Cahors. They no longer needed the Jews and found it troublesome to protect them.

    "In 1290 Edward I ordered the 16,000 remaining Jews of England to leave the country by November1, abandoning all their immovable realty and all their collectible loans. Many were drowned in crossing the Channel in small boats. Some were robbed by the ships' crews. Those who reached France were told by the government that they must leave by Lent of 1291.

    "In France, too, the spiritual climate changed for the Jews with the Crusades against the Turks in Asia and the Albigensian heretics of Languedoc.

    "Bishops preached anti-Semitic sermons that stirred the people. At Beziers an attack upon the Jewish quarter was a regular rite of Holy Week. Finally (1160) a Christian prelate forbade such preaching but required the Jewish community to pay a special tax every Palm Sunday. At Toulouse the Jews were forced to send a representative to the cathedral each Good Friday to receive publicly a box on the ears as a mild reminder of everlasting guilt.

    "In 1171 several Jews were burned at Blois on a charge of using Christian blood in Passover rites. Seeing a chance to turn a pious penny, King Philip Augustus ordered all the Jews in his realm to be imprisoned as poisoners of Christian wells and then released them on payment of a heavy ransom (1180).

    "A year later he banished them, confiscated all their realty, and gave their synagogues to the Church. In 1190 he had eighty Jews of Orange killed because one of his agents had been hanged by the city authorities for murdering a Jew.

    "In 1198 he recalled the Jews to France and so regulated their banking business as to secure large profits to himself.

    "In 1236 Christian crusaders invaded the Jewish settlements of Anjou and Poitou -- especially those at Bordeaux and Augouleme -- and bade all Jews be baptized. When the Jews refused, the crusaders trampled 3000 of them to death under their horses' hoofs. Pope Gregoy IX condemned the slaughter but did not raise the dead.

    "St. Louis advised his people not to discuss religion with Jews. In 1254 he banished the Jews from France, confiscating their property and their synagogues. A few years later he readmitted them and restored their synagogues. They were rebuilding their comnmunities when Philip the Fair (1306) had them all imprisoned, confiscated their credits and all their goods except the clothes they wore and expelled them, to the number of 100,000, with provisions for one day.

    "The King profited so handsomely from the operation that he presented a synagogue to his coachman."

    I am thinking more and more of what I call the "burden of faith." How easy it is to be an atheist. "You want me to be baptized? Sure." "You want me to declare myself a Christian? OK." "Anything you say."

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 04:16 am
    Is THIS a pogrom?

    Robby

    Traude S
    May 19, 2005 - 07:36 am
    ROBBY, may I respond and give the origin of the word.

    "pogrom" def. organized massacre, esp. of Jews , synonyms slaughter, butchery .

    This is the composition of the Russian word:
    "po-" = a perfective prefix + "grom" cf. "gromit" = to batter, hence to wreck, "grom" meaning "thunder". Def as a whole = devastation; destruction.

    P.S. On the subject of the Roma, I highly recommended Bury Me Standing: The Gypsies and Their Journey , 1996, by Isabel Fonseca.

    Rich7
    May 19, 2005 - 07:46 am
    When the Jews refused, the crusaders trampled 3000 of them to death under their horses' hoofs. Pope Gregoy IX condemned the slaughter but did not raise the dead.

    Can anyone explain what Durant meant by "did not raise the dead?"

    Rich

    JoanK
    May 19, 2005 - 09:31 am
    MAL: can I be in your vaudeville troupe when you form it? I can do wheelies in my wheelchair now.

    winsum
    May 19, 2005 - 09:31 am
    It's not that easy to be an atheist. I know been one for most of my life and people are polite when they find out but also they think I'm untrustworthy, probably immoral and they back off. .

    additionialy religion makes me not only nervous but if applied to my self it feels insufferable. . . .and I become insufferable. .That's the reason I don't attend OA meetings anymore..that's OVER EATERS ANonymous a twelve step program. I can do the AS IF part but I can't stand listening to the yowling helpless cries to a higher power made by the suffering religious members. I get so impatient with them. . . ..Claire

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 10:14 am
    Claire: The Jewish thing continues. The Catholic thing is ahead somewhere so stick around.

    winsum
    May 19, 2005 - 10:24 am

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 10:31 am
    The Cathars or Albigensian heretics were stamped out around 1230 or so. Good old St Dominic was charged by Pope Gregory with dealing with the heretics in the Albigensian Crusade. De Montfort did the nasty work for him at Languedoc. About 1220 or so Dominic founded an order of preaching friars who later assisted him in his work with the heretics. The Dominicans did the job so well that in 1498 when Phillip and the Spanish Cardinal wanted rid themselves of those pesky Jews they assigned the task to the Dominicans. Torguemada, the Dominican, was appointed by the Pope to be the chief inquisitor.

    Before 1220 Dominic founded a sisterhood who call themselves Domincans. They are a teaching order today and are largely responsible for operating many of the parochial schools in the US.

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 10:58 am
    Robby; The burden of faith is not borne by the faithful.The shameful history we are examining is largely ignored as is much of the current damage done to society.

    Pogrums are a bloody affair. The Cossack officer in Fiddler on the Roof, while talking to Tevya, says, "We have to do it. Our inspector is coming through this district and we have to make it look as though we are doing our job.It won't be much, so don't worry about it. We'll burn down a few buildings, kill some livestock and perhaps,kill a few people here and there, just to make it look good."

    Bubble
    May 19, 2005 - 11:02 am
    This is in none of the schools history books, so it can be ignored and denied? I have met people who minimised or denied the holocaust as well, and not because it was too horribele to envision.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 01:36 pm
    Here is another article about CLASS which has been so prominent in every culture we have examined.

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 01:45 pm
    "So crowded a justaposition of bloody episodes scattered over two centuries makes a one-sided picture.

    "In Provence, Italy, Sicily and in the Byzantine Empire after the ninth century there were only minor persecutions of the Jews. They found means of protecting themselves in Christian Spain. Even in Germany, England and France the periods of peace were long.

    "A generation after each tragedy the Jews there were again numerous and some were prosperous. Nevertheless their traditions carried down the bitter memory of those tragic interludes.

    "The days of peace were made anxious by the ever-present danger of pogroms. Every Jew had to learn by heart the prayer to be recited in the moment of martyrdom.

    "The pursuit of wealth was made more feverish by the harassed insecurity of its gains. The gibes of gamins in the street were ever ready to greet the wearers of the yellow badge.

    "The ignominy of a helpless and secluded minority burned into the soul, broke down individual pride and interracial amity and left in the eyes of the northern Jew that somber Judenschmerz -- the sorrow of the Jews -- which recalls a thousand insults and injuries.

    "For that one death on the cross how many crucifixions!"

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 01:47 pm
    The Mind and Heart of the Jew

    500-1300

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 01:49 pm
    Letters

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 01:55 pm
    "In every age the soul of the Jew has been torn between the resolve to make his way in a hostile world and his hunger for the goods of the mind.

    "A Jewish merchant is a dead scholar. He envies and generously honors the man who, escaping the fever of wealth, pursues in peace the love of learning and the mirage of wisdom. The Jewish traders and bankers who went to the fairs of Troyes stopped on the way to hear the great Rashi expound the Talmud.

    "So, amid commercial cares, or degrading poverty, or moral contumely, the Jews of the Middle Ages continued to produce grammarians, theologians, mystics, poets, scientists, and philosophers.

    "For a while (1150-1200) only the Moslems equaled them in widespread literacy and intellectual wealth. They had the advantage of living in contact or communication with Islam. Many of them read Arabic. The whole rich world of medieval Moslem culture was open to them. They took from Islam in science, medicine, and philosophy what they had given in religion to Mohammed and the Koran.

    "By their mediation they aroused the mind of the Christian West with the stimulus of Saracen thought."

    Robby

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 02:15 pm
    Years ago, I had a bowel resection done at Lexington Hospital in Kentucky. I am a fairly gregarious guy so I met lots of people in the hospital. Some were from the Hollers of Eastern Kaintuck. One fellow, who had had a heart by-pass done, owned a hardware store in Lazy Creek Holler. He was very colorful. His expressions were down home and the language he used had a rhythm that flowed like a creek in spring.He told me stories about famlies who lived in the Hollers as much as fifty miles distant but as known as next door neighbors. When you think that in New York, next door neighbors, only a few feet away, may be totally unknown to each other, the phenomenon of the Hollers is quite remarkable.

