Judaism 101

[Muslimwoman]

as salaam aleykum

Bananabrain, thank you so much for the Judaism 101 link, what a brilliant site and I take my hat (well hijab - but not in public) off to the lady that wrote it. To be frank I had to keep checking I was in Judaism 101 and not Islam 101, the similarities are unreal (accepting yours came first but I had no idea to what degree). As for Rambams 13 principles of faith I scored 12/13 - so not sure what that says about me?

So I have some questions if I may, I thought I would ask questions as I go along so I don't continue reading with wrong impressions. Hope that is ok?

Was Moses the last Prophet?

If there will be no other Torah, does that mean that G-d stopped communicating with people after the Torah?

Do you then believe the Quran is just a tall story or an attempt to introduce Jewish principles to non Jews? (please be honest - I can take it )

The Moshiach and the End of Days - will this be a physical death for everyone and then a new beginning for the world? If yes, will we be punished/rewarded prior to the beginning of the new world? If no, does the world just continue as is but with the knowledge brought by the Moshiach?

Are there any people alive today that can be traced directly back to King David?

Am I right in thinking Satan is not a being but is the little voice in my head that says "just buy the shoes and give money to your family next week"? This makes perfect sense to me, I never quite got the horns and tail thing.

I noted the age for completing education in Torah and Talmud is 40 years. Islam also states that the age of religious responsibility is 40 years. So do you believe that the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) knew Jewish scripture and wrote the Quran based on this?

Would be grateful for anyone's answers but please remember it is Judaism 101 so I need the idiots guide please. Oh and please tell me if any of my questions would be deemed rude to a Jewish person, so I don't make the same mistake twice.

Just a note - I was interested to read the various views of the Orthodox/Conservative/Reformist Jews, this is such a parallel to Islam and our Traditionalist/Fundamentalists/Modernists. Perhaps it is just human nature, depending on the needs of certain mindsets?

Salaam

 

[dauer]

Hi Muslimwoman

Was Moses the last Prophet?

No. Later prophets include but are not limited to: Elijah, Ezekiel, Amos, Isaiah, etc.

If there will be no other Torah, does that mean that G-d stopped communicating with people after the Torah?

Not really, mostly just not a completely new legal system. Generally Judaism qualifies new ideas by either connecting them in some way to Torah or giving a traditional date for authorship that links them way back, which is also a way of connecting to Torah. One example of this is the Talmud, which is traditionally linked to an "oral torah" that was received at Sinai along with the written torah. Another example is kabbalistic texts linked sometimes to people as early as Adam. But more commonly it just means tying what one says to something in Torah.

Do you then believe the Quran is just a tall story or an attempt to introduce Jewish principles to non Jews? (please be honest - I can take it )

Well, I wouldn't say just Jewish principles, but also Christian principles, while retaining some of the religion that predated Islam. Actually Judaism is indebted to Islam in some ways for its philosphical development in the middle ages. When greek texts were being translated into arabic, the Jewish people benefitted greatly and were able to move away from a more anthropomorphic understanding of God.

The Moshiach and the End of Days - will this be a physical death for everyone and then a new beginning for the world?

Well, some say the world will continue on in a way similar to the way it is, others that there will be a complete change in the nature of reality. In some ways it's a gray area with a lot of possibilities. Traditionally the least of which can be said is that htere will be a moshiach, a descendant of David, who ushers in an era of world peace. From a liberal perspective it could be states simply that there will be a future time of peace, or understood different ways still by others.

Are there any people alive today that can be traced directly back to King David?

I'm guessing there are descendants of David, but there are no genealogies that track all the way back to him.

Am I right in thinking Satan is not a being but is the little voice in my head that says "just buy the shoes and give money to your family next week"? This makes perfect sense to me, I never quite got the horns and tail thing.

Yes and no. One of the opinions is that hasatan is more representative of the yetzer hara, the evil impulse, which can actually be beneficial when regulalated by the yetzer tov. But at the same time there are others who see hasatan as more of a celestial figure who's not a bad guy. Getting into more rationalist perspectives of angels makes hasatan less like a being anyway.

I noted the age for completing education in Torah and Talmud is 40 years. Islam also states that the age of religious responsibility is 40 years. So do you believe that the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) knew Jewish scripture and wrote the Quran based on this?

As I understand it, originally he took his message to the Jews and set direction of prayer to Jerusalem. I would assume he had some exposure to Jewish ideas, from the looks of it particularly familiar with some midrash.

Just a note - I was interested to read the various views of the Orthodox/Conservative/Reformist Jews, this is such a parallel to Islam and our Traditionalist/Fundamentalists/Modernists. Perhaps it is just human nature, depending on the needs of certain mindsets?

I think so. I think some have a need for greater degrees of conservatism peaking in those who need a more complete absolutism and others have a need for change peaking in a nihilistic radicalism, while most of us are some place in the middle. I would draw the relationship between the groups a bit differently though. A more complete perspective of jewish perspectives would include Orthodoxy which it might then differentiate into different forms of Orthodoxy. In addition to Conservative and Reform Judaism as liberal movements it would include Reconstructionism and jewish humanism. Outside of that structure with a footprint stepping from the far left to a bit inside of Orthodoxy would be Jewish Renewal. Also outside would be the havurah movement, which would probably have a larger footprint than Renewal.

