"The Rabbinic Tradition Concerning the "Alterations" Inserted Into the Greek Pentateuch and their Relation to the Original Text of the LXX" by Emanuel Tov is a party and a half.
Okay, not really, but it's cool once you get past the fact that you don't understand what you are reading because it's academia and difficult to wrap your head around on no sleep. (And come on, which student actually sleeps?)
For newbies, the LXX is the Septuagint. The Septuagint is the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible. If you're Jewish, you know Megillah 9a-b includes the story of 72 elders having been gathered by King Ptolemy, who placed them in 72 chambers and asked them to translate the Torah into Greek. Each scholar edited the text/ inserted certain variants identically.
Now, Emanuel Tov begins by telling you that various traditions (Megillah 9a, Yerushalmi Megillah 1,1,4, page 72a, Mek. Exod 12, 40; Midrash Hagadol Exodus 4,20; Abot de-R. Natan version B, chap 37; Sop. 1.7; Yalkut Shimoni Gen 3, Midrash Tanhuma Exodus para 22 and more) say 10, 11, 13, 15 or 18 alterations were made in the Greek translation of the Torah. You might think the shortest list is the "original formulation of the rabbinic tradition and that the longer list expanded it" (66) but this is not certain. The sources which state there were 13 or 15 alterations "are the most wide-spread and presumably reflect the central tradition." The lists having 16 or 18 alterations are the least reliable. 16 "came about as a result of the addition of biblical passages similar to those originally in the list, hence that list is secondary." When it comes to 18, it's influenced by "the list of 18 emendations of the scribes in the Hebrew text of the Bible" hence Tikkun Sofrim.
The base text is in Megillah and King Ptolemy's name is cited in all the sources. Now, these rabbinic texts suggest that the Greek translation was deliberately altered from the Hebrew. However, per the scholars, while "some of these differences do indeed stem from alteration" (72) others, which are in the majority, "stem from Hebrew variants, from translation technique and from an incorrect understanding of certain translation equivalents in the LXX" (72).
(As an interesting sidepoint, Christian tradition also focused on the differences between the Jewish and Greek Bibles, the Greek Bible being the Christian Bible from their point of view. However, in their case, a few Church Fathers "claimed the LXX reflects the true form of God's words, and that it was the Jews who had falsified them in their Bible" 72.)
Re: the list of alterations given in the Gemara, nine differ from the LXX and five agree with one passage being close. It could be that different translations stem from variant traditions that arose through the dissemination of the scrolls. There are no 2 scrolls nearly identical for any book of the LXX in pre-christian period. It seems that in many instances, changes were made to bring it more in line with Hebrew Bible, and so the list in the gemarah represents the original LXX.
The Background of the Differences between MT and the LXX Enumerated in the List (pages 82-83)
The lists in rabbinic literature speak of alterations that were inserted in the translation and it has already been stated above that at the time the sages regarded every difference between the Hebrew and Greek Pentateuch as a change inserted in the translation. In light of what has been stated above, the renewed discussion of the actual background of these differences now disregards the notion that they reflect alterations carried out by the translators). This renewed discussion is now made possible since the original text of the passages in the LXX (later corrected towards MT) has been reconstructed above.
The above-mentioned differences between the Hebrew Pentateuch and the LXX derive from the following factors: (a) translations deviating from MT based on Hebrew variant readings; (b) translations deviating from MT arising either from Hebrew variant readings or from exegesis; (c) exegetical translations; (d) Greek equivalents which were unjustifiably interpreted by rabbinic tradition as differences between the LXX and the Hebrew Pentateuch. This delineation raises most of the possibilities for the differences between MT and the LXX, both in the Pentateuch and in other books, aside from errors on the part of the translators and copyists.
The contents of lists of this type are largely a matter of chance, as is also the case with the list of the "emendations of the scribes" (see note 2). This list does not purport to represent the most conspicuous alterations and indeed the interested reader will easily find much more far-reaching differences between the LXX and MT, as for instance the order of chapters and subject matter at the end of Exod. On the other hand, what the biblical passages in the list have in common is that they pertain to some central issues. It is not hard to understand how post factum one would explain these differences as alterations (like the "emendations of the scribes", see note 2); however, this explanation holds true only in a few instances.
You'll have to read the whole article to see all the examples of the variants.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Why We Cut
Caution: This post may contain trigger words.
For those of you who will read this and worry, I do not cut. But I know what it's like. And I know people who do.
~
I'm not a stranger
No I am yours
With crippled anger
And tears that still drip sore
A fragile frame aged
With misery
And when our eyes meet
I know you see
I do not want to be afraid
I do not want to die inside just to breathe in
I'm tired of feeling so numb
Relief exists I find it when
I am cut
-"Cut" by Plumb
*
We live in different worlds; we all have different reasons. There are those of us who cannot feel; we are caught within the everlasting numbness. We want to feel something, anything, even and perhaps especially if it causes pain. We have blocked off our feelings so completely, often as a defense mechanism, that nothing can reach us except for the sharp slip of the blade against our flesh.
There are those of us who need to concretize the pain. Our personal art project, we start slow, with plastic knives, paper clips and safety pins. Then we graduate to razors. We want there to be proof. We want to make our pain real. There's too much of it, so much that seethes within. It simmers quietly, under the surface, in places you cannot see and cannot reach. It's pretty, the criss-crossing of lines across our wrists. And then it's not about prettiness anymore. It's about anger, the deep kind that wells up just as tears mist over the eye. That anger goes deep and it is expressed violently, with lines that may be pressed deliberately into the skin but are just as eloquent as savage slashes.
There are those of us who seek for control. There is so little in our lives that we can control that this action, this creation of the red blood that swims to the surface and spills over, is what makes us feel powerful. We have been violated and at the root of that violation is the loss of control that forged us. That loss is so desperate, so terrifying that we seek for whatever solace we can find in the careful assortment of ingredients. I sit by the bath: so. I take out my cotton swabs, my alcohol, my razor blades, my bandages. I make sure no one else is around. And then carefully, calmly, I walk the fine line between control and the loss of it. I do not want to die. This is not my suicide attempt. It is my power. I have regained it.
We cut in a blind rage, shaking with tears, sobbing in the shower, holding blades to our wrists. We cut carefully, composedly, in an act of defiance against those who would strip us of our power. We cut in anger, feeling worthless. We write that worthlessness on our skin, that rejection, that loss of self. We write our pain in brilliant colors, searing its message in a way that heals us for that moment in time. There are even those of us for whom the activity is pleasurable. We feel ourselves sink into calm, relaxation as we methodically go about this process.
Too often the movies romanticize cutting. It is not romantic. The body scars, a web of ugly marks across our otherwise perfect flesh. There are whole clumps of skin that we wash into the sink, the water mingling with the blood. It is disgusting. We realize that what we do is wrong, deviant, even crazy. That's why we hide it. We don't want you to know about it. It happens quietly, behind the scenes. I don't flaunt the cuts. I hide them on the inside of my thighs, high up on my arms. We try to stop. It's hard to stop. It's like any other addiction or sickness. An anorexic girl cannot simply choose to stop starving herself. Someone who cuts can try to go without it for a time, but then the urge comes back and it's so strong, almost irresistible.
Cutting is a maladaptive coping mechanism. But it is a coping mechanism. It is the way that we cope with the hurt, rejection, neglect, abandonment, pressure, stress, lack of power, lack of control or pain that we feel. It is not something reserved for supposed problem children from dysfunctional homes. Trying to determine who suffers from this based on external signs misses the point. Top achievers who seem completely normal on the outside cut. Straight-A students. People who do so much kindness for others. People who usually reach out for others, saving them from falling. These people can save everyone except themselves.
There is a darkness so treacherous and terrifying that most people do not ever visit it. It is an incalculable blackness, unending agony. Together with it comes the rage. The rage turns inside. It focuses on me. The rage tells me that I am so weak, so pathetic, so stupid, worthless and otherwise not valuable. The rage tells me that the problems I face are a result of my own poor choices. I rage at myself and coldly deliver the verdict: I deserve to be rejected. No one could possibly want me or love me. Other people manage to cope; it is my fault that I cannot. Because of these things, I deserve to be punished. That punishment needs to take concrete form. The delicate lines I trace across my arms demonstrate my surrender. I know I am not worthy.
We cut for different reasons. We come from different worlds. Some of us find cutting pleasurable; some of us resort to it to relieve tension. Others cut in order to feel something, to realize that we are still alive. Some of us cut to make the pain real, give it a form and a voice. For all of us, it is the only way we feel we can function. There are differing levels of dependence upon this coping mechanism. Some people simply try it and leave it. Others have the force of will to stop. Still others cannot stop unless aided by others. We have different faces; we have different needs. But all of us cut.