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 02:19 pm
    Rich: "Raise the dead" may refer to Lazarus story. Durant may be suggesting that The Vicar of Christ has some powers that he has not used lately. He may also be referring the Resurection story.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 05:36 pm
    Durant speaks of Judenschmerz (the sorrow of the Jews). This ARTICLE give us just a touch of that.

    I consider myself an intelligent, fairly well read and educated person. Through my lifetime I have heard of the discrimination against and persecution of the Jews. I thought I understood. But this last section of Durant has helped me just the tiniest bit to walk a very very small step in their shoes and I am aghast. How awful not be accepted anywhere. As Amos Elon expresses it, "the price of survival remains exodus."

    Robby

    JoanK
    May 19, 2005 - 05:53 pm
    My introduction to the holocaust began during WWII when I was 7 or 8. I am proud of the fact that my parents, even though they were not Jewish, were among the few who "sponsored" a refugee from the camps, so that she could come to this country. She lived with us for awhile. By day, she was a shy teenager, who didn't speak English but taught me how to dance. But at night, she slept in the room over my bedroom, and I would hear her screaming in her sleep all night long.

    Rich7
    May 19, 2005 - 06:39 pm
    Jason, thank you for answering my question.

    In some of these discussion groups I feel like I have walked into a room where everyone is talking and no one is listening.

    Joan, that's a very sad story.

    Rich

    MeriJo
    May 19, 2005 - 06:46 pm
    The title, "Vicar of Christ" for the Pope may be traced back to the words of our Lord when he told Peter, "That upon this rock(Peter) I shall build my Church". The Pope as Vicar of Christ is the representative of Jesus on earth.

    The marks of the Catholic Church are four. It is one because of its divine source. Unity is the essence of the Church. It is holy because it was founded by Jesus, the second Person of the Blessed Trinity It is catholic which means universal, because Jesus is present in it, and because it has been sent out by Christ on a mission to the whole of the human race. It is apostolic because from Peter to the present Pope, Benedict XVI, the Church has continued in an unbroken line of leadership in its Popes, and in its Archbishops and bishops who continued the apostolic line in its unbroken line of ordaining priests. Although, some Popes were imposters, illegally elected, bad people, the history of the lineage has been correctly kept and intact throughout the centuries.

    It is called Roman Catholic Church because the Pope or the head of the Catholic Church is in Rome. It heads both the Eastern and Western Rite of the Church. The distinction did not occur until the Roman Empire became divided with Constantine in Constantinople (Byzantium?) and a Roman heir - youngster of fourteen was given the western part of the empire. It did not do well. Constantine eastern empire was stronger, but the western empire soon was in chaos. The young Roman emperor was killed and the bartbarians from the north - Attila et al overran Rome. Then began the Middle Ages of Western Europe.

    I appreciate learning the greater detail about the Jewish history presented here.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 19, 2005 - 07:07 pm
    In just about 20 pages or so we will be moving onto The Dark Ages starting with the Byzantine World where we will turn from the Oriental side of the endless duel between East and West. However, in that short period of time, let us give the Judaic Civilization its due and concentrate on the Letters, The Adventures of the Talmud, Science Among the Jews, The Rise of Jewish Philosophy, Maimonides and the Maimonidean War, The Cabala, and finally Release.

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 19, 2005 - 07:08 pm
    Justin:

    I don't recall St. Dominic having anything to do with the Albigensian/ Cathar heresy although a Dominican was sent to get rid of them.

    They had a dual view of life. The good and the evil. The good being anything to do with praying and giving praise, but the evil or dark side was carnal. It was all right for people to marry, but it was not all right to have children. The mother was to suffocate her baby and starve herself to death, and the husband was to kill himself. Soon villages would be decimated.

    The following defines the Albigensian heresy in the first paragraph of the link, but it goes on in more detail for additional information.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm

    Some years ago a novel by Charmaine Craig, called "The Good Men" "A Novel of Heresy" was published. It is quite a good story based on a real life person.

    "It is a passionate sweeping story of human tragedy" A short synopsis:

    http://www.readinggroupguides.com/guides3/good_men1.asp

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 09:22 pm
    JoanK... Your folks were certainly among the minority and your experience as an American sponsor of a child from the camps was unique. It was not the policy of this country to bring in refugees from overrun countries before,during the war, or after. In 1947 several shiploads of refugee Jews from Europe were refused the right to land in Palestine by the British who held a mandate from the Versailles treaty. We moaned about those poor people aboard the vessel who were without food for weeks on end but did nothing. The ship, I think, was sent back to it's European port without unloading. I can't remember the final disposition of the passengers. Does anyone else recall the incident?

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 09:55 pm
    MeriJo: How could you think that a Dominican sent to wipe out the Cathars in 1233 would not be Dominic?. It was he who received the papal assignment.Your link to Catholic Encyclopedia article on Albigences confirms story of St Dominic and the Dominican heresy supression.The reference is at the end of Section 11, titled "Origin and History."Other less slanted sources tell us Gregory lX gave independent authority to Dominic and the Dominicans (1233) to investigate Hersey. You will notice from your reference that it was not long after that the Cathars were completely wiped out.

    Justin
    May 19, 2005 - 10:03 pm
    Rich7: Yes, I agree. It is a poor discussion when people do not respond to one another.

    Bubble
    May 19, 2005 - 11:29 pm
    Justin, the fishing boat you are thinking of, is it the Exodus? There is a book by Leon Uris on that and a film was made based on the story too. The passengers were deported to Cyprus in a camp there.

    http://www.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/rz3a035/exodus1947.html

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Immigration/exodus.html

    http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/gallery2/11511.htm

    http://www.jafi.org.il/education/moriya/carmel/Theillegalmmigration.html

    There were other ships as well.Read about the Lanegev boat.

    Lanegev

    Jan Sand
    May 20, 2005 - 01:55 am
    And then there was the boat of Jews that attempted to flee the Nazis to the USA but was prevented by the Roosevelt administration from landing.

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005267

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 20, 2005 - 03:29 am
    Another article about CLASS which seems to have been a problem for thousands of years.

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 20, 2005 - 04:01 am
    "Within Islam the Jews used Arabic in daily speech and written prose.

    "Their poets kept to Hebrew but accepted Arabic meters and poetic forms. In Christendom the Jews spoke the language of the people among whom they lived but wrote their literature, and worshiped Yahveh, in the ancient tongue.

    "After Maimonides the Jews of Spain, fleeing from Almohad persecution, abandoned Arabic for Hebrew as their literary medium. The revival of Hebrew was made possible by the devoted labors of Jewish philologists. The Old Testament text hd become difficult to understand through lack of vowels and punctduation. Three centuries of scholarship -- from ths seventh to the tenth -- evolved the 'Masoretic' (tradition sanctioned) text by adding vowel points, accent strokes, punctuation marks, verse separations, and marginal notes.

    "Thereafter any literate Jew could read the Scriptures of his people.

    "Profiting from this widespread scholarship, Hebrew poetry emancipated itself from Arabic exemplars, developed its own forms and themes, and produced in Spain alone three men quite equal to any triad in the Moslem or Christian literature of their age.

    "Solomon ibn Gabirol, known to the Christian world as the philosoopher Avicebron, was prepared by his personal tragedy to voice the feelings of Israel. This 'poet among philosophers and philosopher among poets,' as Heine called him, was born at Malaga about 1021. He lost both parents early and grew up in a poverty that inclined him to morose contemplation.

    "His verses caught the fancy of Yekutiel ibn Hassan, a high official in the Moslem city-state of Saragossa. There for a time Gabirol found protection and happiness and sang the joy of life. But Yekutiel was assassinated by enemies of the emir and Gabirol fled.

    "For years he wandered through Moslem Spain, poor and sick, and so thin that 'a fly could now bear me up with ease.' Samuel ibn Naghdela, himself a poet, gave him refuge at Granada. There Solomon wrote his philosophical works and pledged his poetry to wisdom. Presumably his impetuous pride caused his quarrel with Samuel.