I would suggest that fundamentalism would fall primarily to some ultra-orthodox Jews but some ultra-orthodox would also fall into traditionalism along with other orthodox jews, some conservative jews, and osme in the groups that aren't denominations. Then modernists would fall to everyone else, including some orthodox jews who are more progressive.

Dauer

 

[Muslimwoman]

Hi Dauer

Thank you so much for your time and explanations, I am thoroughly enjoying my first mental trip into Judaism.

Not really, mostly just not a completely new legal system. Generally Judaism qualifies new ideas by either connecting them in some way to Torah or giving a traditional date for authorship that links them way back, which is also a way of connecting to Torah. One example of this is the Talmud, which is traditionally linked to an "oral torah" that was received at Sinai along with the written torah. Another example is kabbalistic texts linked sometimes to people as early as Adam. But more commonly it just means tying what one says to something in Torah.

So am I understanding you correctly, the Torah is the original word of G-d and everything since, to be authentic, must relate directly back to the Torah in some way? ie if it goes against the Torah then it cannot be from G-d?

Well, I wouldn't say just Jewish principles, but also Christian principles, while retaining some of the religion that predated Islam. Actually Judaism is indebted to Islam in some ways for its philosphical development in the middle ages. When greek texts were being translated into arabic, the Jewish people benefitted greatly and were able to move away from a more anthropomorphic understanding of God.

So what is the generally held Jewish perspective of Islam - fact or fiction or something in between?

As I understand it, originally he took his message to the Jews and set direction of prayer to Jerusalem. I would assume he had some exposure to Jewish ideas, from the looks of it particularly familiar with some midrash.

You are correct, direction of prayer used to be toward Jerusalem (personally I wish it still was as Mecca was a polytheisic site). Ooo just learnt a new Hebrew word 'midrash'


Again thanks for your answers. I shall go and read the next few pages, hope it's okay if I come back with more questions.

Salaam

 

[dauer]

So am I understanding you correctly, the Torah is the original word of G-d and everything since, to be authentic, must relate directly back to the Torah in some way? ie if it goes against the Torah then it cannot be from G-d?

Well to me Torah isn't the word of God either. It gains its status because of the way it is viewed by the Jewish civilization that holds it as sacred, which is the reason I see any sacred text as being sacred, because a people hold it to be so. There are things that contradict Torah in some way that have been introduced, and accepted, but we generally find a way to interpret Torah so that they are not actually in complete disagreement (if I am not mistaken, Islam also has 4 levels of interpretation), or claim it to be an authentic part of Torah. All of Judaism today besides karaism incorporates the Talmud as integral to the Jewish interpretation of Torah. Those groups that reject the authority of the Talmud (besides karaism) generally reject the authority of Torah and any other Jewish source to the same degree.

Whereas some religions incorporate new material by saying, "This is something new from God" Judaism's default way of incorporating something new has been to say "This is something old." This doesn't mean there's no level of self-consciousness to this activity. In the Talmud there's a story of God allowing Moses to meet R. Akiva. R. Akiva is making interpretations based on crowns on the Hebrew letters that didn't even exist in Moses' day, and Moses is unable to understand R. Akiva's interpretations. We also have the understanding that the Torah is not in heaven. It is given to us to extrapolate and interpret. We also see a teaching that the Torah has 70 faces.

As revelation goes, I don't really accept finite revelation, revelation limited to a particular text, and so don't really see a need to link to Torah for authenticity. At the same time, I think it's important to find some way to link the new ideas to older ones, even if it's entirely allegorical, and this includes to get around the more patriarchal, authoritarian, or limiting concepts expressed in Torah by placing new emphasis on less recognized passages. And also I think it's important not to throw anything out, but instead fo make it personally relevant on some level. However in the name of progress, when not possible, I think sometimes it is necessary to transcend the text without the text. I haven't really seen a time when it's really possible not to support a progressive opinion on some level, however tenuous that level might be. A very early example of this type of tenuous building from Torah is the way the rabbis of the Talmud arrive at the avot melachah, the categories of work not to be done on Shabbos, based on the activities done in constructing the mishkan, and they admit to the tenuousness.

So what is the generally held Jewish perspective of Islam - fact or fiction or something in between?

There is no authoritative or religious view of Islam except that today it's almost unanimously seen as a religion that abides by the covenant with Noah, by the 7 Noahide Laws. When BB gets a chance to answer, he'll probably talk about the idea that Muhammad could not have been a prophet to the Jewish people, but that does not stop him from being a prophet to non-Jews. And I would say pretty much the same thing in somewhat different words. If it's bringing people closer to God and to right-action then certainly it's a good thing. And as someone who does not view myth as historical fact, but instead as something much richer, it's not really important to me whether there is fact or fiction in the Quran. There is truth found in it regardless.

Again thanks for your answers. I shall go and read the next few pages, hope it's okay if I come back with more questions.

Glad I could be of some help.

--Dauer

 

[bananabrain]

hi there,

dauer and i don't agree on a lot of stuff, as he is much more of a hardcore hippy than i am, being what you might call radically conservative, which means being a traditionalist whilst trying not to be all "oh, we know everything and have all the answers" and acknowledging that we have much to learn from non-traditionalists and certainly from non-jews - goodness knows mosques are a heck of a lot more comfortable and aesthetically pleasing than an average synagogue - and then there's the music and dancing...