Please see that we are not definable as belonging to one group. We come from the best of families, ones that are tightly-knit and close. We also come from the worst of families. We are students who test high on our IQ tests. We are people who are over-achievers. We are also students failing out of school. We are people who have faced incredible struggles. There are those of us who have been abused, neglected or hurt by those close to us. We may also not have something you would perceive as a legitimate 'reason' to be acting out this way. We may have been raped. We may simply feel worthless. We may simply crave control. We are found in many communities, across the range of human experiences. We are simply not able to be put in a box or limited to one particular sector of society. The best way to help us is to recognize that we are amongst you as well. And then, instead of passing judgment and labelling, you will join in the effort to teach us to write love on our arms.
- S.A.F.E
- To Write Love On Her Arms
For those of you who will read this and worry, I do not cut. But I know what it's like. And I know people who do.
~
I'm not a stranger
No I am yours
With crippled anger
And tears that still drip sore
A fragile frame aged
With misery
And when our eyes meet
I know you see
I do not want to be afraid
I do not want to die inside just to breathe in
I'm tired of feeling so numb
Relief exists I find it when
I am cut
-"Cut" by Plumb
*
We live in different worlds; we all have different reasons. There are those of us who cannot feel; we are caught within the everlasting numbness. We want to feel something, anything, even and perhaps especially if it causes pain. We have blocked off our feelings so completely, often as a defense mechanism, that nothing can reach us except for the sharp slip of the blade against our flesh.
There are those of us who need to concretize the pain. Our personal art project, we start slow, with plastic knives, paper clips and safety pins. Then we graduate to razors. We want there to be proof. We want to make our pain real. There's too much of it, so much that seethes within. It simmers quietly, under the surface, in places you cannot see and cannot reach. It's pretty, the criss-crossing of lines across our wrists. And then it's not about prettiness anymore. It's about anger, the deep kind that wells up just as tears mist over the eye. That anger goes deep and it is expressed violently, with lines that may be pressed deliberately into the skin but are just as eloquent as savage slashes.
There are those of us who seek for control. There is so little in our lives that we can control that this action, this creation of the red blood that swims to the surface and spills over, is what makes us feel powerful. We have been violated and at the root of that violation is the loss of control that forged us. That loss is so desperate, so terrifying that we seek for whatever solace we can find in the careful assortment of ingredients. I sit by the bath: so. I take out my cotton swabs, my alcohol, my razor blades, my bandages. I make sure no one else is around. And then carefully, calmly, I walk the fine line between control and the loss of it. I do not want to die. This is not my suicide attempt. It is my power. I have regained it.
We cut in a blind rage, shaking with tears, sobbing in the shower, holding blades to our wrists. We cut carefully, composedly, in an act of defiance against those who would strip us of our power. We cut in anger, feeling worthless. We write that worthlessness on our skin, that rejection, that loss of self. We write our pain in brilliant colors, searing its message in a way that heals us for that moment in time. There are even those of us for whom the activity is pleasurable. We feel ourselves sink into calm, relaxation as we methodically go about this process.
Too often the movies romanticize cutting. It is not romantic. The body scars, a web of ugly marks across our otherwise perfect flesh. There are whole clumps of skin that we wash into the sink, the water mingling with the blood. It is disgusting. We realize that what we do is wrong, deviant, even crazy. That's why we hide it. We don't want you to know about it. It happens quietly, behind the scenes. I don't flaunt the cuts. I hide them on the inside of my thighs, high up on my arms. We try to stop. It's hard to stop. It's like any other addiction or sickness. An anorexic girl cannot simply choose to stop starving herself. Someone who cuts can try to go without it for a time, but then the urge comes back and it's so strong, almost irresistible.
Cutting is a maladaptive coping mechanism. But it is a coping mechanism. It is the way that we cope with the hurt, rejection, neglect, abandonment, pressure, stress, lack of power, lack of control or pain that we feel. It is not something reserved for supposed problem children from dysfunctional homes. Trying to determine who suffers from this based on external signs misses the point. Top achievers who seem completely normal on the outside cut. Straight-A students. People who do so much kindness for others. People who usually reach out for others, saving them from falling. These people can save everyone except themselves.
There is a darkness so treacherous and terrifying that most people do not ever visit it. It is an incalculable blackness, unending agony. Together with it comes the rage. The rage turns inside. It focuses on me. The rage tells me that I am so weak, so pathetic, so stupid, worthless and otherwise not valuable. The rage tells me that the problems I face are a result of my own poor choices. I rage at myself and coldly deliver the verdict: I deserve to be rejected. No one could possibly want me or love me. Other people manage to cope; it is my fault that I cannot. Because of these things, I deserve to be punished. That punishment needs to take concrete form. The delicate lines I trace across my arms demonstrate my surrender. I know I am not worthy.
We cut for different reasons. We come from different worlds. Some of us find cutting pleasurable; some of us resort to it to relieve tension. Others cut in order to feel something, to realize that we are still alive. Some of us cut to make the pain real, give it a form and a voice. For all of us, it is the only way we feel we can function. There are differing levels of dependence upon this coping mechanism. Some people simply try it and leave it. Others have the force of will to stop. Still others cannot stop unless aided by others. We have different faces; we have different needs. But all of us cut.
Please see that we are not definable as belonging to one group. We come from the best of families, ones that are tightly-knit and close. We also come from the worst of families. We are students who test high on our IQ tests. We are people who are over-achievers. We are also students failing out of school. We are people who have faced incredible struggles. There are those of us who have been abused, neglected or hurt by those close to us. We may also not have something you would perceive as a legitimate 'reason' to be acting out this way. We may have been raped. We may simply feel worthless. We may simply crave control. We are found in many communities, across the range of human experiences. We are simply not able to be put in a box or limited to one particular sector of society. The best way to help us is to recognize that we are amongst you as well. And then, instead of passing judgment and labelling, you will join in the effort to teach us to write love on our arms.
- S.A.F.E
- To Write Love On Her Arms
Self Injury, Self Harm, Cutting and Pain
I. Am. So. Impressed.
Mishpacha Family First tackled the issue of SI.
SI standing for self-injury. Meaning those people who cut, burn, hit or otherwise harm themselves due to the pain they feel which they turn inward.
This is a topic that has been severely under-addressed (or not addressed at all!) in our community. I am so incredibly impressed that Mishpacha Family First chose to tackle it. Unfortunately, only the beginning of the article is published online, but read it here and if anyone has the magazine and wants to scan the rest, I'd really appreciate it.
This is a taboo topic I have long felt needs to be properly addressed in our community. I'm really excited Mishpacha is breaking the silence.
~
When Pain Reaches a Boiling Point
Debbie Braun
“How many of you have experienced a problem with cutting in your institution?” asked renowned psychologist Dr. David Pelcovitz at a seminar offered to a wide-ranging group of American educators in Jerusalem.
Every hand in the audience went up.
Thoroughly shocked at the unanimous response, Dr. Pelcovitz thought for a moment, and then it dawned on him: these principals believed he was referring to the widespread issue of students “cutting” class.
After clarifying his intent and the misunderstanding, only two principals bashfully admitted they’d encountered the awful phenomenon in their schools. But Dr. Pelcovitz knew better: he waited a minute longer, and slowly, hand by hand, about half of the educators in the room acknowledged they’d faced the behavior.
Dr. Pelcovitz’s suspicions were confirmed: cutting, a self-injurious behavior infinitely more deleterious than playing hooky, is prevalent in significant numbers in the frum community.
Self-Injury: An Overview
Defined as any intentional injury to one’s own body tissue without conscious suicidal intent, self-injury (also referred to as self-harm or self-mutilation) occurs in an estimated 4 to 10 percent of Americans. Though it most commonly appears in the form of cutting, self-injurers have also been found to inflict pain through burning, scratching, hair-pulling (trichotillomania), hitting, head-banging, biting, or interfering with the healing of wounds.
“I started off using noninvasive things — like my own fingernails, which would just raise welts on my skin. But eventually I turned to anything that would inflict pain,” recounts Esther,* who began self-harming while in high school. “Over the course of my experience I used safety pins, kitchen knives, wire, broken glass, and razors. I would also prevent my scabs from healing (even those from accidental injuries), and sometimes, if I was really frustrated, I would bang my head or bite myself.”
Sufferers like Esther often inflict wounds on the wrists, upper arms, and inner thighs; many prefer to wound themselves in places that will be undetectable to others.
“I do have some faint scars lower down on my arms where I wasn’t careful enough,” admits Esther.
Psychotherapist Marcia Kesner — adjunct professor at Yeshiva University’s Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology and clinical director of Darkah, a Flatbush residence for young women with mental illness — notes that the location of the cuts can be a good indicator of the underlying emotions.
“If the lesions are in a visible place on the body, it’s most likely that the individual has resorted to this behavior in a desperate plea for intervention. If not, it’s possible that the individual is only self-harming as a method of self-soothing in the face of pain.”