    "Still a youth in his late twenties, he resumed his wandering poverty. Misfortune humbled his spirit and he turned from philosophy to religion. His poetry took at times the somber grandeur of the Psalms. His masterpiece, Kether Mallkuth (Royal Crown) celebrated the greatness of God as his early poems had celebrated his own."

    Any comments here on literature?

    Robby

    Bubble
    May 20, 2005 - 04:24 am
    Ibn Gvirol has a main street named for him in almost every big town. I am learning why presently.

    All the Jews arriving here from North Africa were fluent in Arabic. My grand parents in Cairo spoke French and Arabic at home, as well as Ladino; they could read and understand their Hebrew Bible of course. I wonder if knowing many different languages helped make the literature richer.

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 12:55 pm
    Justin:

    This is the excerpt from my link that pertains to your question: Two Spaniards, Diego, Bishop of Osma and his companion, Dominic Guzman (St. Dominic), returning from Rome, visited the papal legates at Montpellier. By their advice, the excessive outward splendour of Catholic preachers, which offended the heretics, was replaced by apostolical austerity. Religious disputations were renewed. St. Dominic, perceiving the great advantages derived by his opponents from the cooperation of women, founded (1206) at Pouille near Carcassonne a religious congregation for women, whose object was the education of the poorer girls of the nobility. Not long after this he laid the foundation of the Dominican Order.

    St. Dominic worked to replace the ostentatious manners of the local clergy, who ultimately would directly deal with the heresy also, but he, himself, seems to have been involved in "religious disputations", supposedly concerning the heresy. He had not formed the Dominican order yet at that time. He had come as a companion to the bishop, while still independent of an order - He may have been a priest or a civilian according to this. He was referred to here as one of "two Spaniards".

    It was Innocent III who initiated the investigation of the Cathars. I have not seen a reference to Gregory IX. Innocent III was severe enough. Even Charmaine Craig, in her book, emphasizes Innocent III.

    Rich7
    May 20, 2005 - 01:09 pm
    Bubble, I think your family story (stories?) would make a great book.

    I hereby commission you to write it!

    (Don't expect money from me, however.- I'll buy a copy when it's published )

    Rich

    Bubble
    May 20, 2005 - 01:58 pm
    Rich, I wish I could. I am sure there was enough material for it.

    Unfortunately, the generation that could have told the Cairo period to me is almost all gone. I myself never met those grand parents because my parents left for the African continent on their honey moon.

    Of course the African chapter is most interesting but remote from what we are talking now. Does Durant talk about the colonisation of Africa? Bubble

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 02:15 pm
    MeriJo.

    Innocent came to power in 1198 and in 1205 Dominic Guzman did as you say. In 1206 he founded an order of women.

    But 25 years later, Gregory lX was in power and it was he who gave Dominic full power to independently investigate heretics. His male Dominican order had been in operation for some years. Innocent was long dead. The council of Toulouse in 1229 instituted the Inquisition. You will find some of this in the last sentences of the section titled Origins and history of your linkage.

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 02:28 pm
    I wonder if the Committee of Englishman under James Stuart used any of the original Hebrew text in it's translation of the Old Testament. My guess is that they used the Masuretic version which added vowels and punctuation to the original text. Which means they were already "one off".

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 20, 2005 - 04:38 pm
    Any comments regarding Durant's remarks in Post 908?

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 04:44 pm
    Justin:

    I had an appointment and had to leave our discussion. I did come back and research Gregory the IX, and he did continue to have concerns re the Albigensian heresy once he became Pope. He was pretty old when he became Pope - over eighty, but the execution of heretics at that time was turned over to the civil government. The heretics were burned at the stake under the aegis of the emperor or king. There was no mention of Dominic himself in my source, but it is true that Dominicans were involved in finding the Cathars. He most certainly would have known about their activities.

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 04:57 pm
    Robby:

    I am reading your excerpts as best as I can and find much of the specific references very interesting, and I would like to know more about these works of poetry. Are there separate references?

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 20, 2005 - 04:59 pm
    Message from Mal

    Hey youse guys,

    From the Flat on Your Back Library these are the books I have read so far:

    I Am Charlotte Simmons, by Tom Wolfe -- a good book. I liked it. The Life of Pi, by some Canadian named Yann Martel-- a well written hoax. I should have left it on the shelf. Bill Bryson's two books, I'm a Stranger Here Myself, and Notes From a Small Island-- lovely books for the recovering invalid, or anybody who wants to smile. The Plot Against America, by Philip Roth-- this is a well written, very good book which I will have to read again when I am a little less dismantled than I am right now. The Russian Debutante's Handbook by Gary Shteyngart-- a very funny book with multitudinous American and middle-european characters of a dubious nature.

    These are the books I've read thus far, in the past week or so.

    My physiotherapist Jack said to me today, "Have a great weekend!" I didn't know it was the weekend, but I'll repeat it to you anyway.

    Mal

    JoanK
    May 20, 2005 - 06:20 pm
    JUSTIN asks:"I wonder if the Committee of Englishman under James Stuart used any of the original Hebrew text in it's translation of the Old Testament. My guess is that they used the Masuretic version which added vowels and punctuation to the original text. Which means they were already "one off""

    I read somewhere, but have lost the source, that the King James, and other Christian bibles did not use Hebrew sources. If I remember correctly, they used a source in Greek which was actually older than the Masuretic version. Hence they were able to claim it was closer to the source than the original, even though it had been translated. Can anyone else confirm this.

    My copy of the Torah does use the Masuretic version. I have always meant to sit down and compare it to the King James version, but never seem to find the time.

    Some years ago, I read some of the papers published on the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. One asked why there has not yet been a translation based on these scrolls, which are much older than the Masuretic version. There has been a word by word comparison of a copy of the Book of Isiah found at the Dead Sea site with the Masuretic version. Many discrepancies were found but, it was said, most of them were in spelling. (The introduction of vowels made some simplifications in spelling possible). I have not seen a more detailed analysis.

    JoanK
    May 20, 2005 - 06:28 pm
    Here is a link to some of his poems:

    POEMS OF IBN GABIROL

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 08:06 pm
    Joan K.

    Thanks for your link. I appreciated the poem.

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 08:23 pm
    Justin:

    Dominic died on August 6, 1221 in Bologna, Italy. He could not have been in Spain for the Inquisition.

    http://www.answers.com/St.%20Dominic

    MeriJo
    May 20, 2005 - 08:57 pm
    I thought I would check Google, and I think I found quite a collection of Hebrew Literature from the medieval period answering my own question in a way - I hope this is all right. Just click on any of the underlined author's names and a selection of his works appear. The source is the Columbia Encyclopedia.

    http://www.bartleby.com/65/he/Hebrewli.html

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 10:44 pm
    MeriJo: I don't think religious bodies, generally, undertake the task of capital punishment.There are probably exceptions to this practice. People may have died under torture by a religious body but that is not the same as an execution. Generally, the civil authorities undertake that task at the behest of religious authority. Jesus and Pilate is a good example. Torguemada and King Ferdinand is another. Dominic and de Montfort is another.

    In 1233, Gregory gave Dominic and his Dominicans full authority to investigate the heresy question and later he cannonized Dominic. Gregory lX, by the way, was a relative of Innocent lll.

    There is a painting of Dominic presiding over an Auto da Fe by Pedro Berruguete. It hangs in the sacristiy of Santo Tomas in Avila. It is a most frightening image of power run amok. It would be nice if one our researchers could find it and bring it up.It might be in the Prado today.

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 10:50 pm
    MeriJo: That was a nice link on Hebrew literature. Thank you.

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 10:58 pm
    Yes, the St. Dominic is in the Prado. It is catalogue #618.

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 11:26 pm
    Dominic's death in 1221 would seem to leave him out of the de Montfort massacre in 1233 and Gregory's assignment of the heretic problem to the Dominicans. But it does not leave him out of the Albigensian struggle against heresy. William Langer's work on World History( Harvard 1952) dealing with Innocent lll says, "The Spaniard, Dominic, organized the spontaneous response within the Church to this crisis. The Mendicant order, the Dominicans, born of Dominic's campaign against the Albigensian heresy was sanctioned by Innocentlll in 1215.The conduct of the Inquisition was entrusted to them in 1233." (after the death of Dominic).