To be frank I had to keep checking I was in Judaism 101 and not Islam 101, the similarities are unreal

oh, they're very real. that's part of the reason jews and muslims get on so well when they're allowed to.

As for Rambam's 13 principles of faith I scored 12/13 - so not sure what that says about me?

rambam is quite universalist in his philosophy whilst preserving the particularist view about judaism, a tough balance. i don't know how you got 12/13 though without accepting the part about Torah never changing - that is a big fight between traditionalists like myself and the islamic opinion that we falsified the Torah somehow, so that islam represents the authentic, original religion as given to abraham/ibrahim - as well as the other stuff.

Was Moses the last Prophet?

not for us, as dauer pointed out. prophecy proper (called in hebrew NeBhIOuTh ceased shortly after the destruction of the second Temple, although the last official prophet was, i believe, micah. however, there was a lesser form of prophecy known as a "BaTh-QOL" or heavenly voice", angelic messengers known as "maggidim" and another lesser form of prophecy known as "RuaH Ha-QODeSh" (something like ruh al-quds in arabic i expect) which, depending on who you ask, continues today in mystical circles. there is not a lot of agreement on who has it and, anyway, rabbinic legal opinion (halakhah) overrules it, based on a talmudic incident known as the "oven of achnai" argument.

If there will be no other Torah, does that mean that G!D stopped communicating with people after the Torah?

some people might think that, but i find it very hard to believe that G!D only wanted to Talk to us. we were chosen to receive the Torah, ok, out of everybody, but not because we were particularly wonderful - in fact according to the midrash (same word-root as madrasa, that) it was only because everyone else turned it down. puts quite a different spin on that i can tell you. certainly there are several examples of non-jewish prophets in the bible, evil ones such as bilaam and good ones such as jethro (idris) and job (ayyub). certainly if G!D had stuff to say to other people i find it difficult to believe that it was left to us to tell them considering it's not part of our job to spread the word, as it were, despite our duty to be a "light unto the nations", in which we seem to be signally failing at present unfortunately.

Do you then believe the Qur'an is just a tall story or an attempt to introduce Jewish principles to non Jews? (please be honest - I can take it )

actually, for me, the poetic and literary qualities of the Qur'an would tend to indicate that it has a certain ruh al-quds to it - certainly my arabic-speaking friends swear to that and i am prepared to believe them if they are prepared to believe the same of my experience of the hebrew Torah. it is certainly an exceptional Text and has brought much light to dark places, as have the Gospels, the Vedas, the Guru Granth Sahib and so on. but because the Qur'an is so, well, jewish in tone, it has a special place in my heart. i might not believe it to be 100% Divine-from-G!D's-Mouth-Not-That-G!D-Has-A-Mouth-Of-Course-Via-Gabriel-To-Muhammad but there is no obligation on me to believe that one way or t'other. if it works for you guys then go to it as long as you leave the guardianship and interpretation of Torah to us.

The Moshiach and the End of Days - will this be a physical death for everyone and then a new beginning for the world? If yes, will we be punished/rewarded prior to the beginning of the new world? If no, does the world just continue as is but with the knowledge brought by the Moshiach?

opinion is divided upon the subject - messianic prophecy being one of the most recondite and confusing, not to say dangerous areas of biblical interpretation - watching a few series of "deep space 9" ought to make that clear.

Are there any people alive today that can be traced directly back to King David?

allegedly. but it's a tiny bit difficult to prove.

Am I right in thinking Satan is not a being but is the little voice in my head that says "just buy the shoes and give money to your family next week"? This makes perfect sense to me, I never quite got the horns and tail thing.

the horns and tail thing is a piece of dark ages christian marketing aimed at pan, the green man and a whole bunch of pagan symbolism - it's got nothing to do with us, or with ha-satan for that matter. other than that, what dauer said.

I noted the age for completing education in Torah and Talmud is 40 years. Islam also states that the age of religious responsibility is 40 years. So do you believe that the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) knew Jewish scripture and wrote the Quran based on this?

i don't think there's an age for completing it - i think that's the official age of commencement of initiation into the mystical tradition if you've been studying them all along. the age of full religious responsibility is 13 for boys and 12 for girls, although once you are 3 you have to say blessings and so on. i believe muhammad knew some jewish scripture - i don't believe he wrote the Qur'an based on it, but i believe it influenced his message and much of his hashkafa, which is a technical word meaning his "religious lifestyle and practice" - ie, giving charity, looking after the disadvantaged, treating women well, preferring to discuss rather than fight in the first instance and many other areas. of course, the hashkafa of the jahiliyya influenced him as well, as muslim historiographers also admit - so while he removed the idols from the kaaba, he kept the kaaba itself. that's a very jewish accommodation. on the other hand, it seems that most of the jews he knew were not terribly nice people and certainly based upon their reported actions and speech, they weren't exactly religiously strict or ethical people. i see them as jewish-influenced, or somewhat lapsed jewish clans who had assimilated into jahiliyya society, much like the hellenised jews of late antiquity and the early christian period, somewhat ignorant, chauvinistic and decadent. he may have met some great jewish scholars, but i think if he had, their names and writings would have survived - we keep very good records, you see, whereas i don't believe there were any great scholars in the hijaz at that time - the great gaonic academies were in the north, at sura and pumbedita in iraq.