~
You'd have to buy the magazine to read the rest.
Mishpacha Family First tackled the issue of SI.
SI standing for self-injury. Meaning those people who cut, burn, hit or otherwise harm themselves due to the pain they feel which they turn inward.
This is a topic that has been severely under-addressed (or not addressed at all!) in our community. I am so incredibly impressed that Mishpacha Family First chose to tackle it. Unfortunately, only the beginning of the article is published online, but read it here and if anyone has the magazine and wants to scan the rest, I'd really appreciate it.
This is a taboo topic I have long felt needs to be properly addressed in our community. I'm really excited Mishpacha is breaking the silence.
~
When Pain Reaches a Boiling Point
Debbie Braun
“How many of you have experienced a problem with cutting in your institution?” asked renowned psychologist Dr. David Pelcovitz at a seminar offered to a wide-ranging group of American educators in Jerusalem.
Every hand in the audience went up.
Thoroughly shocked at the unanimous response, Dr. Pelcovitz thought for a moment, and then it dawned on him: these principals believed he was referring to the widespread issue of students “cutting” class.
After clarifying his intent and the misunderstanding, only two principals bashfully admitted they’d encountered the awful phenomenon in their schools. But Dr. Pelcovitz knew better: he waited a minute longer, and slowly, hand by hand, about half of the educators in the room acknowledged they’d faced the behavior.
Dr. Pelcovitz’s suspicions were confirmed: cutting, a self-injurious behavior infinitely more deleterious than playing hooky, is prevalent in significant numbers in the frum community.
Self-Injury: An Overview
Defined as any intentional injury to one’s own body tissue without conscious suicidal intent, self-injury (also referred to as self-harm or self-mutilation) occurs in an estimated 4 to 10 percent of Americans. Though it most commonly appears in the form of cutting, self-injurers have also been found to inflict pain through burning, scratching, hair-pulling (trichotillomania), hitting, head-banging, biting, or interfering with the healing of wounds.
“I started off using noninvasive things — like my own fingernails, which would just raise welts on my skin. But eventually I turned to anything that would inflict pain,” recounts Esther,* who began self-harming while in high school. “Over the course of my experience I used safety pins, kitchen knives, wire, broken glass, and razors. I would also prevent my scabs from healing (even those from accidental injuries), and sometimes, if I was really frustrated, I would bang my head or bite myself.”
Sufferers like Esther often inflict wounds on the wrists, upper arms, and inner thighs; many prefer to wound themselves in places that will be undetectable to others.
“I do have some faint scars lower down on my arms where I wasn’t careful enough,” admits Esther.
Psychotherapist Marcia Kesner — adjunct professor at Yeshiva University’s Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology and clinical director of Darkah, a Flatbush residence for young women with mental illness — notes that the location of the cuts can be a good indicator of the underlying emotions.
“If the lesions are in a visible place on the body, it’s most likely that the individual has resorted to this behavior in a desperate plea for intervention. If not, it’s possible that the individual is only self-harming as a method of self-soothing in the face of pain.”
~
You'd have to buy the magazine to read the rest.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Inspiration in Life-Sized Bites
I read this conversation between mother and child over at 'Every Day Adventures of a Pavement Pounding Mommy,' written by Yael Hanover. It seemed to me to capture the beauty, the sweetness and the sadness of motherhood and children all at once. A repost of the conversation that moved me:
~
BH last week Hubby's cousin gave birth to a baby girl. So I went to TJMaxx and bought her a cute little outfit, which I hung on the coat closet door handle in anticipation of getting the cousin's address and sending out the outfit. Well, Moo found the outfit and comandeered it. It's been moved to various places in his room, but he won't put it back on the closet. I talked to him about it yesterday. I think I got to the root of it, but I hope I wasn't too leading.
Me - "How come you want to keep this outfit in your room?"
Moo - "I just like it here."
Me - "Who is this outfit for?"
Moo - "A baby girl."
Me - "Our baby girl?"
Moo - "No, somebody else's. Our baby girl is Adelle Shayna. She's my sister, but she passed away. But why is she always passed away?"
Me - "Well, passing away is permanent. When somebody leaves this life, they leave it forever until Moshiach comes. Does this dress make you think about Adelle Shayna?"
Moo - "Yes."
Me - "Will you be sad if I send this dress to someone else?"
Moo - "No, I won't be sad. Actually, yes. I think I'll be upset if you send it someone else. Yes. I'll be sad."
~
I know there are some people who are really inspired by shiurim and Rabbis. I've heard the names of these rabbis and speakers and if they really do manage to reach their audience, then may God be with them! But that has never worked for me. I cringe when I hear these speeches with their cliche, simplified ideas and overly condescending undertones. They remind me, usually negatively, of my unhappy Bais Yaakov experience. I deliberately avoid these sorts of speeches and venues because I know they will simply make me angry.
In contrast to the deliberately structured 'inspirational' speech, I admire and find meaning in the lives of people. Yael to me is an incredibly impressive person. Her fortitude in the face of great loss, her cheerfulness, kindness and incisive commentary and wit all make her someone I would love to be like. She's currently looking for a job (preferably involving writing) and her skill set is posted up here. Perhaps one of you has something for her.
~
BH last week Hubby's cousin gave birth to a baby girl. So I went to TJMaxx and bought her a cute little outfit, which I hung on the coat closet door handle in anticipation of getting the cousin's address and sending out the outfit. Well, Moo found the outfit and comandeered it. It's been moved to various places in his room, but he won't put it back on the closet. I talked to him about it yesterday. I think I got to the root of it, but I hope I wasn't too leading.
Me - "How come you want to keep this outfit in your room?"
Moo - "I just like it here."
Me - "Who is this outfit for?"
Moo - "A baby girl."
Me - "Our baby girl?"
Moo - "No, somebody else's. Our baby girl is Adelle Shayna. She's my sister, but she passed away. But why is she always passed away?"
Me - "Well, passing away is permanent. When somebody leaves this life, they leave it forever until Moshiach comes. Does this dress make you think about Adelle Shayna?"
Moo - "Yes."
Me - "Will you be sad if I send this dress to someone else?"
Moo - "No, I won't be sad. Actually, yes. I think I'll be upset if you send it someone else. Yes. I'll be sad."
~
I know there are some people who are really inspired by shiurim and Rabbis. I've heard the names of these rabbis and speakers and if they really do manage to reach their audience, then may God be with them! But that has never worked for me. I cringe when I hear these speeches with their cliche, simplified ideas and overly condescending undertones. They remind me, usually negatively, of my unhappy Bais Yaakov experience. I deliberately avoid these sorts of speeches and venues because I know they will simply make me angry.
In contrast to the deliberately structured 'inspirational' speech, I admire and find meaning in the lives of people. Yael to me is an incredibly impressive person. Her fortitude in the face of great loss, her cheerfulness, kindness and incisive commentary and wit all make her someone I would love to be like. She's currently looking for a job (preferably involving writing) and her skill set is posted up here. Perhaps one of you has something for her.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Steaks are YUM!
There's an amazing new deal for all New Yorkers available today. Just spend $25 and get $50 worth of steaks, alcohol, ribs etc at ABIGAEL'S on Broadway in New York! Limit 1 voucher per table. Click here to get it now!
And for those of you who follow this blog, you'll remember Abigael's is where Hesh took me after we got engaged. *smiles*
And for those of you who follow this blog, you'll remember Abigael's is where Hesh took me after we got engaged. *smiles*
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Set the Dark on Fire
Drink up, baby, stay up all night
The things you could do, you won't but you might
The potential you'll be that you'll never see
The promises you'll only make
-"Between the Bars" by Elliot Smith
*
I wonder if everyone is caught between the bars. And then I think: no, that's only for the folks who are prisoners in their own minds. The rest can't fathom an existence lived between bars.
"I'll kiss you again between the bars."
Desperation and eroticism in that sentence? Certainly it's affecting. The question is why. I think it's the cocktail mix of various emotions. Also because of how vividly an image of a man kissing a woman comes to mind while the window slats make shadows on his shirt so that it really looks like he is kissing her between the bars. Does anyone else here think in images?
The beginning of a story, to my mind: Caught between the bars, he chooses to set the dark on fire.
It's not a story that ends happily in my mind.
The things you could do, you won't but you might
The potential you'll be that you'll never see
The promises you'll only make
-"Between the Bars" by Elliot Smith
*
I wonder if everyone is caught between the bars. And then I think: no, that's only for the folks who are prisoners in their own minds. The rest can't fathom an existence lived between bars.
"I'll kiss you again between the bars."
Desperation and eroticism in that sentence? Certainly it's affecting. The question is why. I think it's the cocktail mix of various emotions. Also because of how vividly an image of a man kissing a woman comes to mind while the window slats make shadows on his shirt so that it really looks like he is kissing her between the bars. Does anyone else here think in images?