    By the way, finding the date of Dominic's death was good research.

    Justin
    May 20, 2005 - 11:41 pm
    Bubble; Yes, the Exodus was the ship I had in mind. Thank you.

    Bubble
    May 21, 2005 - 12:46 am
    http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Auto_da_fe

    http://gallery.euroweb.hu/html/b/berrugue/pedro/index.html

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 06:49 am
    "The richness and variety of Jewish culture in Moslem Spain were summed up in the Ibn Ezra family at Granada.

    "Jacob ibn Ezra held an important post in the government of King Habbus under Samuel ibn Naghdela. His home was a salon of literature and philosophy.

    "Of his four sons, reared in this atmosphere of learning, three reached distinction. Joseph rose to high office in the state and to leadership of the Jewish community. Isaac was a poet, a scientist, and a Talmudist. Moses ibn Ezra (1070-1139) was a scholar, a philosopher, and the greatest Jewish poet of the generation before Halevi. His happy youth ended when he fell in love with a beautiful niece, whose father (his older brother Isaac) married her to his younger brother Abraham. Moses left Granada, wandered through strange lands and fed his hopeless passion with poetry. 'Though thy lips drop honey for others to sip, live on, breathe myrrh for others to inhale. Though thou art false to me, yet shall I be true to thee till the cold earth claims her own. My heart rejoices in the nightingale's song, though the singer soars above me and afar.'

    "In the end, like Gabirol, he tuned his harp to piety and sang psalms of mystic surrender.

    "Abraham ben Meir ibn Ezra -- whom Browning used as a mouthpiece of Victorian philosophy -- was a distant relative but an intimate friend, of Moses ibn Ezra. Born in Toledo in 1093, his youth knew hunger and thirsted for knowledge in every field.

    "He too wandered from town to town, from occupation to occupation, luckless in all. He said, with the wry humor of the Jew:-'Were candles my merchandise, the sun would never set. If I sold burial shrouds, men would live forever.'

    "He traveled through Egypt and Iraq to Iran, perhaps to India, back to Italy, then to France and England. At seventy-five he was returning to Spain when he died, still poor, but acclaimed throughout Jewry for both his poetry and his prose.

    "His works were as varied as his domiciles -- on mathematics, astronomy, philosophy, religion. His poems ranged through love and friendship, God and nature, anatomy and the seasons, chess and the stars.

    "His contemporaries valued him chiefly for his Biblical commentaries on every book of the Old Testament. He defended the authenticity and divine inspiration of the Hebrew Scriptures but interpreted as metaphors the anthropomorphic phrases applied to the Deity.

    "He was the first to suggest that the Book of Isaiah was the work of two prophets, not one. Spinoza considered him a founder of rational Biblical criticism."

    Your comments, please?

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 21, 2005 - 08:39 am
    Justin:

    I agree with you. Thanks for your comment re my research.

    If you click on my answer.com link you will find the painting of the "auto de fe". At the lower right corner is a small square with what looks like a couple of small frames. Click on it and you will get information on the painting which hangs in the Prado - also a larger view of the painting and more.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 08:50 am
    Any comments regarding Durant's remarks?

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 21, 2005 - 08:51 am
    Robby:

    #930:

    The fact that the Jews were able to gather together to discuss literature and philosophy during those years shows to me that reading materials were available. There is no doubt that these people preserved much for future generations.

    I was concerned with the fact that so close a blood relationship as a niece would marry an uncle. Would this possibly have caused some health problems for their children?

    It has been said that humor is close to sadness and Abraham ben Meir ibn Ezra does give wonderful examples of that as shown here.

    Bubble
    May 21, 2005 - 10:03 am
    Marijo, union between uncle and niece are more acceptable in the Halacha (the Jewish code) than between cousins and happen even nowadays. They are forbidden between siblings.

    winsum
    May 21, 2005 - 11:18 am
    google knew. as so would you. took one and a half minutes. what strikes me about this is the casual scene. No one is really paying attention. . . . Claire

    the painting

    winsum
    May 21, 2005 - 11:33 am
    "the wry humor of the Jew:-'Were candles my merchandise, the sun would never set. If I sold burial shrouds, men would live forever.'

    "

    steritypical statement but somehow it sounds right. Do Jews have a wry way with words? . . . winsum

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 01:01 pm
    Thank you, ladies , one and all for the Berruguete Painting. I think it should be pointed out that St Dominic in this painting done in 1490,is only symbolic of the Dominican role in the Spanish Inguisition. Fr. Torquemada was the leading Dominican in the Spanish pogrum.

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 01:08 pm
    I too was surprised by a marriage between uncle and neice. Consanguinity problems plagued European nobility but I thought there were Talmudic constraints on kinship marriage.

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 01:14 pm
    Rational Biblical Criticism is still, today, very active with a large catalogue of works on the shelves. Durant told us about the two authors of Isaiah when we were discussing that era.

    Rich7
    May 21, 2005 - 01:38 pm
    I've read that the self deprecating humor of the Jews was a defense mechanism in a dangerous world. "I make fun of myself: See I am a simple person with a sense of humor. I make fun of you: I may be a threat to you."

    The painting of "Saint" Domenic attending a public burning of non-believers is chilling. What's disturbing is the image of the clergy sitting about in all their Vatican finery while officiating over the execution of two people who disagree with them. There's something familiar about the "I am closer to God, and I know what's right" attitude displayed in the painting which I think prevails among Catholic clergy on an intellectual level to this day.

    Rich

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 02:27 pm
    The Adventures of the Talmud

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 02:44 pm
    "The Jews of that golden age in Spain were too prosperous to be as deeply religious as their poets became in declining years.

    "They produced verses joyous and sensuous and graceful and expressed a philosophy that confidently reconciled the Holy Scriptures with Greek thought. Even when Almohad fanaticism drove the Jews from Moslem into Christian Spain they continued to prosper.

    "Jewish academies flourished under Christian tolerance in Toledo, Gerona, and Barcelona in the thirteenth century. But in France and Germany the Jews were not so fortunate. They crowded their narrow quarters timidly and gave their best minds to the study of the Talmud.

    "They did not bother to justify their faith to the secular world. They never questioned its premises. They consumed themselves in the Law.

    "The academy founded by Rabbi Gershom at Mainz became one of the most influential schools of its time. Hundreds of students gathered there and shared with Gershom in editing and clarifying through two generations of labor the Talmudic test. A similar role was played in France by Rabbi Shelomoh ben Yitzdhak (1040-105), fondly called Rashi from the first letters of his title and his name.

    "Born at Troyes in Champagne, he studied in the Jewish academies of Worms, Mainz, and Speyer. Returning to Troyes, he supported his famiy by selling wine but gave every leisure hour to the Bible and the Talmud. Though not officially a rabbi, he founded an academy at Troyes, taught there for forty years and gradually composed commentaries on the Old Testament, the Mishna, and the Gemara.

    "He did not try, as some Spanish scholas had done, to read philosophical ideas into the religious texts. He merely explained these with such lucid learning that his Talmudic commentaries are now printed with the Talmud.

    "The modest purity of his charcter and his life won him reverence among his people as a saint. Jewish communities everywhere in Europe sent him questions in theology and law and gave legal authority to his replies. His old age was saddened by the pogroms of the First Crusade.

    "After his death his grandsons Samuel, Jacob, and Isaac ben Meir continued his work. Jacob was the first of the 'tosaphists' for five generations after Rashi the French and German Talmudists revised and amended his commentaries with Tosafoth or 'supplements.'"

    Prosperity leads to a lessening of religion?

    Robby

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 03:00 pm
    Rich7; The painting you describe from Bubbles list of Berruguetes showing St Dominic presiding over the burning of books is more significant than you may be aware. The books are those of the Talmud.

    Our old friend Gregory lX, ordered all copies of the Talmud in Spain, France and England turned over to the Dominicans and burned. That heinous act ended the literary efforts of the Jews in those countries. Dominic's appearance in these paintings is of course only symbolic. He represents the Dominicans.