Just a note - I was interested to read the various views of the Orthodox/Conservative/Reformist Jews, this is such a parallel to Islam and our Traditionalist/Fundamentalists/Modernists.

it's similar, but by no means exactly the same - for that, a lot more people would have to be followers of people like irshad manji and ayaan hirsi ali - tariq ramadan for all his liberalism is still a traditionalist. you won't have the same variation of views in islam without people who believe in the sovereignty of the individual and its right to overrule tradition, authority, accepted interpretations of Qur'an, hadith and sunna and will happily go down the pub for a pint and a bag of pork scratchings at the same time as fiercely maintaining their right to identify as muslims and for this to be an islamic, sharia choice. personally, i don't think you guys are ready for that - we certainly bear the scars, but it is the price of ossification and, imho, what you will get if you allow the saudis to dictate what islam is. i call that "micro$oft islam" and you have obviously seen it in your discussions with abdullah.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[The Jaded Fool]

Greetings...

I just wanted to say that I find this thread to be very interesting and educational... keep it rolling ... Thanx for starting it muslimwoman... and thanx to those who have contributed...

Peace & Love

 

[Muslimwoman]

When BB gets a chance to answer, he'll probably talk about the idea that Muhammad could not have been a prophet to the Jewish people, but that does not stop him from being a prophet to non-Jews. And I would say pretty much the same thing in somewhat different words.

This is what makes me mad about the Muslim 'interpretation' of Islam. The Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) never tried to be a Prophet to the Jews, he lived in peace, where possible, with Jews and Christians and Allah Himself states there will be no compulsion in religion. How they managed to get from that to "you must hate everyone that isn't Muslim' is quite frankly beyond me.

Glad I could be of some help.

I really appreciate your time and explanations. Thank you.

 

[Muslimwoman]

and then there's the music and dancing...

as salaam aleykum Bananabrain

Music and dancing in a synagogue? The mind boggles.

rambam is quite universalist in his philosophy whilst preserving the particularist view about judaism, a tough balance. i don't know how you got 12/13 though without accepting the part about Torah never changing - that is a big fight between traditionalists like myself and the islamic opinion that we falsified the Torah somehow, so that islam represents the authentic, original religion as given to abraham/ibrahim - as well as the other stuff.

I have no problem accepting the Torah or that it should never change (sorry I don't hold with changing G-d's word). Of course life moves on and morals, circumstances change but our basic beliefs and actions surrounding our faith should remain (I think I could only support that in terms of the Quran because I know little of your faith so could not explain it in terms of your faith). I have not read it because I wouldn't know where to find it but I have just always accepted it's authenticity and authority. Really I can't explain why, perhaps respect for the Jewish nation but I have never questioned that the Jewish were the first nation to receive revelation from G-d, throught the Torah.

based on a talmudic incident known as the "oven of achnai" argument.

I am still on the idiots guide and this is advanced stuff I shall just accept that rabbi's say "bunkum" or would that be "woo woo"?

some people might think that, but i find it very hard to believe that G!D only wanted to Talk to us.

I will do some reading on the Prophets (not my strong point ). This is my point with Islam, why would G-d suddenly decide to scrap everything and start again? The thread and message throughout the books remains the same, just given to different nations when they were needed. The fact that people twist and misinterpret it is a human failing, creating partners etc, not an inconsistancy of G-d.

actually, for me, the poetic and literary qualities of the Qur'an would tend to indicate that it has a certain ruh al-quds to it - certainly my arabic-speaking friends swear to that and i am prepared to believe them if they are prepared to believe the same of my experience of the hebrew Torah.

I have been known to curse that my mother tongue is not Arabic. I cannot, ever, fully appreciate it's beauty and therefore always feel I am missing out somehow. It is like listening to something magical but at the edge of hearing, you can't quite make it out properly. I have watched my husband cry listening to the Quran and I just can't attain that level of understanding.

but i think if he had, their names and writings would have survived - we keep very good records, you see, whereas i don't believe there were any great scholars in the hijaz at that time - the great gaonic academies were in the north, at sura and pumbedita in iraq.

I think I disagree here BB. If the Prophet Mohammad had met some great Jewish scholars your records would be unlikely to comment too much, as this would probably not have seemed particularly significant at the time. The Muslims were a small group then and the significance wouldn't have emerged until later. Our records, of any such meetings, on the hand would have been destroyed by later Muslims who began this anti-semite mood in Islam.

you won't have the same variation of views in islam without people who believe in the sovereignty of the individual and its right to overrule tradition, authority, accepted interpretations of Qur'an, hadith and sunna and will happily go down the pub for a pint and a bag of pork scratchings at the same time as fiercely maintaining their right to identify as muslims and for this to be an islamic, sharia choice.

Hee, hee, no we are certainly not up for for that. Some Muslim scholars from the west are exploring such issues but we just laugh.

personally, i don't think you guys are ready for that - we certainly bear the scars, but it is the price of ossification and, imho, what you will get if you allow the saudis to dictate what islam is. i call that "micro$oft islam" and you have obviously seen it in your discussions with abdullah.