The beginning of a story, to my mind: Caught between the bars, he chooses to set the dark on fire.
It's not a story that ends happily in my mind.
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
The Snaith Bible: A Critical Examination
Miles B. Cohen and David B. Freedman write a scathing review of the Snaith Bible, in which they basically attack the book and demonstrate its many errors. The conclusion to the piece serves as an excellent summary as well.
~
In conclusion, we have tried to show: (1) In matters of Masoretic spacing, vocalization, accentuation and use of Mem-Taf-Gimmel, Snaith's citing of the British Museum Manuscript Or.2626-8 as his basis is misleading, in view of the divergence of that manuscript and Snaith's printed text in an extraordinary number of instances (2) Snaith's claim that his text is independent of Biblia Hebraica is in need of substantiation (3) Snaith indicated his desired changes in a Letteris Bible which was not carefully checked to correct misprints and broken characters before it was submitted to the printer as the copy for Snaith's Bible (4) The typesetter was not made aware of the importance of some distinctions in the placement of certain accents (5) The proofreading was far below the caliber required for a project of this importance.
In the light of the above evidence, Snaith's edition must not be considered a reliable Masoretic text. It should therefore be noted that this Bible can no longer serve to substantiate Snaith's hypothesis that the Ben Asher tradition "is to be found in the first hand in the best Sephardi [manuscripts]," although the hypothesis itself may still be true.
Norman Henry Snaith has been a very demanding critic of Bible printings, as can be seen from his description of another scholar's Bible as "tragedy almost unrelieved." We would hope that if he were to reexamine his own text in the light of our evidence, he would agree that much serious revision of his Bible is needed.
~
In conclusion, we have tried to show: (1) In matters of Masoretic spacing, vocalization, accentuation and use of Mem-Taf-Gimmel, Snaith's citing of the British Museum Manuscript Or.2626-8 as his basis is misleading, in view of the divergence of that manuscript and Snaith's printed text in an extraordinary number of instances (2) Snaith's claim that his text is independent of Biblia Hebraica is in need of substantiation (3) Snaith indicated his desired changes in a Letteris Bible which was not carefully checked to correct misprints and broken characters before it was submitted to the printer as the copy for Snaith's Bible (4) The typesetter was not made aware of the importance of some distinctions in the placement of certain accents (5) The proofreading was far below the caliber required for a project of this importance.
In the light of the above evidence, Snaith's edition must not be considered a reliable Masoretic text. It should therefore be noted that this Bible can no longer serve to substantiate Snaith's hypothesis that the Ben Asher tradition "is to be found in the first hand in the best Sephardi [manuscripts]," although the hypothesis itself may still be true.
Norman Henry Snaith has been a very demanding critic of Bible printings, as can be seen from his description of another scholar's Bible as "tragedy almost unrelieved." We would hope that if he were to reexamine his own text in the light of our evidence, he would agree that much serious revision of his Bible is needed.
(pages 125-126 or 29-30 depending on the article)
~
P.S. The only other time I've seen a review as negative as this one was Dr. Grach's "Responsa: Literary History and Basic History" about Peter J. Haas's work. It is also possibly the funniest review you'll ever read.
~
P.S. The only other time I've seen a review as negative as this one was Dr. Grach's "Responsa: Literary History and Basic History" about Peter J. Haas's work. It is also possibly the funniest review you'll ever read.
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Policemen, Priests and Psych Wards
I've been thinking a lot about policemen and schizophrenics. Or rather, policemen and mental illness. This is partially because of the family in the book Beach Music. Add to that my recent reading of I Know This Much is True by Wally Lamb and my current subway reading, Spiritual Survival for Law Enforcement by Cary A. Friedman, and you see the thought process.
Policemen, the mentally ill and clergy all have something in common. It has to do with safety, which is the same as grace, and whether they possess that safety and if so, whether they can gift it to others. Policemen keep us safe. The mentally ill (especially paranoid schizophrenics) rarely feel safe. And clergy know that we are not safe but give safety to others even so.
Policemen, the mentally ill and clergy all have something in common. It has to do with safety, which is the same as grace, and whether they possess that safety and if so, whether they can gift it to others. Policemen keep us safe. The mentally ill (especially paranoid schizophrenics) rarely feel safe. And clergy know that we are not safe but give safety to others even so.
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
The Year
Today marks a year from the English date that my beloved moonlit grandmother passed away. Thanks to all who learned mishnayos for her.
Rest well in heaven, Baba Rena.
Rest well in heaven, Baba Rena.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Passion
I love Richard Armitage and I love his portrayal of Mr. Thornton in the BBC's rendition of "North and South."
Watch at your own risk, as this scene includes a major spoiler. But for those who are not worried about spoilers, I love the passion with which he says these words.
Watch at your own risk, as this scene includes a major spoiler. But for those who are not worried about spoilers, I love the passion with which he says these words.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
The Second Rabbinic Bible
Did you ever want to know about the printing of the Bible? When did it start? Which books were printed first? Were the copies accurate or not? Well, all that information and more can be found in C.D. Ginsburg's Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, specifically pages 779-976. These are the pages you have to read for Dr. Leiman's class specifically.
In any case, today I am going to be excerpting from these pages regarding The Second Rabbinic Bible, mostly because I need to know it for my comps and somewhat because I think that everyone ought to know this. So enjoy.
~
Second edition of the Rabbinic Bible or the editio princeps of Jacob b. Chayim with the Massorah, Venice 1524-25
Though Bomberg's second edition of the Rabbinic Bible, this is the famous editio princeps of the Rabbinic Bible with the Massorah edited by Jacob b. Chayim Ibn Adonijah. This renowned Massorite became connected with the spirited and enterprising Venice printer about 1516-17, the very time when the edition of Felix Pratensis was published, and there can hardly be any doubt that Jacob the ultra orthodox Rabbinic Jew must often have pointed out to Bomberg the disadvantage of appealing to Jewish communities to purchase a Rabbinic Bible edited by a neophyte Augustinian monk and dedicated to the Pope. However that may be, the enthusiastic Massorite persuaded Bomberg in the course of a few years to undertake the publication of the justly celebrated Bible with the Massorah which finally settled the Massoretic text as it is now exhibited in the present recension of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Jacob b. Chayim's own account of this great enterprise in his elaborate Introduction to the Bible is as follows:
Volume I. The Pentateuch.- This Volume, which contains the Pentateuch with the Targum of Onkelos, the Commentaries of Rashi and Ibn Ezra and both the Massorahs, Magna and Parva, is without pagination and without catchwords in the Hebrew and Chaldee, but has the catchwords in the Commentaries. It consists of 234 folios and 30 quires with signatures. The first quire has 6 folios and the last has 4 folios, whilst the other 28 quires have respectively 8 folios. The quires are numbered both in Hebrew and Arabic numerals, whilst the sheets composing the quires are marked with Hebrew and Roman numerals.
Every folio has as a rule four columns, the two middle columns give the Hebrew text and the Chaldee of Onkelos both being furnished with the vowel-points and the accents; in the upper and lower margins of these central columns the Massorah Magna is given which generally consists of three lines in the upper margin and which has no definite number of lines in the lower margin: the space between the two central columns is occupied by the Massorah Parva. The two outer columns contain respectively the Commentaries of Rashi and Ibn Ezra. Not unfrequently there is also a narrow column outside these four columns which contains those portions of the Massorah Parva which were too long for the space between the Hebrew and Chaldee columns.
Each book begins with the first wood in large letters which is enclosed in a decorative wood-cut border and this again is contained in a square composed of lines varying in number which comprise Massoretic Rubrics. At the end of each book is the Massoretic Summary which registers the number of verses, the middle verse &c in the book.
The fifty-four annual Pericopes into which the Pentateuch is divided are indicated in a four-fold manner. (a) Each Parasha is separated from the other by a textless space of about four lines (b) With the exception of four instances there is at the end of each Pericope a register of the number of verses in the Pericope with the mnemonic sign (c) This is followed by the word פרשה in large letters which occupies the centre of the column when the Pericope coincides with an Open Section which is normally the case. In the abnormal instances where the Pericope coincides with a Closed Section, three Samechs (ססס) take the place of Parasha, and (d) each Parasha begins with the first word in larger letters. The names of the Pericopes are given in running head-lines throughout the Pentateuch where, however, מקץ is a mistake for ויגש on fol 56a.
In the sectional division of the text, Jacob b. Chayim has not followed the ancient rule which prescribes the form of the Sections, and which is followed in the best Sephardic MSS. He exhibits alike Open and Closed Sections by unfinished lines, indented lines and breaks in the middle of the lines. To indicate, however, the nature of the respective Sections, he inserted into the sectional spaces the letters Pe (פ) and Samech (ס) throughout the Pentateuch. IN this respect, therefore, he has only partially followed the excellent second edition of the entire Hebrew Bible, Naples 1491-93.
