Slashdot Mirror

Not the GP but the first link I found: https://www.chabad.org/library...

Fair warning, the article contains earlier views also, which seem to have been more in line with the Philosophical and Scientific (such as it were) views of the time, rather than current understanding, but it also includes more modern views, all of which support this statement.

Environmentalism has only been a thing since the 1970s.

Or for the past couple thousand years. But close enough, eh?

Enjoy it while you can. Iceland just moved up a notch on the suck level.

Are you joking? Polygamy is *allowed* in the Torah, see http://www.jewishencyclopedia.... and http://www.chabad.org/library/....

  Living among monogamous pagans is a much more relevant factor.

Hebrew speaker here.

the most probable translation is sorcerer (or witch, less likely poisoner).

The original word "Mekhashefa" translates as "witch" or "sorceress" (feminine, but see below). Definitely not "poisoner", which derives from a different root -- Resh-Ain-Lamed.

It must be noted that it is not an order to kill witches, but an order to not use their services and so to not let them live (to not sustain their life).

It definitely was an order to execute witches. The RASHI commentary says:
You shall not allow a sorceress to live: But she shall be executed by the court. [This law applies equally to] both males and females, but the text speaks of the usual, and those who practice sorcery are usually women. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 67a]

Also see Leviticus 20:27
And a man or a woman who has [the sorcery of] Ov or Yid'oni, shall surely be put to death; they shall pelt them with stones; their blood is upon themselves.

And the RASHI commentary thereof:
[And a man or a woman] who has [the sorcery of] Ov or Yid’oni: Here, regarding those [who practice the sorcery of Ov or Yid’oni,] Scripture states death, while above (verse 6), Scripture states excision. [With] witnesses and warning [not to commit the sin], they incur [death by] stoning, but if [the perpetrators transgress] willfully but without warning, they incur excision; and if they transgress unintentionally, [they must bring] a sin-offering. And this [general principle regarding death, excision or sin-offering,] applies to all who are subject to the death penalty, about whom excision is also stated.

Quotes from http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8165

Yup, the ultra-orthodox really hate the Internet:

http://www.chabad.org/

This conference is about deciding what sort of rules should be applied to the Internet within the ultra-orthodox community, not banning the Internet all together. As for the issue of child molestation, yes, it is a problem within the community; and guess what? There are Jews standing outside of the conference protesting its purpose and demanding that the issue of child molestation be addressed first. So much for hating the Internet.

You know what the worst thing you can do is? Point fingers at the ultra-orthodox and scream about child molestation, since that is exactly what they are afraid of happening if people speak about it outside of their community -- you are basically validating what they are saying to themselves when they keep it a secret. How about we take the rational approach and just bring child molesters to court, where they can be tried and sentenced like anyone else, without shouting about how they are Jewish?

Very similar to Maimonides Eight levels of Charity. From highest to lowest:

1. Teaching the needy so that they scan support themselves
2. Anonymous giving without knowing who will be the recipient
3. Donor knows who receives, recipient does not know who gives
4. Donor does not know who receives, recipient knows who gave
5. Giving directly to recipient, before being asked
6. Giving directly to recipient after being asked
7. Giving willingly, but insufficiently
8. Giving unwillingly

22. And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders].
23. But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life,

Not only is there a lesser penalty for causing a miscarriage, said miscarriage explicitly isn't considered a fatality.

Just one example of said belief here.

I disagree with your interpretation of his answer. It seems to me his explanation is against the thought 'if we were supposed to be circumcised, wouldn't God have us born without foreskin?' I don't see the implication that the foreskin is a mistake, only that God's creation does not imply that the creation is not intended to be changed. Tell me if you think I'm totally off-base here.

More importantly, it's pretty obvious that we're talking cultural Judaism rather than religious Judaism (even most of the Jews in Israel don't believe in God). Otherwise, the question wouldn't have needed to be asked, and the answer would have just been God told us to. So the question becomes: do they circumcise for religious or cultural reasons, and are either acceptable. Put another way, this isn't necessarily a question about religious 'mutilation', but of cultural.

But famed jewish philosopher Maimonides had an even more disturbing view. He acknowledged that the foreskin was useful, that it had sexual functions, that removing it hampered one's sexual capacity. And circumcision should be done because of that. I kid you not, that's a guy who thought an inferior sex life was a moral goal. How demented does one have to be, to take that shit seriously?

Again, while I may be totally off base about this, it still seems to me to be a reflection of the change of mainstream Judaism toward acting cultural norms rather than religious belief. If we were speaking merely of belief, the Genesis quote would be enough. However, if you have a Jewish man who does not believe in God, you need another reason.

Long way of saying: if the person promoting circumcision is doing so for ulterior motives, I agree that is wicked. I have a hard time, though, condemning someone for circumcising a child in good faith and for the perceived good of their child.

Just one example of said belief here.

But famed jewish philosopher Maimonides had an even more disturbing view. He acknowledged that the foreskin was useful, that it had sexual functions, that removing it hampered one's sexual capacity. And circumcision should be done because of that. I kid you not, that's a guy who thought an inferior sex life was a moral goal. How demented does one have to be, to take that shit seriously?

For the most part, if it's for medical purposes, pork is fine. Saving a life takes precedence here

How nice. And for more details on various fantasies of ignorant old farts: http://www.chabad.org/search/keyword_cdo/kid/8213/jewish/Pig.htm

Wearing shoes made of pigskin - cool. Having pigs as pets - not cool. Why? Who cares.

You are taking everything from a Christian POV. I'll give you a short answer from the Jewish POV. You can find a very detailed version of the answer (in the Jewish world it is called responsa) by Rabbi M. M. Schneerson (the same person education and sharing day is in honor of), IIRC printed in the book Mind over Matter, base on Rabbi M. M. Schneerson's talks and responsa. An online version can be found here.

Imagine you lived in the time of Leonardo da Vinci. And took a photo of Mona Lisa. Try selling it, today? You might be lucky if you get $10 for it. But a imprefect painting of it is priceless. The same with this world.

Accorrding to Judaism and the Torah (the unedited version of "the 5 books of Moses") it is to bring Godlyness into this world and refine it. That is why you will see religous Jewish groups mixing in with the rest of scocity, because that's what the whole point of creation is.

Hard to understand, eh? Is an evening an eon to? How about morning?

It's only simple if you don't know what you're talking about. (Read Rashi on Bereshith 1:1 for context on time.)

• Chabad
• OU
• Being Jewish

• Aish HaTora
  
• Chabad of Cyber Space
  
• Being Jewish
  
• Jewdism 101
  
• Young Israel
  
• A Chasidic FAQ Site, Rooster 613