Phew, not by a long way. Please G-d Saudi never gets control or Islam will be the scurge of the earth. I certainly have seen it with Adbullah and the words mind numbing brainwashing spring to mind. It does still surprise me that people can close their mind so utterly and spew out such rhetoric without any notion of it's meaning. Hey ho it's a funny old world. I shall just carry on down my little path of discovery and leave others to answer to G-d for their own views.

I realise this ludicrous, a Muslim asking a Jew why the Muslims hate them but given your knowledge I thought you may be able to answer that for me. Of course I ask Muslims and get the usual biased nonsense but I thought from your perspective you could explain to me where it began and what the issues are (my book didn't arrive yet).

Salaam

 

[bananabrain]

The Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) never tried to be a Prophet to the Jews, he lived in peace, where possible, with Jews and Christians and Allah Himself states there will be no compulsion in religion.

well, yes, but i was always given to understand that muhammad was much keener on getting the jews on board with islam before he had the big bust-up with the banu qurayzah or whatever they were called. after that, i am almost surprised that he maintained as much tolerance as he did towards the ahl al-qitab, even if you consider the battle of the trench.

How they managed to get from that to "you must hate everyone that isn't Muslim' is quite frankly beyond me.

it is a logical consequence of "we are best and have the last, most authoritative message from G!D and you'd be better off hearing about it" - it is the dark side of universalism. if something is universal, then something else which is not as universal will be devalued, even though it may have other advantages, or may serve a different purpose. there are some products which cannot be sold in tesco, although tesco may well put specialist retailers out of business, as it were.

Music and dancing in a synagogue? The mind boggles.

i didn't really mean in a synagogue necessarily. we only dance once a year, on simhath Torah; religiously speaking, men and women aren't supposed to dance together. nor are men supposed to hear women sing, although that is, according to the rabbinic opinion i follow, only the case in liturgical situations. i meant more in terms of the fact that we have pretty lousy religious music in my opinion, at least in terms of the general standard in the UK, although there is a lot of potential in the material and some very impressive stuff out there if you know where to look. i just don't see *quality* in jewish music as a general perception in the way i do in islamic music and, maybe, that's my prejudice.

I have never questioned that the Jewish were the first nation to receive revelation from G!D, throught the Torah.

that's not the issue. it is accepted by muslims that we received the Torah from G!D; the problems occur when people say that we then changed what we received, which we find insulting, to say the least, as well as illogical.

I am still on the idiots guide and this is advanced stuff I shall just accept that rabbi's say "bunkum" or would that be "woo woo"?

the oven of achnai incident may appear advanced, but it deals with a basic issue, namely, when can we argue with G!D (for which there are precedents going back to moses and abraham) and when can we modify the actions required by the Law without violating the spirit of the Law. the oven of achnai incident established that human interpretation can overrule direct manifestations of the Divine Will *in certain, restricted circumstances* and only insofar as it supports an improved outcome, ie what the Divine Will would have wanted if we were capable of achieving it. an excellent example is the "eye for an eye" rule, which we interpret to refer to financial compensation (rather than chopping something off, which would be the literalist view) by the simple expedient of taking a valid example which violates the spirit of the Law and then reinterpreting the *intent* of the Law so that the example no longer violates it - in this case, if a blind man pokes my eye out, i cannot remove his eye in retribution. G!D cannot have intended that this Law be frustrated, so we conclude that alternative means of compensation must be necessary, ie a fine. what happened at the oven of achnai incident was basically that G!D Suggested an answer direct, using a bat-qol (heavenly voice) and the rabbis overruled it, preferring a human resolution. G!D basically is portrayed as approving this course of action, as it shows that we have matured enough to present a compelling case for action without the necessity Divine Intervention. does that make sense?

This is my point with Islam, why would G!D suddenly decide to scrap everything and start again?

well, according to the Torah, it's happened before, many times, the flood only being the last. in fact, G!D considers, after the golden calf incident, starting over with the jews, which moses argues against effectively ("people will talk, G!D - they'll say ha! what kind of omnipotent G!D is this that can't even manage a simple exodus") - G!D takes this on board and says that the Torah will never be abrogated, whatever we do and no matter how much Divine Anger is provoked.

The thread and message throughout the books remains the same, just given to different nations when they were needed.

but there's a logical fallacy that arises from this successionist chain of thought, which is that later=better and that subsequent revelations represent a subsequent need which the Divine is meeting. put it this way, the christians told us we needed their new testament and christ, the muslims told us and them that we needed the Qur'an and the baha'is, ahmadis etc did the same thing with the muslims. the muslims were quite happy to dish it out, but not at all happy to be on the receiving end - the same goes with everyone; now there are people who say that all religion is blind faith and that rationality and science have superseded it and made it unnecessary. i think we can both agree that we don't find that a convincing argument.

I think I disagree here BB. If the Prophet Mohammad had met some great Jewish scholars your records would be unlikely to comment too much, as this would probably not have seemed particularly significant at the time.

we might not have mentioned that the scholar had met muhammad, but we would certainly have known of the scholar himself, because he would have been in contact with the exilarch in babylon and the gaonic academies, as the greatest religious authorities. the talmud (which was redacted by 500 CE) mentions scholars from all over the middle east, from egypt to persia, including greece and rome - as far as i know nobody from the hijaz is mentioned, despite many references to the customs of the arabs, with which the sages were familiar. i say as far as i know, but i'm no talmud scholar.