The preliminary matter to this Volume consists of (1) a rhythymical eulogy of this stupendous work written by Joseph b. Samuel Zarphati; (2) Jacob b. Chayim's celebrated Introduction to the Bible which I have published with an English translation &c; (3) complete Lists giving the number of the Christian chapters in each book of the Bible with the words wherewith each chapter begins; (4) Lists of the Sedarim throughout the Bible with their respective initial words, and (5) Ibn Ezra's Introduction to the Pentateuch. This preliminary matter occupies a separate quire of 6 folios with a duplicate signature, since this sheet like the following one has the same signature, א=1. It was printed after the whole Bible had left the press.
Volume II. The Former Prophets.- This Volume contains the Former Prophets, i.e. Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. It consists of 26 quires of 8 folios each, with the exception of the last quire which has 9 folios, so that the Volume has altogether 209 folios. The signatures exhibit a continuation of those in the first Volume. Hence the 26 quires are numbered both in Hebrew and Arabic numerals from ל 30 to נה 55.
The names of the respective books are given in running head-lines throughout the Volume where we have for the first time the division of Samuel and Kings into two books each, indicated by 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings and 2 Kings. This is a further development on Felix Pratensis who simply marked the division in the text itself or in the margin, but not in the head-lines. Jacob b. Chayim, however, has omitted the remarks of Pratensis in which this division is ascribed to Christians.
The arrangement and contents of the columns are similar to those in the first Volume with the following exceptions. (1) The Chaldee Paraphrase is that of the so-called Jonathan b. Uzziel and though it has the vowel points it is without the accents. (2) The Commentary of David Kimchi takes the place of Ibn Ezra and (3) the Commentary of Ralbag (= R Levi B. Gershom) is added, generally in the lower part of the column occupied by Rashi.
As is the case in the first Volume, each book in this Volume begins with the first word in large letters which is enclosed in a decorative wood-cut border. Outside this border is a large square made up of lines varying in number which contain sundry Massoretic Rubrics. At the end of each book is the Massoretic Summary which registers the number of verses, the middle verse and the Sedarim in the book. But thought Samuel and Kings are severally divided into two books, they are Massoretically treated as constituting one book each, and hence 2 Samuel and 2 Kings do not begin with the first word in larger letters and the Massoretic Summary at the end applies to the undivided Samuel and Kings.
Volume III. The Latter Prophets- The third Volume contains the Latter Prophets in the following order: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve Minor Prophets, which is the sequence exhibited in Column IV of the Table on page 6. It consists of 27 quires of 8 folios each with the exception of the last quire which has only 3 folios. The Volume has, therefore, altogether 211 folios. In this Volume too, the quires exhibit a continuous numeration from the former Volume and the numbers of the 27 quires are in the Hebrew and Arabic from 56 to 82.
The arrangement of the columns with the Hebrew and the Chaldee in the centre, the two commentaries in the two outer columns, the massorah Magna in the upper and lower margins witih the Massorah Parva occupying the space between the two central columns, is exactly the same as in the former Volumes. It is in the two outer columns which exhibit the Commentaries where alternate changes take place. In Isaiah the Commentary of Ibn Ezra takes the place of Kimchi, and in Jeremiah and Ezekiel Kimchi takes the place of Ibn Ezra, whilst in the Minor Prophets Ibn Ezra takes again the place of Kimchi. The Commentary alone uniformly occupies one of the columns throughout the Volume.
Volume IV. The Hagiographa- The fourth Volume contains the Hagiographa in the order exhibited in Column VIII of the Table on page 7. It consists of 37 quires of 8 folios each, with the exception of the last quire which has 10 folios. Accordingly this Volume has 298 folios. Here too the numeration of the quires runs on from the previous Volume and the 37 quires are numbered from 83 to 119.
The changes both in the arrangement and contents of the columns in this Volume are considerable. Up to Daniel the arrangement of the columns is the same and it is only in the contents of the columns which exhibit the two Commentaries where the alternate changes occur. In the Psalms the two columns contain Rashi and Ibn Ezra, in Proverbs and Job, Ralbag takes the place of Rashi, whilst in the Five Megilloth Rashi resumes his place. The Commentary on Proverbs, however, which is described in the heading as Ibn Ezra's, belongs to Moses Kimchi.
From Daniel to the end of Chronicles which is the last book of the Hebrew text, there is a change in the arrangement of the columns. As the last three books, viz .Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles are without the Targum, each page is henceforth divided horizontally into two sections, with two columns in each. The two columns in the upper section contain the text with the Massorah Parva in the intervening space, the Massorah Magna is given in the upper margin and below the text which horizontally divides the two sections, whilst the two columns in the lower section exhibit the two Commentaries.
In Daniel the two columns are respectively occupied by the Commentaries of Saadia and Rashi, in Ezra-Nehemiah Ibn Ezra's is the companion Commentary to Rashi, whilst in Chronicles Rashi is the sole occupant of both columns. Here again the Commentary on Ezra-Nehemiah which is ascribed in the heading to Ibn Ezra, belong to Moses Kimchi as is now established beyond the shadow of a doubt.
At the end of Chronicles or as an Appendix to Volume IV, Jacob b. Chayim gives in 65 folios of four columns each, that part of the Massorah Magna which was too long for the upper and lower margins of the text. As I have reprinted the whole of his recension I need not describe it here. Suffice it to say, that his conscientious and laborious application of the different Rubrics to the sundry pssages of the Bible faithfully exhibits the Hebrew text with all the phenomenal letters, words &c according to the Massorah and that this is the only authorised Massoretic recension. No textual redactor of modern days who professes to edit the Hebrew text according to the Massorah can deviate from it without giving conclusive justification for so doing.
A few of the characteristic features which distinguish this edition from its predecessors will suffice to show its merits.
(I) It is the first edition in which the consonants of the official readings are given in the margin with the express remark ק or Keri. Hitherto the editors have simply affixed the vowel points of the keri to the consonants of the Kethiv without any indication in the margin of the real consonants to which these graphic signs belong. Felix Pratensis, who alone gives the official readings, has mixed them up with the various readings from other Codices, and as he omits to mark the official variant with ק - Keri, it is difficult to distinguish between the two classes of variants.
(2) Jacob b. Chayim is also the first who has given in his edition of the Bible a large number of the important variants which are known by the name Sevirin
(3) He has, moreover, carefully collated a number of Codices and frequently gives their variants in the margin of his edition. The following instances from Genesis will show the nature and extent of the variations which he records (see page 964- I'm not typing it up)
These important glosses are no part of the Massorah, but record the result of Jacob b. Chayim's own collation. They disclose the fact that some of the model Codices and the Massoretic Annotators not unfrequently differed in their readings, and that Jacob b. Chayim had to exercise his own judgment as to which was the better reading. In this respect a modern editor is not bound to abide by Jacob b. Chayim's decision. A striking illustration of this fact we have in the two verses of Joshua XXI viz 36, 37. We have seen that some of the best MSS and all the early editions without exception have these two verses. Jacob b. Chayim, however, decided to omit them in accordance with a certain School of Massorites, but we are perfectly justified in restoring them on the authority which we have adduced.
Moreover Jacob b. Chayim with all his exertions had only been able to obtain a comparatively small portion of the Massorah, and many important Rubrics were entirely unknown to him as may be seen from a comparison of his edition of this Corpus with the Massorah which I published. The distribution and application of the contents of these new Lists among the various passages of the text, which constitute the Rubrics in question, not unfrequently yield new readings. But even here a modern editor has to give explicit data for departing from the Massoretic text as edited by Jacob b. Chayim.
Jacob b. Chayim himself has not unfrequently wrongly deviated from the Massorah which he printed. Hence his own text is occasionally in conflict with the Rubric which accompanies the textual phenomena. Thus on Gen IX 21 where we have one of the instances in which אהל, tent, with the suffix third person singular masculine, exhibits the archaic termination He (ה) instead of the normal Vav (ו), the Massorah Parva states that it is so written in four instances, and the Massorah Magna on this very passage not only mentions the same fact but enumerates the four passages, viz. Gen IX 21; XII 8; XIII 3; XXXV 21. And though the Massorah Parva remarks against each of the instances that it is one of the four exceptions, yet Jacob b. Chayim's text also reads אהלה with He in Gen XXVI 25 contrary to the unfirom Massorah Parva in the four passages. In the Massorah Finalis where he gives the heading of this Rubric he indeed states that there are five such instances, and refers to Gen IX 21 where he says the Massorah enumerates them in full. Bu thtis Massoretic Rubric, as we have seen, expressly states that there are only four and the enumeration coincides with the heading. This conflict between Jacob b. Chayim's textual reading and his Massorah is manifestly due to the fact that some Massoretic Schools had preserved more instances of this archaic form and that Gen XXVI 25 is one of them. Still his reading in Gen XXVI 25 contradicts his Massorah.