    I agree, the little Jewish converts who were accused of apostacy, and have now been turned over to the secular authorities for punishment are depicted as insignificant little beings not worthy of concern. Notice that two more Jews are lined up wearing their penitential hat and garments waiting their turn at the stake. Another Jew, being interviewed by a Dominican is probably being asked to uphold his conversion for which he will be strangled before burning.

    The faithful looks at this period in religious history and says,"We are more civilized today. We don't burn people at the stake anymore." Yet somehow these same people look at the Holocaust and blame others. It is strange reasoning that brings people to religion and lets them overlook the evils that seem to be inherent in the practice.

    MeriJo
    May 21, 2005 - 04:28 pm
    Bubbles:

    Thank you for explaining about the uncle/niece marriage.

    Rich 7:

    One can imagine any one in power developing their intellectual pride. Even the lowly chairman of the local PTA can experience a sense of power in describing what the organization's agenda will be for the coming year. It's a human trait, I would think.

    Justin

    Although the painting of the books shows an elaborate gold-embossed hard cover of sorts - didn't think books were around as such at that time, but perhaps at the time of the painter - I thought these were the writings of the Albigensians from whom some Jewish and Muslim beliefs were applied in the practice of their morbid version of Christianity.

    winsum

    I agree. Virtually each character in the painting seems preoccupied with his own sense of resignation and collection of personal thoughts. It would have been a time for a bewildering set of observations.

    MeriJo
    May 21, 2005 - 04:45 pm
    Re prosperity and religion:

    It appears that Durant believes that the selling of wine provided enough means for Rabbi Gershom at Mainz to provide for his family and found an academy. I assume that he received stipends from his pupils and those seeking his advice from his teaching and counsel as well. Giving as much time as he did to study and writing made him a respected, authoritative figure- even though officially not a rabbi. However, in today's thinking that would have not seemed enough of an income for measurable prosperity.

    It seems as though he was immensely involved with religion. His involvement does not appear to have lessened his participation in his religion, I think. To answer your question, Robby, I don't think so.

    Gershom may have done a bit more than just sell wine. Did he have vineyards and a winery?

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 04:57 pm
    Again -- the subtopic of CLASS because Durant considers it so important in the progress of Civilization -- this time in relation to religion.

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 21, 2005 - 05:26 pm
    Here is an EXAMPLE of a religious organization helping to raise young people from a lower socio-economic class.

    Robby

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 05:54 pm
    MeriJo; Keep your eye on Gregory lX. He may be old as I am but he was a bear.

    The codex form of book using quires comprised of a dozen parchment leaves folded, written on verso and recto, stitched and bound in leather was available at the end of the third century. The Church was a heavy user of such codices.

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 06:02 pm
    I think, lack of prosperity probably breeds religious zeal. Fear sets in and religion gains in popularity. I suppose the opposite is true. Prosperity brings security and the need for religion diminishes.

    3kings
    May 21, 2005 - 09:20 pm
    It is exactly as you say Justin. The poor are attracted to religion, they will sometimes willingly die for it. Some wealthy have less ardour for those facets of doctrine which restrict their ambitious accumulation of wealth. Remember Matthew the publican ?

    I wonder why it is considered appropriate in some cases for an uncle to marry a niece, but not for an aunt to marry a nephew? I guess it is the age thing; the male in a partnership should be older than the female.

    Hence the shock and horror recently, when a woman teacher in California had an affair with a 16 year old boy. Had the ages been reversed, many would have shrugged and said 'men will be men'. ++ Trevor

    winsum
    May 21, 2005 - 09:26 pm
    I find myself wading though an awful lot on the Catholics which is GREEK to me. . . Claire

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 10:28 pm
    Claire: We just went through a perod of Jewish history most influenced by Christian thinking. When we were discussing Albigensia, were discussing the effects of Christianity on the Jews as well as on Christian cults.

    As we progress we will be talking more and more about the effects of Christianity on the Jews and on other religious groups. Faith is the topic of this volume. Because of the great power of the Church in this period much of what we encounter will be seen from the view point of the Church and it's policies.

    The discussion is conducted in a learning format so one does not necessarily have to know about Catholicism or any other topic in advance to participate. It might help if you had a copy of the book so you could read ahead and think about the material before Robby posts a section for discussion.

    We can check around to see if we can find some inexpensive copies. Several people in the discussion do not have the book and would probably appreciate a good used edition. Perhaps, Robby and Ginny can help.

    Jan Sand
    May 21, 2005 - 10:30 pm
    Justin

    It may be that the mind set that can manipulate the forces of the world to create personal prosperity does not depend upon the beneficence of a theoretical super being to distribute the good things of life.

    Claire

    Perhaps the discussion of the Catholics is releveant to the centuries long miseries of the Jews.

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 10:47 pm
    I just looked at Barnes and Noble. They have 21 used volumes rated at good or better in a range of $4.00 to $15. I will be glad to help in any way I can.

    Justin
    May 21, 2005 - 11:05 pm
    Thank God, economics is not tied to God's largesse.

    Yes, I agree, it well behooves the modern Jew to examine historical Christianity, in order to understand the problems of the Jew in history. The conditions that created the Jewish problem have not gone away and if one does not understand what caused it in the first place one is doomed to suffer through it again.

    When WWll ended I said, "we must understand how Hitler came to power in a democracy so we do not repeat the mistake." Twenty years passed before I could address the problem. The answer I came up with is complex. But it is clear to me that a Hitler can come along in any democracy and work the magic of coalition building to gain power. .

    winsum
    May 21, 2005 - 11:08 pm
    "Perhaps the discussion of the Catholics is relevant to the centuries long miseries of the Jews."

    I have been aware of this history since I was a sentient child and the haulicost was going on. The reference to Hitler's rise is based upon German history which is loosely connected with theories of AMAGEDON (sp)

    I find that the miseries that Jews have suffered at the hands of the Catholic church just make me mad and impatient. ancient history repeating itself and creating for me not a prejudice because it's not PRE but a hatred for all things Christian. Yes it's OK to hate.

    . . . . And then to have Catholic theologians featured here so prominently contributes to it. I couldn't care less about any long dead theologies. I am concerned about present day problems related to a resurgence of antisemitism as indicated by skin heads, British black balling Israel's university and other such happenings. As for buying the book -- I don't like the DURANTS . . .and their approach which is though the age of faith and don't want to give them room on my bookshelf. . . .I do find personal contributions here to be very interesting and enjoy the contact with such lively people in the discussion. The links are often interesting too leading to others etc. . . . This is a good place to be for the most part but I do have personal problems with the emphasis on religion anyhow and in particular with Christian religion. . . . Claire

    Jan Sand
    May 21, 2005 - 11:26 pm
    Claire

    I am most sympathetic to your dislike of the many nasty forces released by religious belief but I find difficulty in understanding how one might investigate the history of faith without entering into a discussion of the history of religion. There are, of course, faiths outside of religion but in general, religion plays a dominant role.

    winsum
    May 22, 2005 - 12:43 am
    "religion plays a dominant role. " that very dominance is what frightens me. the willingness of so many people to be led like sheep into danger is very upsetting to me. Can't they understand what is happening. It's not a matter of intellect but of carelessness supported by adrenaline and testosterone when questioned. How can so many folks be so wrong . . . but they are . . . and it is hard for me to lump them all together like that but in this instance believers and especially the ones with missionary zeal are scary. . . . Claire

    kiwi lady
    May 22, 2005 - 12:57 am
    Claire you are saying Christians are wrong. However although many of us do not preach to others, it is offensive for anyone to be told their religion is wrong. Some behaviours may be wrong but we should not attack anothers faith.

    Carolyn

    winsum
    May 22, 2005 - 01:02 am
    there are fine people who are believers in some form of religion. They often do good works but their belief system is WRONG. they don't need it to be fine and do good works... it's so sad . . . . . Claire

    Bubble
    May 22, 2005 - 01:42 am
    Claire, if those good people find help and need for religion in their life and they are "righteous", does it matter? It is their life and should be free to steer it as they prefer. We all do enjoy the same freedom - I hope.