Our records, of any such meetings, on the hand would have been destroyed by later Muslims who began this anti-semite mood in Islam.

we have records, of course, of contacts with muslims, because we were living under them from the period of the caliphs onward.

Please G!D Saudi never gets control or Islam will be the scourge of the earth.

i think that's already happened, unfortunately - the first part at any rate. the saudis have bought control of worldwide islamic education since the 1970s and we are now reaping the whirlwind.

I certainly have seen it with Abdullah and the words mind numbing brainwashing spring to mind.

i've found him all right, actually - have you seen his input on the "islamic tradition of non-violence" thread?

I realise this ludicrous, a Muslim asking a Jew why the Muslims hate them but given your knowledge I thought you may be able to answer that for me.

i doubt i can give you any answers you can't work out for yourself - the roots of it of course, are a more complicated matter, going back to the bad blood between the early muslims and the jewish tribes of the hijaz, who, unfortunately, seem to have peed in everyone's soup in terms of setting a very poor example of how jews ought to behave. as a dhimmi, under islamic rule, the jew was a second-class citizen and remained so for over a thousand years - it was when we threw off this role and started defining ourselves, in certain cases to the disadvantage of muslims, that we started being resented. it is the same in christian europe; everyone is happy with jews as downtrodden victims of the holocaust or assimilated cultural intellectuals, but nobody's all that happy with confident, assertive, proudly religious, tough, athletic jews. not that the latter is any kind of panacea, but people don't seem to like it when we escape the roles that they are comfortable for us to hold.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[dauer]

i meant more in terms of the fact that we have pretty lousy religious music in my opinion, at least in terms of the general standard in the UK, although there is a lot of potential in the material and some very impressive stuff out there if you know where to look.

Hear hear. A lot of the melodies in shul are pretty poor compared to what can sometimes be heard from other traditions, Islam included. Some transcend that a bit, like kol nidre. Two of the best expressions of Jewish liturgy I've ever heard were unfortunately Jewish kirtan with Yofiyah and a Jewish zikr I did with R. David Cooper. I like some hasidic niggunim too, but a lot of that is literally just other people's melodies so it's really not much of a flag to wave. One person whose liturgical melodies I like a bit is R. Shefa Gold. The last thing I heard from her was when I saw her do a Shabbaton revolving around extra chants from Shir HaShirim throughout.

 

[dauer]

Found a bunch of reb shefa's chants on her website. This is one of the ones she did with shir hashirim, "sham etayn et dodai lach"

~ Rabbi Shefa Gold ~ Building The Intention For Love ~

 

[Muslimwoman]

after that, i am almost surprised that he maintained as much tolerance as he did towards the ahl al-qitab, even if you consider the battle of the trench.

I am afraid the only history of the Jewish tribes I have comes from Islamic history, which paints them very much as fibbers and traitors. I have no idea if that is the 'victors story' or if it is true, I have not read any Jewish history. I tend to find with such issues that the truth tends to lie somewhere between the two stories.

it is a logical consequence of "we are best and have the last, most authoritative message from G!D and you'd be better off hearing about it" - it is the dark side of universalism.

Sorry, maybe I am just a bit thick but I don't get it. We know that the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was tolerant of the other Abrahamic religions, so I can't see why everything has to be interpreted the way is it now. Think some reading is required on my behalf.

that's not the issue. it is accepted by muslims that we received the Torah from G!D; the problems occur when people say that we then changed what we received, which we find insulting, to say the least, as well as illogical.

It was my understanding that you have Torah scrolls that go back centuries before Islam was ever heard of, so a simple comparison to modern copies of the scrolls should show they are unchanged. Any group of people that rely on hadiths of goats abrogating the Quran, have a bit of a nerve saying someone elses scriptures have been tampered with. Do the Muslim scholars offer any evidence of these changes? I shall look on some Islamic sites and see what the scholars say about this.

the oven of achnai incident may appear advanced, but it deals with a basic issue, namely, when can we argue with G!D .... does that make sense?

Makes a lot of sense but also makes me feel a little nervous, the idea of arguing with G-d. So who do your scholars put these arguments to, in order to decide if they have shown G-d they have moved on enough to make this decision? Perhaps Islam needs an oven!!

well, according to the Torah, it's happened before, many times,

Sorry I didn't mean scrap it in that way. I meant scrap his message, you know "ok lads I've changed my mind and decided to go in a different direction". Sorry but it doesn't sound very G-d like to me.

but there's a logical fallacy that arises from this successionist chain of thought, which is that later=better and that subsequent revelations represent a subsequent need

It was a subsequent need but for a different group of people, I don't think we can say new = better unless the new message is given to the same group of people. I know I wear rose tinted glasses where G-d is concerned but I believe He has a path for each of us and it is not the same path. I have only believed that since reading the Quran so this is why I don't get the 'take over the world' attitude.

i think we can both agree that we don't find that a convincing argument.