A still more striking instance of conflict between Jacob b. Chayim's text and his Massorah is to be seen in Gen XXVII 11 where the unique orthography of שער, hairy, occurs and where the Massorah Parva duly remarks that this defective form does not occur again. In verse 23 of this very chapter שערת hairy, the plural feminine of this adjective occurs which is also defective. Here the Massorah Parva remarks "there are three instances of defective orthography of this expression in the Bible". As usual the Massorah Parva simply gives the number, but does not give the passages. The Massorah Magna, however, on this very pssage not only states that there are four such instances, which contradicts the Massorah Parva, but minutely enumerates them, viz. Gen XXVII 11, 23; Levit XVI 18, 21. Accordingly the other two instances are in Levit XVI 18, 21. On referring, however, to these two passages, it will be seen that they are both plene in Jacob b. Chayim's text which is in conflict with his Massorah. The contradiction is due to the same cause. The plene orthography emanates from one School of textual redactors and the defective spelling was transmitted by another School. AS the majority fo the MSS which he collated exhibited the defective orthography he inserted it into his text, but having also found this Massorah he felt it his conscentious duty to record it. Still his textual readings contradict his Massorah.
In the face of such conscientious proceedings which made Jacob b. Chayim scrupulously to record Massorahs even when they were in direct conflict withthe readings he adopted in the text, it is astonishing to find that some eminent critics have accused him of being a party to a "pious fraud" and that he had falsified the text in the interest of Christianity to please his Christian employer. This accusation is based upon the Massorah Parva on Numb XXIV 9 and Psalm XXII 17, but more especially on his remarks in the Massorah Finalis with reference to teh quadriliteral expression כארי which occurs four times in the Bible, twice with Kametz under the Caph and twice with Pathach.
(1) On Numb XXIV 9, where it first occurs and where it has Pathach, the Masorah Parva simply states that it occurs four times, twice with Kametz and twice with Pathach. As this simply registers the number of times without giving the passages, nothing is to be deduced from t his matter of fact statement. The Massorah Magna, however, on this very passage which notices the two instances where it is with Pathach, gives this as the first and Ps. XXII 17 as the second passage with the important remark that the textual reading or the Kethiv in the latter place is כארו with Vav at the end, which most unquestionably makes it a verb third person plural, the Kethiv in Jacob b. Chayim's text is not only k'ari with Yod at the end, but that the Massorah on this passage makes no mention whatever of the existence of such a variant.
(3) It is the alphabetical Massorah Finalis at the end of the fourth volume where Jacob b. Chayim records and discusses the various readings in Ps. XXII 17. In letter Aleph he gives the Massoretic Rubric withthe four passages in full in which this quadriliteral occurs,a nd appends to the following important note in Rabbinic characters:
Nothing short of documentary evidence could justify so serious a charge. As there was no other printed Massorah in Hupfeld's time by which to test the accuracy of Jacob b. Chayim's Massorah he was in duty bound to investiage MS Lists. He would then have found that every important Condex with the Massorah gives the Alphabetical List of words which respectively occur twice in two different senses and that כארי in Isa XXXVIII 13 and PS XXII 17 is an essential constituent of this List. In confirmation of this statement I refer to the Ochlah Ve-Ochlah edited by Frensdorff and to my edition of the Massorah. But what makes this charge inexcusable is the fact that hte MS. of the important recension of the Ochlah ve-Ochlah is in the University Library at Halle where Hupfeld resided and where he was Hebrew Professor. If he had consulted this MS, which was his duty to do, he would have found this list with kaari in it as having two different senses in Isa XXXVIII 13 and Ps XXIII 17.
As to the important note in the Massorah Finalis, Hupfled boldly declares that "Jacob b. Chayim was very much pressed by the Christian printer in whose pay he was to insert the reading כארו into the text "for the glory of God" which he indeed did not do, but to please his employer he was induced to designate the MSS. In which he found this reading as careful or correct Codices contrary to the truth.
Having proved the genuineness of the Massorah Parva on Ps. XXII 17, which according to Hupfeld himself conveys the same sense as the Kethiv mentioned by Jacob b. Chayim in the Massorah Magna and in the note appended to the Rubric in the Massorah Finalis, I might here dismiss the charge with regard to this Kethiv. The existence, however, in ancient times of the reading which Jacob b. Chayim gives as the Kethiv which is beyond the shadow of a doubt, not only vindicates the character of the first editor of the Massorah, but is important to textual criticism.
Leaving out the reading in the Septugint which critics of the Hupfeld School ascribe to a Christian hand, this reading is attested by Aquila who renders it - they have made hateful- which was sufficient evidence even for Graetz that "at the time of the earlier Tanaites in the beginning of the second century the text of some Codices had כארו. The reading כארו as a verb preterite third person plural is, moreover, perserved in the Midrash on the Psalms where it is rendered by הוכרו, they made hateful, or according to others they made happy. There is, therefore, no doubt that the two rival readings were preserved in two different Schools of textual redactors and that by way of compromise one was put into the text and the other in the margin. Indeed from the Chaldee rendering of this passage it would appear that at one time both these readings were in the text which is not at all improbable since it not unfrequently happened that one of pairs which are alike, is dropped out of the text. Accordingly the text in some MSS was כארו כארי ידי ורגלי - like a lion they tore my hands and feet.
Such a paranomasia is of frequent occurence and is regarded as imparting force to Hebrew diction.
As had already been remarked, the text of Jacob b. Chayim's edition exhibits most scrupulously the Massoretic recension. It is therefore of supreme imporatnce to see how far the innovations which have been introduced into some modern editions called Massoretic are in harmony with this Massoretic editio princeps.
There is not only a hiatus in Gen IV 8, but the Massorah Parva on it distinctly remarks that it is one of the twenty-eight instances in which there is a break in the middle of the verse. בשגם in Gen VI 3 is with Kametz under the Gimel. With regard to the orhography of Chedor-laomer which occurs five times the editor is inconsistent, since it is in two words in three instances and in one word in two instances. Beth-el, however, is not only uniformly printed in two words in all the seventy passages in which it occurs in the Hebrew Bible, but is in two separate lines in no fewer than ten instances, Beth being at the end of one line and El at the beginning of the next line. AS has already been stated, this is the first printed edition of the Hebrew Bible in which the two verses are omitted in Josh XXI viz 36, 37 neither has it Neh VIII 68.
It cannot be too much emphasized that this Standard edition of teh Massooretic text is against the innovation of (1) inserting Dagesh into a consonant which follows a guttural with Sheva (2) into the first letter of a word when the preceding word with which it is combined happens to end with the same letter or (3) of changing Sheva into Chateph-Pathach when a consonant with simple Sheva is followed by the same consonant, as will be seen from the following examples (see list yourself on page 974).
As to the relation of this edition to that of Felix Pratensis, though Jacob b. Chayim never refers to it, there is no doubt that he was greatly indebted to it. We have seen that Felix Pratensis was the fist who not only printed the Keri in the margin but also variants from MSS. Jacob b. Chayim does the same, but more regularly and consistently. From the edition of Felix Pratensis, Jacob b. Chayim reprinted the TArgums on the Prophets and the Hagiographa which, however, he did not improve inasmuch as he omitted the Targum of Jonathan on the Pentateuch and the second Targum of Esther, which appeared for the first time in the edition of Felix Pratentis. Moreover, Jacob b. Chayim omitted the Dikduke Ha-Teamim which is also given for the first time by Felix Pratensis, though he promised to give it when mentioning it in the Massorah Finalis under letter Cheth. At the end of Volume IV, however, he etells us that he omitted it because he regarded it as superfluous.
Of this edition I collated two copies, one in the British museum, press mark 1900, 1. 3-6, and the second copy is in my own possession.
~
In any case, today I am going to be excerpting from these pages regarding The Second Rabbinic Bible, mostly because I need to know it for my comps and somewhat because I think that everyone ought to know this. So enjoy.