    You are right about antisemitism being more prevalent nowadays, but that is not to be imposed on the conscience of those good people, especially that most do recognize the problem and try to help.

    Post 947 - what a wonderful reportage. I wish the papers had more articles similar to encourage people in taking part, in believing they can effect a change, to convince that it matters. By people I mean both those receiving the benefit and those striving to give it.

    MeriJo #945 - a religious Jew is not allowed to touch wine made by someone other than a Jew. This would be a good income for Rabbi Gershon ( this first name is still in use) if there were not many others doing it too. Also he would have received presents of food, clothes, produces from whoever came to ask his advice. This was and is the norm.

    Trevor, not only are the poor attracted to religion, but I see around me that the old too return to practice after they are retired a few years. I asked my eldest uncle why he did it. His reply: going to the synangogue daily brings an aim to the day; it gives companionship and an alternative to being around the wife all day long; it also prepare for the judgement day when life ends and surely it is not bad to have some extra bonus then too.
    Bubble

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 03:12 am
    Claire:-I have no doubt but that you often feel hurt after reading some of the actions toward Jews throughout history. To avoid reading about them, however, is similar to having a festering sore and doing nothing about it. A visit to the physician results in his picking around the sore and for a while making it feel worse. This is not at all pleasant but may help us to understand how the sore came into being in the first place.

    I am curious as to why you do not like Durant. That is your privilege, of course, but he is known as a historian's historian and has an excellent reputation among those who look for accuracy and fairness.

    I would suggest to others here that while it is difficult to discuss The Mind and Heart of the Jew (our current subtopic as indicated in the GREEN quotes above) without referring to Catholicism, that we use Durant's comments referring to the Roman Catholics and not move off onto other sub-topics even though they may be about the Roman Catholics. We are now on Page 401 and are discussing "The Adventures of the Talmud."

    Robby

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 03:39 am
    "The Talmud had hardly been completed when Justinian outlawed the book (553) as 'a tissue of puerilities, fables, iniquities, insults, imprecations, heresies, and blasphemies.'

    "Thereafter the Church seems to have forgotten the existence of the Talmud. Few theologians of the Latin Church could read the Hebrew or Aramaic in which it was written.

    "For 700 years the Jews were free to study the cherished volumes -- so sedulously that they in turn seem almost to have forgotten the Bible. But in 1239 Nicholas Donin, a French Jew converted to Christianity, laid before Pope Gregory IX an indictment of the Talmud as containing shameful insults of Christ and the Virgin, and incitations to dishonesty in dealing with Christians.

    "Some of the charges were true, for the assiduous compilers had so reverenced the tannaim and amoraim as to include in the haggadic or popular portion of the Gemara occasional remarks in which irate rabbis had struck back at Christian critiques of Judaism. But Donin, how more Christian than the Pope, added several charges that could not be substantiated:-that the Talmud considered it permissible to deceive, and meritorious to kill, a Christian, no matter how good -- that the Jews were allowed by their rabbis to break promises made under oath -- and tht any Christian who studied the Jewish Law was to be put to death.

    "Gregory ordered all discoverable copies of the Talmud in France, England, and Spain to be turned over to the Dominicans or the Franciscans, bade the monks examine the books carefully, and commanded that the books be burned if the charges proved true. No record has been found of the aftermath of this order.

    "In France Louis IX directed all Jews to surrender their copies of the Talmud on pain of death and summoned four rabbis to Paris to defend the book in public debate before the King, Queen Blanche, Donin, and two leading Scholastic philosophers -- William of Auvergne and Albertus Magnus. After three days' inquiry the King ordered all copies of the Talmud to be burned (1240).

    "Walter Cornutus, Archbishop of Sens, interceded for the Jews and the King allowed many copies to be restored to their owners. But the Archbishop died soon afterward and some monks were of opinion that this was the judgment of God on the royal lenience. Convinced by them, Louis ordered the confiscation of all copies of the Talmud. Twenty-four carloads were brought to Paris and were committed to the flames (1242).

    "The possession of the Talmud was prohibited in France by a papal legate in 1248. Thereafter rabbinical studies and Hebrew literature declined in all of France except Provence."

    Your thoughts, please?

    Robby

    Bubble
    May 22, 2005 - 03:50 am
    I am reminded of purification from witches by burning. We will never know what part of our past and history has been thus lost in flames. Indexed books too were used in bonfires.

    It is hard to stay on the topic when it is as painful.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 04:32 am
    Here is the BIO of Nicholas Donin.

    Robby

    kiwi lady
    May 22, 2005 - 08:54 am
    If we look at a the persecution of all sorts of believers over the centuries the persecution begins with influential zealots who spread the poison amongst a fear filled population.

    We have had the persecution of the Jews, there has been the persecution of Protestant churches who withdrew from the mainstream. My husbands ancestors left Scotland in Elizabethan times because they broke away from the Church of Scotland and were being persecuted. A whole church and its flock left at the time my late husbands ancestors left their birth place. They sailed to Nova Scotia and then after a generation or two they packed up again and came to NZ.

    Persecution always begins with a Zealot in a position of power.

    Carolyn

    Jan Sand
    May 22, 2005 - 09:52 am
    Perhaps it is the quality of absolute acceptance fostered by religions which is the culprit behind the awful violence that can be generated in religious congregations. The habit of being critical about religious proclamations is a secular attitude and doubters in religious groups are not well accepted. So when a religious leader makes outrageously nasty statements about a group considered outsiders, none of the religious followers even considers doubting their truth.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 09:59 am
    Some definitions of ABSOLUTISM.

    Robby

    JoanK
    May 22, 2005 - 10:42 am
    Of course we need to look at Catholicism, too. But I think Claire's point is valid. Christianity is the dominant religion. It is so dominant that even when we are supposed to be studying Judaism, we wind up talking about Christianity instead. I think we may need to immerse ourselves more in the Jewish point of view, for this part of the discussion. From the Jewish point of view it doesn't matter a fig whether the person that persecuted them was named Dominic or something else. We can talk about that later, when we talk about the Christians.

    JoanK
    May 22, 2005 - 10:50 am
    I'm glad Claire mentioned the Jewish sense of humor. I don't think you can talk about Jewish culture without talking about that. I think it is an important part of Judaism.

    Jan (I think) mentioned that self-depreciating sense of humor is a useful coping method of the oppressed, making them seem non-threatening. This is true, but not the main point, I think. Jewish humor was primarily directed toward other Jews, not gentiles. To me, it's a part of the "weltschmertz" (sp?) that we talked about earlier. This view of the world BOTH recognizes the tragedy of life AND recognizes the humor -- that even within the tragedy there is shared laughter. To me, this is outstanding.

    Rich7
    May 22, 2005 - 10:54 am
    I have a Dominican joke.

    Don't anybody worry, I've told it to priests who have laughed out loud.

    The Dominican order and the Jesuits have had a serious rivalry through the centuries. Actually, the name Jesuit is shorthand for Society of Jesus. Jesuits often sign their names followed by an SJ, as a doctor would follow his name with an MD.

    Anyway, a Dominican and a Jesuit are argueing with each other about who is more favored in the eyes of God. They decide to settle it by asking God the question in the form of a note left overnight on the altar in a nearby chapel.

    The next morning they went to the chapel and, sure enough, there was a written response.

    It read: "My sons, you are both equal in my eyes."

    Signed

    God..SJ

    Rich

    MeriJo
    May 22, 2005 - 10:54 am
    Bubbles:

    Thank you for your explanation of the wine. I am learning much about Jewish life from you. Thanks.

    As for the burning of the Talmud I can see where it may have posed a threat at the time to Christianity.

    The ability to read was limited to the educated classes - not necessarily privileged. The Church was a secular power at the time, and following the Fall of Rome it became the dominant temporal power. The Talmud represented a diversion from Christianity and introduced a fear in Christians that incorrect or anti-Christian views would enter into the thinking of the general population. The Church did not want to risk that.

    The measures taken to eliminate fears were those of the times and hoped they would be final, but there was ignorance then of the existence of others in the world who would save these books and so the burning was not wholly effective.