Hey it's a great idea, deny the existence of G-d, have a big party, die, burn in hell. Yep great idea.

we might not have mentioned that the scholar had met muhammad, but we would certainly have known of the scholar himself

Sorry this may be ignorance on my part, of Jewish records and religious hierarchy. I haven't read anything that suggests the Prophet Mohammad travelled to where 'big' Jewish scholars would have been. Perhaps I am assuming Judaism is like the Catholic church, so he would need to go to the Vatican to be 'worthy' of being in the records (probably by being burned alive there but hey ho).

i think that's already happened, unfortunately - the first part at any rate. the saudis have bought control of worldwide islamic education since the 1970s and we are now reaping the whirlwind.

No I don't think so. Saudi set up the sharia system in Pakistan and the Hudood law has been replaced there now, so not a resounding success. There are also now so many non Arab converts and many 'western' scholars who are working toward reform and re-education in line with the Quran. I think, but only my humble view, that Saudi is losing it's stranglehold on Muslim people. Whenever I point out something stupid the Saudi's have said, the people here laugh and say how crazy they are and that is in a Muslim country, so even here they are seen as extreme views.

Do Jews have anything similar to the sharia law?

i've found him all right, actually - have you seen his input on the "islamic tradition of non-violence" thread?

No, I will go have a look. I have been in a long circular conversation with him about taqlid and it is giving me headache. He is probably a very nice chap but I can't discuss with extreme traditionalists, you get nowhere and it is frustrating me.

i doubt i can give you any answers you can't work out for yourself

I was just interested in the view from the other side of the fence so to speak. I get the arm waving, ranting version from the Arabs, so was interested in your take on the situation.

Salaam

 

[Muslimwoman]

Found a bunch of reb shefa's chants on her website. This is one of the ones she did with shir hashirim, "sham etayn et dodai lach"

~ Rabbi Shefa Gold ~ Building The Intention For Love ~

Thanks Dauer, that was erm.....interesting. Well they do say you should try everything once.

 

[Muslimwoman]

No, I will go have a look. I have been in a long circular conversation with him about taqlid and it is giving me headache. He is probably a very nice chap but I can't discuss with extreme traditionalists, you get nowhere and it is frustrating me.

Oh no huge fib. Seen it, posted on it, commented what a good thread it is. Perhaps it is a simple matter of arguing with your own? A bit like fighting with my brother but boy if anyone else tries to fight with my brother - watch out world.

 

[dauer]

Thanks Dauer, that was erm.....interesting. Well they do say you should try everything once.

lolol. I'm not actually very fond of her singing voice, just some of her compositions. I like how that one starts off really slow and entrancing, and as it starts to get slower it becomes ecstatic. And then as that starts to build, it gets slow again, and so the tension builds and builds.

Dauer

 

[bananabrain]

ah, zikr... if it hadn't been for zikr and sufi muslims i might not be as religious as i am. that was part of what started it all off for me, you know. i always got the intellectual bit, but never the emotional/aesthetic/sensory bit until i saw how sufis could get high on G!D through music. that's one of the reasons i have such a soft spot for islam. but most modern-type niggunim i just find kind of embarrassing - i'll make a small exception for neshama carlebach who i gigged with once (a small claim to fame) and her father's stuff but i just can't stick the debbie friedmans of this world at any price. bunch of second-rate lai-la-lai merchants who wouldn't know a decent gig if it stuck a firework up their bums. i'll make another small exception for the great DF herself, who is quite a mesmirising performer, having also spent time on stage with her, although admittedly it was with my friend the hippy inventing the now widely-disseminated actions to a song called "i am a latke". give me umm kulthum any day.

I am afraid the only history of the Jewish tribes I have comes from Islamic history, which paints them very much as fibbers and traitors

and if it's true, then they were very poor jews indeed. but, as you say, the victors write the story. there's no jewish record of this at any rate, in comparison to our records of the roman persecutions.

Sorry, maybe I am just a bit thick but I don't get it. We know that the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was tolerant of the other Abrahamic religions, so I can't see why everything has to be interpreted the way is it now.

i don't think the problem is with muhammad exactly, i think it's with the compilers of the hadeeth and 'ayaat, to say nothing of the supposedly modern interpreters such as al-qaradawi. i know what book you'd like to read - karen armstrong's "the battle for G!D" which is a comparative history of fundamentalism. i also recommend her "a history of G!D" as a fantastic piece of comparative religious writing.

It was my understanding that you have Torah scrolls that go back centuries before Islam was ever heard of, so a simple comparison to modern copies of the scrolls should show they are unchanged.

you'd think that, wouldn't you, but they go on things like the documentary hypothesis, may its name be erased, as well as things like the sentence in jeremiah which refers to the "lying tongue of the scribes", although the fact that the aforementioned sentence seems to have escaped said scribes apparently doesn't cause comment. or it could be an argument about how we interpret, we've had enough of those i can tell you - look up the karaites and the samaritans for a start.

I meant scrap his message, you know "ok lads I've changed my mind and decided to go in a different direction".

then how does one explain the flood? this can only really be reconciled by understanding what we mean by a "brit" or covenant - which is an agreement between two parties. G!D Agreed not to destroy the world again, as well as implementing abraham's "covenant between the parts" and the covenant of the Revelation of the Torah.