~
Second edition of the Rabbinic Bible or the editio princeps of Jacob b. Chayim with the Massorah, Venice 1524-25
Though Bomberg's second edition of the Rabbinic Bible, this is the famous editio princeps of the Rabbinic Bible with the Massorah edited by Jacob b. Chayim Ibn Adonijah. This renowned Massorite became connected with the spirited and enterprising Venice printer about 1516-17, the very time when the edition of Felix Pratensis was published, and there can hardly be any doubt that Jacob the ultra orthodox Rabbinic Jew must often have pointed out to Bomberg the disadvantage of appealing to Jewish communities to purchase a Rabbinic Bible edited by a neophyte Augustinian monk and dedicated to the Pope. However that may be, the enthusiastic Massorite persuaded Bomberg in the course of a few years to undertake the publication of the justly celebrated Bible with the Massorah which finally settled the Massoretic text as it is now exhibited in the present recension of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Jacob b. Chayim's own account of this great enterprise in his elaborate Introduction to the Bible is as follows:
- When I explained to Bomberg the advantage of the Massorah, he did all in his power to send into all the countries in order to search out what may be found of the Massorah, and praised be the Lord we obtained as many of the Massoretic books as could possibly be got. He was not backward, and his hand was not closed, nor did he draw back his right hand from producing gold out of his purse to defray the expenses of the books and the messengers who were engaged to make search for them in the most remote corners and in every place where they might possibly be found.
- Behold I have exerted all my might and strength to collate and arrange the Massorah, with all the possible improvements in order that it may remain pure and bright and shew its splendour to the nations and princes; for indeed it is beautiful to look at. This was a labour of love, for the benefit of our brethren, the children of Israel, and for the glory of our holy and perfect Law, as well as to fulfil, as far as possible, the desire of M. Daniel Bomberg, whose expenses in this matter far exceeded my labours. And as regards the Commentaries, I have exerted my powers to the utmost degree to correct in them all the mistakes as far as possible and whatsoever my humble endeavors could accomplish was done for the glory of the Lord, and for the benefit of our people. I would not be deterred by the enormous labour, for which cause I did not suffer my eyelids to be closed long, either in the winter or summer, and did not mind rising in the cold of the night, as my aim and desire were to see this holy work finished. Now praised be the Creator who granted me this privilege to begin and to finish this work.
Volume I. The Pentateuch.- This Volume, which contains the Pentateuch with the Targum of Onkelos, the Commentaries of Rashi and Ibn Ezra and both the Massorahs, Magna and Parva, is without pagination and without catchwords in the Hebrew and Chaldee, but has the catchwords in the Commentaries. It consists of 234 folios and 30 quires with signatures. The first quire has 6 folios and the last has 4 folios, whilst the other 28 quires have respectively 8 folios. The quires are numbered both in Hebrew and Arabic numerals, whilst the sheets composing the quires are marked with Hebrew and Roman numerals.
Every folio has as a rule four columns, the two middle columns give the Hebrew text and the Chaldee of Onkelos both being furnished with the vowel-points and the accents; in the upper and lower margins of these central columns the Massorah Magna is given which generally consists of three lines in the upper margin and which has no definite number of lines in the lower margin: the space between the two central columns is occupied by the Massorah Parva. The two outer columns contain respectively the Commentaries of Rashi and Ibn Ezra. Not unfrequently there is also a narrow column outside these four columns which contains those portions of the Massorah Parva which were too long for the space between the Hebrew and Chaldee columns.
Each book begins with the first wood in large letters which is enclosed in a decorative wood-cut border and this again is contained in a square composed of lines varying in number which comprise Massoretic Rubrics. At the end of each book is the Massoretic Summary which registers the number of verses, the middle verse &c in the book.
The fifty-four annual Pericopes into which the Pentateuch is divided are indicated in a four-fold manner. (a) Each Parasha is separated from the other by a textless space of about four lines (b) With the exception of four instances there is at the end of each Pericope a register of the number of verses in the Pericope with the mnemonic sign (c) This is followed by the word פרשה in large letters which occupies the centre of the column when the Pericope coincides with an Open Section which is normally the case. In the abnormal instances where the Pericope coincides with a Closed Section, three Samechs (ססס) take the place of Parasha, and (d) each Parasha begins with the first word in larger letters. The names of the Pericopes are given in running head-lines throughout the Pentateuch where, however, מקץ is a mistake for ויגש on fol 56a.
In the sectional division of the text, Jacob b. Chayim has not followed the ancient rule which prescribes the form of the Sections, and which is followed in the best Sephardic MSS. He exhibits alike Open and Closed Sections by unfinished lines, indented lines and breaks in the middle of the lines. To indicate, however, the nature of the respective Sections, he inserted into the sectional spaces the letters Pe (פ) and Samech (ס) throughout the Pentateuch. IN this respect, therefore, he has only partially followed the excellent second edition of the entire Hebrew Bible, Naples 1491-93.
The preliminary matter to this Volume consists of (1) a rhythymical eulogy of this stupendous work written by Joseph b. Samuel Zarphati; (2) Jacob b. Chayim's celebrated Introduction to the Bible which I have published with an English translation &c; (3) complete Lists giving the number of the Christian chapters in each book of the Bible with the words wherewith each chapter begins; (4) Lists of the Sedarim throughout the Bible with their respective initial words, and (5) Ibn Ezra's Introduction to the Pentateuch. This preliminary matter occupies a separate quire of 6 folios with a duplicate signature, since this sheet like the following one has the same signature, א=1. It was printed after the whole Bible had left the press.
Volume II. The Former Prophets.- This Volume contains the Former Prophets, i.e. Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. It consists of 26 quires of 8 folios each, with the exception of the last quire which has 9 folios, so that the Volume has altogether 209 folios. The signatures exhibit a continuation of those in the first Volume. Hence the 26 quires are numbered both in Hebrew and Arabic numerals from ל 30 to נה 55.
The names of the respective books are given in running head-lines throughout the Volume where we have for the first time the division of Samuel and Kings into two books each, indicated by 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings and 2 Kings. This is a further development on Felix Pratensis who simply marked the division in the text itself or in the margin, but not in the head-lines. Jacob b. Chayim, however, has omitted the remarks of Pratensis in which this division is ascribed to Christians.
The arrangement and contents of the columns are similar to those in the first Volume with the following exceptions. (1) The Chaldee Paraphrase is that of the so-called Jonathan b. Uzziel and though it has the vowel points it is without the accents. (2) The Commentary of David Kimchi takes the place of Ibn Ezra and (3) the Commentary of Ralbag (= R Levi B. Gershom) is added, generally in the lower part of the column occupied by Rashi.
As is the case in the first Volume, each book in this Volume begins with the first word in large letters which is enclosed in a decorative wood-cut border. Outside this border is a large square made up of lines varying in number which contain sundry Massoretic Rubrics. At the end of each book is the Massoretic Summary which registers the number of verses, the middle verse and the Sedarim in the book. But thought Samuel and Kings are severally divided into two books, they are Massoretically treated as constituting one book each, and hence 2 Samuel and 2 Kings do not begin with the first word in larger letters and the Massoretic Summary at the end applies to the undivided Samuel and Kings.
Volume III. The Latter Prophets- The third Volume contains the Latter Prophets in the following order: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve Minor Prophets, which is the sequence exhibited in Column IV of the Table on page 6. It consists of 27 quires of 8 folios each with the exception of the last quire which has only 3 folios. The Volume has, therefore, altogether 211 folios. In this Volume too, the quires exhibit a continuous numeration from the former Volume and the numbers of the 27 quires are in the Hebrew and Arabic from 56 to 82.
The arrangement of the columns with the Hebrew and the Chaldee in the centre, the two commentaries in the two outer columns, the massorah Magna in the upper and lower margins witih the Massorah Parva occupying the space between the two central columns, is exactly the same as in the former Volumes. It is in the two outer columns which exhibit the Commentaries where alternate changes take place. In Isaiah the Commentary of Ibn Ezra takes the place of Kimchi, and in Jeremiah and Ezekiel Kimchi takes the place of Ibn Ezra, whilst in the Minor Prophets Ibn Ezra takes again the place of Kimchi. The Commentary alone uniformly occupies one of the columns throughout the Volume.
Volume IV. The Hagiographa- The fourth Volume contains the Hagiographa in the order exhibited in Column VIII of the Table on page 7. It consists of 37 quires of 8 folios each, with the exception of the last quire which has 10 folios. Accordingly this Volume has 298 folios. Here too the numeration of the quires runs on from the previous Volume and the 37 quires are numbered from 83 to 119.
The changes both in the arrangement and contents of the columns in this Volume are considerable. Up to Daniel the arrangement of the columns is the same and it is only in the contents of the columns which exhibit the two Commentaries where the alternate changes occur. In the Psalms the two columns contain Rashi and Ibn Ezra, in Proverbs and Job, Ralbag takes the place of Rashi, whilst in the Five Megilloth Rashi resumes his place. The Commentary on Proverbs, however, which is described in the heading as Ibn Ezra's, belongs to Moses Kimchi.
From Daniel to the end of Chronicles which is the last book of the Hebrew text, there is a change in the arrangement of the columns. As the last three books, viz .Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles are without the Targum, each page is henceforth divided horizontally into two sections, with two columns in each. The two columns in the upper section contain the text with the Massorah Parva in the intervening space, the Massorah Magna is given in the upper margin and below the text which horizontally divides the two sections, whilst the two columns in the lower section exhibit the two Commentaries.