    Knowledge of human nature was still in its infancy, I think.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 11:29 am
    MESSAGE FROM MAL

    Hi Robby,

    I am still unable to pull myself to a sitting position in bed without help. I still cannot transfer myself from the bed to the wheelchair without help. This is why I do not use my computer: I cannot get at it by myself.

    When I can do all of these things - and I don't think it will be too much longer, a couple weeks maybe - I will be back in the Story of Civilization discussion.

    FIrst will come a WREX deadline for the exchange and critique of short stories, essays and book chapters. I am aiming for the first or second Saturday in June.

    Be patient with me please. I am working as hard as I can at getting well.

    Mal

    Jan Sand
    May 22, 2005 - 12:10 pm
    MeriJo

    Your remark that the understanding of human nature at the time of the Catholic Church's efforts to destroy the Jews was in its infancy makes me wonder about your views of our current understanding considering what goes on in the world today.

    winsum
    May 22, 2005 - 01:09 pm
    You and I are on the same page. You understand exactly what I was trying to say and you say it again. . . which makes it important. . . both items the study of Judaism includes but not necessarily in detail that of Christianity as having its roots there. and the bit about the sense of humor which may or may not be exclusively Jewish but if full of irony. . . it is . . . and it isn't .. . all at the same time. I find it subtle and delightful.

    Claire

    winsum
    May 22, 2005 - 01:16 pm
    reminds me of American History 7A at UCLA where I took about seven pages of notes for every lecture. These consisted of names and dates and were to be memorized for testing. I learned much more about history from my art history classes with visual examples which stayed in my mind much longer than names and dates of wars and politicians etc. I don't like the Durants approach because it is so dependent on arbitrary meaningless names and dates. I would have liked an examination of philosophy and even some conjecture about what the common person was like and what life was like for him/her. More than just a casual glance as was presented. Durants study is too full of words that don't say anything about the growth of this process we are still experiencing. . . CIVILIZATION. And the tone is so SELF IMPORTANT or at least it seems to me to be that way, I'm offended. . . . Claire

    MeriJo
    May 22, 2005 - 02:32 pm
    Jan Sand:

    I don't know if my views of today's problems are very thought through. I have developed a sense of things according to my own sense of reality. And my experiences, although seemingly varied, have been mostly protected, I think, so my reality may be very different from that of the public's as presented in the news, for example.

    I think there is an information overload, and not enough time to sort out where each bit of information may be applied. My impression is that there are many misinterpretations of events and the picture that appears is like a crazy-quilt. To react to this can be very exhausting.

    If you are referring to the U. S. in the world, we are as a country in the dock so to speak, because of all the accusations aimed to it. Our president is strong, but he has incurred the wrath of those who have an opposite reality. The war did not turn out as expected and anyone with a knowledge of the Middle East would have known that it was going to be a hard row to hoe, and so we are there.

    I am encouraged, however, by all the good that is being done in small ways, by all the discoveries being made and in general that the whole of things will recover if people can sit back and study the situation. I have an optimistic view of the economy. I think there is much interest by those in a position to correct things to do so. I am optimistic there.

    During the medieval age. I think, there were few who studied and applied what they studied to the world around them. There were many factors affecting thinking at the time. Those who became leaders, either of a country or a faith, had knowledge that did not go far enough. They were largely affected by superstition, by ignorance of our world regarding the universe, people's feelings as being important in the scheme of things, and a narrow understanding of what was reality. It was limited and it had a measure of fear. Church people were afraid of losing their power and their importance. Kings etc. were in fear of the Church and revolts and over all the people was the danger of being wrongfully accused, plagues, and marauders.

    The Jews, with all their many years of knowledge, tradition and with an ability to be resilient and have good humor, were strong in their sense of duty to one another. I believe this characteristic is still present among the Jewish people. They were strong in their faith which in and of itself is sustaining.

    This may be more than you wanted to know.

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 02:35 pm
    Science Among the Jews

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 02:46 pm
    "Jewish science and philosophy in the Middle Ages were almost entirely domiciled in Islam.

    "Isolated and scorned, and yet influenced by their neighbors, the Jews of medieval Christendom took refuge in mysticism, superstition, and Messianic dreams. No situation could have favored science less.

    "Religion, however, encouraged the study of astronomy, for on this depended the correct determination of the holydays. In the sixty century the Jewish astronomers of Babylonia substituted astronomic calculation for direct observation of the heavens.

    "They based the year on the apparent movements of the sun and the months on the phases of the moon -- gave Babylonian names to the months -- made months 'full' with thirty days, some 'defective' with twenty-nine -- then reconciled the lunar with the solar calendar by inserting a thirteenth month every third, sixth, eighth, eleventh, fourteenth, seventeenth, and nineteenth year in a nineteen-year cycle.

    "In the East the Jews dated events by the Seleucid calendar, which began at 312 B.C. In Europe, in the ninth century, they adopted the present 'Jewish era,' anno mundi -- 'year of the world' -- beginning with the supposed creation in 3761 B.C.

    "The Jewish calendar is as clumsy and sacred as our own."

    Your comments about Medieval Jewish science?

    Robby

    3kings
    May 22, 2005 - 03:04 pm
    WINSOME, I think your analysis of Durant is rather flawed. His work is a study, as far as they can be ascertained, of historical events.

    To do that, it is sensible to use names and dates to provide a framework on which the events can be displayed.

    Durant's work is a study of history, a text book, if you like. It is not an "Historical Novel", in which one follows the minuté of some family's daily life.

    Such works, if well done, have a useful place in the literature, but it was not Durant's intention to write a novel. His scope was far wider than that.

    Robby I hope you will excuse my straying of track,especially after you having often remarked that this forum is not a study of Durant, as such, but of Civilisation itself. ++ Trevor.

    winsum
    May 22, 2005 - 03:15 pm
    Of course you are right. there has to be a time frame and probably the names of some of the more relevant people of the time but that's about all there is here. It's boring. . . .it's not the STORY of CIVILIZATION. . . at all. There is a story here, not necessarily in the form of a novel, but interesting in itself.

    One of the writing courses I indulged in made this point. SHOW don't TELL. I think the Durants could have benefitted from this advise. .. . Claire

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 04:01 pm
    MariJo: Your 972 confuses me. You describe the Church as a dominant secular power following the fall of Rome.Durant tells us Rome went down the tubes to the Ostrogoths in 540-580. The Church following that period was in it's weakest position and continued so for some time. Rarely was it on good terms with european secular royalty and as late as the eleventh century was forced to relay on the barons and laity for support of the Crusades. The Church has never been the dominant secular power in Europe or any where else. It ruled through fear of GOD. It's military capacity was confined in the Renaisance to the Vatican States.

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 04:29 pm
    JoanK. I tend to agree with you that emphasis in the Islamic discussion was on Islam and now that we are in the Jewish portion of the text we have tended to discuss Judaism primarily in relation to Catholicism. There is, of course, a reason for that. Durant raised the issue of anti-semitism and that is largely a function of Christianity. Much of the recent discourse has been focused on that topic. I don't quite see how that topic or the role of the Church could be avoided.

    I read other authors to see whether the Durants overlooked anything of significance. "Great Ages and Ideas of the Jewish People" by Baron,Cohen,Halkin, Kaufmann and other was useful in this regard. It is an exploration of the long history of the Jewish people and an inerpretation of the major ideas and values that have grown out of that unique historical experience.I concluded that Durant covered much of the material these authors covered but in much less detail.

    It must be recalled also that the period we are covering now is that of the Rabbinic or Talmudic Age. The Biblical and Hellenistic ages were covered long ago in this discussion. .

    kiwi lady
    May 22, 2005 - 04:46 pm
    I was disappointed in Durant because his main interest has been in religion and there was so much more to the peoples he studied than their religion. He seem to be obsessed with religion in all his books.