I don't think we can say new = better unless the new message is given to the same group of people.

well, a universal message is given to all people by definition, which implies it includes even people who had earlier revelations - i think that's the logic. so, christ didn't come to save everyone apart from the jews, but everyone - at least if you go for supercessionism rather than what is called "dual covenant" theology. talk to a few baha'is or ahmadis and you'll soon work out what i mean.

I haven't read anything that suggests the Prophet Mohammad travelled to where 'big' Jewish scholars would have been. Perhaps I am assuming Judaism is like the Catholic church, so he would need to go to the Vatican to be 'worthy' of being in the records

that's not what i mean (although people believe he went to jerusalem, don't they?) - i mean that all the big jewish centres of scholarship corresponded with each other to share knowledge, experiences and interpretations of religious law. those records are pretty well preserved. you'd need to look in the works of sa'adia or hai ga'on, although they are far later than muhammad - there were earlier ge'onim.

Saudi set up the sharia system in Pakistan and the Hudood law has been replaced there now, so not a resounding success.

i think it's been repealed, but i think it's still operating in the tribal areas and, as you should know, the shari'a courts are very much up and running - whether in parallel with regular law, i don't know, but either way, the version being taught is very much saudi-influenced.

I think, but only my humble view, that Saudi is losing it's stranglehold on Muslim people. Whenever I point out something stupid the Saudi's have said, the people here laugh and say how crazy they are and that is in a Muslim country, so even here they are seen as extreme views.

i really hope you're right, although people consider al-qaradawi, for example, to be moderate, whereas from my PoV there's not much difference between him and some foaming salafi obscurantist.

Do Jews have anything similar to the sharia law?

uncannily so. it's called halakha, from the word meaning "way" or the verb "to go".

get the arm waving, ranting version from the Arabs, so was interested in your take on the situation.

oh, believe me, we have our own versions of that, but you hopefully won't hear that from me and dauer even though we disagree about a helluvalot.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[dauer]

bb,

*waves arms and rants*

I wasn't talking about the newer niggunim. Some of them are okay, but I generally prefer some of the older stuff, especially the really slow meditative niggunim. The modern ones are generally so simplified. Sometimes it works, but other times it doesn't. I do like some of the modern chants made using traditional language, even though they're often very repetitive and lack a lot of melody too. R. Shlomo's b'shem hashem always gets me. And there's a healing chant based from Moses' prayer for Miriam when she had tzara'at that I find very powerful in a group setting. Also some chants built around birchot hashachar. But there are others I'm not as fond of. Like there's a melody to go with ilu finu that to me removes the punch of what the words are saying, even with the multiple parts harmonizing together. I also like the attempt to fit English translations to the melodies of the hebrew, and when reading Torah in English to improvise the Hebrew cantillation. My sense of the text when doing that is different than if I were to read a Torah translation normally. It's kinda like the guys who when explaining gemara in English still continue that melody used with the Hebrew and Aramaic, which I also think is beautiful practice.

Dauer

 

[bananabrain]

I generally prefer some of the older stuff, especially the really slow meditative niggunim. The modern ones are generally so simplified. Sometimes it works, but other times it doesn't. I do like some of the modern chants made using traditional language, even though they're often very repetitive and lack a lot of melody too. R. Shlomo's b'shem hashem always gets me.

what bothers me - and this is just as true for r. shlomo as for other modern tunes, is that they nearly always violate the scansion and pronunciation of the hebrew text, forcing unnatural lengthenings, stresses and repetitions in the attempt to shoehorn an ancient poetic form into the 4/4 and 2/4 rhythms comfortable to the modern, eurocentric, rock n'roll-trained ear. when was the last time you heard something in 7/8, 5/8, 9/8 or even 6/8? when was the last time you heard a hemiola (2/3) or an irregular beat? the rhythm ought to serve the pasuk, not the other way round. that's why sephardic stuff, particularly 'eidoth mizrah stuff works so much better, because people are used to hearing turkish and arabic music which fits the rhythms of hebrew so much better. even balkan rhythms from places like bulgaria feel more natural. it's why the "tanu rabannan" melody works. and chasidut is one of the worst offenders in this respect.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[dauer]

Yeah I know what you mean. I've heard a few different versions of psalm 150, and in each one some of the words are pronounced differently. I actually think I've heard the word neshamah pronounced three different ways in order to fit a melody and you make a good point. I'm also fond myself of irregular beats anyway. Aren't some of the prayers in the liturgy in iambic pentameter though or something similar? Is that just some of the stuff that was added later?

Dauer

 

[bananabrain]

actually think I've heard the word neshamah pronounced three different ways in order to fit a melody and you make a good point.

the thing is, it is, ironically, actually quite simple. look for where the maqaf (accenty thing that looks like a | ) is under the letter. there's your stress. find a siddur that distinguishes between the open shva and the closed one (the difference between HIQ-e-ThaH and HIQ-ThaH) and take account of the dagesh, in your case the difference between B and V, K and Kh and T and S (if you're a traditional ashky pronouncer). double letters (ie those with a dagesh) should be harder. and the ta'amim should also indicate the stress. just try the first paragraph of the shem'a with attention to absolute precision in the pronunciation and stress. it's a most rewarding experience.

b'shalom

bananabrain