    Just IMHO

    carolyn

    MeriJo
    May 22, 2005 - 04:50 pm
    Jewish Medicine during the medieval period. I found this excerpt about the esteem Jewish physicians were held during the Medieval Period. I hope it is a good reference. I recall from my school days that medicine made important strides during the medieval period especially in Southern Europe - Italy, here Malta is referred.

    http://www.geocities.com/hotsprings/2615/medhist/medieval.html

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 05:12 pm
    Carolyn:-We have to continue reminding ourselves that the name of this volume is "The Age of Faith." In effect, Durant told us in advance that these thousand years (which he is telling us about in a thousand pages) revolved heavily around various religions and the conflicts between them. He is a historian and it is not his fault that faith -- religion -- belief -- superstitution -- call it what you will, was the underlying theme of civilization in this era as it "progressed."

    In the earlier volumes -- Our Oriental Heritage, The Life of Greece, and Caesar and Christ -- the practice of religion was of course discussed but, in my memory, it played a more balanced part with economics, politics, and the pursuit of knowledge.

    What appears to be coming out it, at least to me, is that while religion has its positive side, that it can (and did and does) lead to some of the greatest miseries in mankind. And these are the sad events that remain uppermost in our minds. Perhaps they should. How easy it is to complain about our lives today and speak of the "good old days."

    Robby

    MeriJo
    May 22, 2005 - 05:13 pm
    Justin:

    You are partially right. There was a period in those early Dark Ages of much confusion and sorting out of ownerships of property. Immediately after the fall of Rome and the acceptance of Christianity in the West, and the marauders from the north, Vandals, Visigoths, Magyars, Huns et al, some individuals rose to the top and declared lands for their families. The Church, too, established ownership of lands - known as the Papal States. In time, the Church established its own lay nobility.

    The following is a pretty good reference, I think for a quick overview.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages

    robert b. iadeluca
    May 22, 2005 - 05:27 pm
    Speaking of the thousand pages (1086 to be exact) in this volume, we have completed 403 pages. In a day or so we will have completed 5000 postings. At that time, as you know, the Senior Net "technies" will move us to another SofC page and we will continue right on with no interruption whatsoever.

    In those 5000 postings we have discussed The Triumph of the Barbarians, The Progress of Christianity, Europe taking form, The Byzantine Civilization, The Persians, Mohammed, The Koran, The Islamic Scene, Eastern Islam, Western Islam, The Grandeur and Decline of Islam, The Talmud, The Medieval Jews -- and we are now in the final section under Judaic Civilization entitled The Mind and Heart of the Jew.

    I want to thank deeply all of you who have been making this discussion group so successful as a result of your sharing your thoughts. We, of course, miss Mal who is the "wizard of links" and not too long from now will come back to us from her hospitalization and somehow locate relevant links that most of us cannot find.

    Robby

    kiwi lady
    May 22, 2005 - 05:59 pm
    I had the privilege when I was young and in advertising to have as a client an older Jewish lady. She had a lingerie business. She was so kind but if you did not know her she could be quite forbidding. She had a really dry sense of humour which I loved. She took me under her wing when I was a real novice and brought other clients to me along the way. She made me many a lunch in my working week and I will never forget her. She moved away and I lost touch. She would be in her nineties now I would think.

    Carolyn

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 06:22 pm
    MariJo: We should not be discussing this for it is way off topic. The Papal States consisted of four small areas in and around Rome in the eleventh to the fourteenth century. In no way could they possibly be conceived as an important European source of secular power for the Papacy. I grant you they represented an attempt on the part of the papacy to achieve a little secular power but feudal powers like the Sforzas, the Manfredi, the Malatestas and other local lords replaced the vicars of the church with their own authority in the 14th century. It was, you will remember, in the early fourtenth century that Clement V abandoned Rome and went to Avignon and the French began their domination of the Papacy.

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 06:33 pm
    Mal; It is true that I miss you in this discussion, very much, but at the same time I recognize that you must not return until you are physically ready to do so. Get well, Lady, so we can share in your life again.

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 06:59 pm
    Jewish science was almost entirely domiciled in Islam. Jewish early writing in mathematics, astronomy, and medicine was almost entirely in Arabic.

    Over time, Jews became the most esteemed physicians in Christian Europe. However, once again the Papacy intervened and did it's usual thing. It forbade Christians to use Jewish physicians while at the same time the papacy used a Jewish doctor, Monesteries and Nunneries also used Jewish doctors. So did kings and other royalty. Just the laity was restrained in the use of Jewish doctors.

    The church hierarchy was afraid people might prefer rational medicine to treatment with relics and other mumbo jumbo. They were right but hypocritical and dishonest in that the clergy believed more in rational medicine than in the mumbo jumbo of faith.

    It is clear once again that the clergy is more interested in earning a living than in practicing what they preach. This characteristic was the motive in Sumeria.It was the motive in Medieval times and it is the motive today.

    Jan Sand
    May 22, 2005 - 07:59 pm
    MeriJo

    It was not just he USA I had in mind when I questioned the maturity of current civilization. The world entire is headed down a path of enviromental destruction and monstrous selfishness. The USA , of course, in its constant cries of freedom and individual initiative and its actions in the opposite direction is in the forefront of hysterial foolishness but I merely reacted to the amount of callous massacres in the world in the twentieth century and cannot see any rise out of infantile human comprehension. Our sophistication with machines may, in the long run, prove our undoing as machine intelligence surpasses human capability to control it.

    MeriJo
    May 22, 2005 - 09:08 pm
    Jan Sand:

    I really am at a loss of what to do here. I am a newcomer. I am a Catholic. My family has been Catholic all the way back to the Renaissance and before. I am very reasonable. I appreciate all the information I am gettimg here, and it is wonderful to discuss things with such an intelligent group, but I keep being asked questions and I hope to answer them quickly and briefly, but always with the caveat over my head that I am off-topic, so I have researched as much as I could about the Jews and posted it here. I hope I can be a good participant.

    However, I have had access to literature and a perspective that may be different from many here. I see many things being done to offset environmental catastrophe and Jan, I agree that the twentieth century was a violent century, but I do think that just about any century since the beginning of recorded time has been violent. I also see much good in people. I see many people doing good for others and I am encouraged by all of these things I see.

    This concern of yours could develop into a complete discussion of its own. Machines are helpless without a human guiding them

    Justin:

    I am pretty good in history - I like it and have done extra reading of historical things whenever I could throughout life. However, at my age I have to research things again because it has been many a year since I studied so carefully - although I do have still a pretty good memory of such a favorite subject matter. So until later.

    Jan Sand
    May 22, 2005 - 09:55 pm
    MeriJo

    There has always been a good deal of good in people inside and outside of religion but each increase in power of human cabability has given humanity more power over nature and over human civilization and more and more that power has been misused by shortsighted individuals to destroy our possibilities.

    Machines, at the moment, have not yet crossed the threshold of independance but that point is rapidly approaching.

    I admit that this is getting too far from topic and I will stop this point of discussion.

    Justin
    May 22, 2005 - 10:55 pm
    MariJo. I am very pleased that you are in this discussion with us. I recognize that you are a newcomer and have not labored through the centuries that have preceded the Age of Faith. We have been kicking this around for a couple of years from the Sumerians to the Middle ages. Much of the past prior to this point is at our finger tips. I taught college level Art History when I was a younger man and this discusion helps me to feel connected to the field.

    I sensed you were a Catholic and were posting as such and not as an objective historian. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with that but you must then expect challenges.

    I hope you will stay in this discussion with us because I find your knowledge of history far better than the average and I enjoy trading thoughts with you. I sense that you have always had an interest in history and that you will make a fine discusant.

    The issue of being on topic is easy to explain. Robby posts at the top of this discussion some quotes in green. and he posts selected paragraphs from the Durant text from time to time. Those are the guidelines we try to follow. Robby is a good fellow so he allows occasional deviations but not too extensive in scope or long lasting. I encourage you to get the book. Used copies are inexpensive and we are just a third into the book. Most of us think the Durants are outstanding historians.

    You and I were off topic in our last posting because several discusants were complaining about the frequent appearance of Catholicity in our discussion of Judaism. You and I were talking about the Papal States-a topic usually covered in the Renaisance and one that will come up when we deal with that period.

    I encourage you to stay with us and to let us enjoy your company through your postings.

    jane
    May 23, 2005 - 06:17 am
    jane, "Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant ~ Volume IV, Part 6 ~ Nonfiction" #1, 23 May 2005 6:21 am

    jane