In Daniel the two columns are respectively occupied by the Commentaries of Saadia and Rashi, in Ezra-Nehemiah Ibn Ezra's is the companion Commentary to Rashi, whilst in Chronicles Rashi is the sole occupant of both columns. Here again the Commentary on Ezra-Nehemiah which is ascribed in the heading to Ibn Ezra, belong to Moses Kimchi as is now established beyond the shadow of a doubt.
At the end of Chronicles or as an Appendix to Volume IV, Jacob b. Chayim gives in 65 folios of four columns each, that part of the Massorah Magna which was too long for the upper and lower margins of the text. As I have reprinted the whole of his recension I need not describe it here. Suffice it to say, that his conscientious and laborious application of the different Rubrics to the sundry pssages of the Bible faithfully exhibits the Hebrew text with all the phenomenal letters, words &c according to the Massorah and that this is the only authorised Massoretic recension. No textual redactor of modern days who professes to edit the Hebrew text according to the Massorah can deviate from it without giving conclusive justification for so doing.
A few of the characteristic features which distinguish this edition from its predecessors will suffice to show its merits.
(I) It is the first edition in which the consonants of the official readings are given in the margin with the express remark ק or Keri. Hitherto the editors have simply affixed the vowel points of the keri to the consonants of the Kethiv without any indication in the margin of the real consonants to which these graphic signs belong. Felix Pratensis, who alone gives the official readings, has mixed them up with the various readings from other Codices, and as he omits to mark the official variant with ק - Keri, it is difficult to distinguish between the two classes of variants.
(2) Jacob b. Chayim is also the first who has given in his edition of the Bible a large number of the important variants which are known by the name Sevirin
(3) He has, moreover, carefully collated a number of Codices and frequently gives their variants in the margin of his edition. The following instances from Genesis will show the nature and extent of the variations which he records (see page 964- I'm not typing it up)
These important glosses are no part of the Massorah, but record the result of Jacob b. Chayim's own collation. They disclose the fact that some of the model Codices and the Massoretic Annotators not unfrequently differed in their readings, and that Jacob b. Chayim had to exercise his own judgment as to which was the better reading. In this respect a modern editor is not bound to abide by Jacob b. Chayim's decision. A striking illustration of this fact we have in the two verses of Joshua XXI viz 36, 37. We have seen that some of the best MSS and all the early editions without exception have these two verses. Jacob b. Chayim, however, decided to omit them in accordance with a certain School of Massorites, but we are perfectly justified in restoring them on the authority which we have adduced.
Moreover Jacob b. Chayim with all his exertions had only been able to obtain a comparatively small portion of the Massorah, and many important Rubrics were entirely unknown to him as may be seen from a comparison of his edition of this Corpus with the Massorah which I published. The distribution and application of the contents of these new Lists among the various passages of the text, which constitute the Rubrics in question, not unfrequently yield new readings. But even here a modern editor has to give explicit data for departing from the Massoretic text as edited by Jacob b. Chayim.
Jacob b. Chayim himself has not unfrequently wrongly deviated from the Massorah which he printed. Hence his own text is occasionally in conflict with the Rubric which accompanies the textual phenomena. Thus on Gen IX 21 where we have one of the instances in which אהל, tent, with the suffix third person singular masculine, exhibits the archaic termination He (ה) instead of the normal Vav (ו), the Massorah Parva states that it is so written in four instances, and the Massorah Magna on this very passage not only mentions the same fact but enumerates the four passages, viz. Gen IX 21; XII 8; XIII 3; XXXV 21. And though the Massorah Parva remarks against each of the instances that it is one of the four exceptions, yet Jacob b. Chayim's text also reads אהלה with He in Gen XXVI 25 contrary to the unfirom Massorah Parva in the four passages. In the Massorah Finalis where he gives the heading of this Rubric he indeed states that there are five such instances, and refers to Gen IX 21 where he says the Massorah enumerates them in full. Bu thtis Massoretic Rubric, as we have seen, expressly states that there are only four and the enumeration coincides with the heading. This conflict between Jacob b. Chayim's textual reading and his Massorah is manifestly due to the fact that some Massoretic Schools had preserved more instances of this archaic form and that Gen XXVI 25 is one of them. Still his reading in Gen XXVI 25 contradicts his Massorah.
A still more striking instance of conflict between Jacob b. Chayim's text and his Massorah is to be seen in Gen XXVII 11 where the unique orthography of שער, hairy, occurs and where the Massorah Parva duly remarks that this defective form does not occur again. In verse 23 of this very chapter שערת hairy, the plural feminine of this adjective occurs which is also defective. Here the Massorah Parva remarks "there are three instances of defective orthography of this expression in the Bible". As usual the Massorah Parva simply gives the number, but does not give the passages. The Massorah Magna, however, on this very pssage not only states that there are four such instances, which contradicts the Massorah Parva, but minutely enumerates them, viz. Gen XXVII 11, 23; Levit XVI 18, 21. Accordingly the other two instances are in Levit XVI 18, 21. On referring, however, to these two passages, it will be seen that they are both plene in Jacob b. Chayim's text which is in conflict with his Massorah. The contradiction is due to the same cause. The plene orthography emanates from one School of textual redactors and the defective spelling was transmitted by another School. AS the majority fo the MSS which he collated exhibited the defective orthography he inserted it into his text, but having also found this Massorah he felt it his conscentious duty to record it. Still his textual readings contradict his Massorah.
In the face of such conscientious proceedings which made Jacob b. Chayim scrupulously to record Massorahs even when they were in direct conflict withthe readings he adopted in the text, it is astonishing to find that some eminent critics have accused him of being a party to a "pious fraud" and that he had falsified the text in the interest of Christianity to please his Christian employer. This accusation is based upon the Massorah Parva on Numb XXIV 9 and Psalm XXII 17, but more especially on his remarks in the Massorah Finalis with reference to teh quadriliteral expression כארי which occurs four times in the Bible, twice with Kametz under the Caph and twice with Pathach.
(1) On Numb XXIV 9, where it first occurs and where it has Pathach, the Masorah Parva simply states that it occurs four times, twice with Kametz and twice with Pathach. As this simply registers the number of times without giving the passages, nothing is to be deduced from t his matter of fact statement. The Massorah Magna, however, on this very passage which notices the two instances where it is with Pathach, gives this as the first and Ps. XXII 17 as the second passage with the important remark that the textual reading or the Kethiv in the latter place is כארו with Vav at the end, which most unquestionably makes it a verb third person plural, the Kethiv in Jacob b. Chayim's text is not only k'ari with Yod at the end, but that the Massorah on this passage makes no mention whatever of the existence of such a variant.
(3) It is the alphabetical Massorah Finalis at the end of the fourth volume where Jacob b. Chayim records and discusses the various readings in Ps. XXII 17. In letter Aleph he gives the Massoretic Rubric withthe four passages in full in which this quadriliteral occurs,a nd appends to the following important note in Rabbinic characters:
- In some correct Codices, I have found כארו as the Kethiv and k'ari as the Keri but I have searched in the List of words which are written with Vav at the end and are read with Yod and did not find it included therein. Neither did I find it noticed among the variations which exist in the Bible between the Easterns and the Westerns. Thus far.
Nothing short of documentary evidence could justify so serious a charge. As there was no other printed Massorah in Hupfeld's time by which to test the accuracy of Jacob b. Chayim's Massorah he was in duty bound to investiage MS Lists. He would then have found that every important Condex with the Massorah gives the Alphabetical List of words which respectively occur twice in two different senses and that כארי in Isa XXXVIII 13 and PS XXII 17 is an essential constituent of this List. In confirmation of this statement I refer to the Ochlah Ve-Ochlah edited by Frensdorff and to my edition of the Massorah. But what makes this charge inexcusable is the fact that hte MS. of the important recension of the Ochlah ve-Ochlah is in the University Library at Halle where Hupfeld resided and where he was Hebrew Professor. If he had consulted this MS, which was his duty to do, he would have found this list with kaari in it as having two different senses in Isa XXXVIII 13 and Ps XXIII 17.
As to the important note in the Massorah Finalis, Hupfled boldly declares that "Jacob b. Chayim was very much pressed by the Christian printer in whose pay he was to insert the reading כארו into the text "for the glory of God" which he indeed did not do, but to please his employer he was induced to designate the MSS. In which he found this reading as careful or correct Codices contrary to the truth.
Having proved the genuineness of the Massorah Parva on Ps. XXII 17, which according to Hupfeld himself conveys the same sense as the Kethiv mentioned by Jacob b. Chayim in the Massorah Magna and in the note appended to the Rubric in the Massorah Finalis, I might here dismiss the charge with regard to this Kethiv. The existence, however, in ancient times of the reading which Jacob b. Chayim gives as the Kethiv which is beyond the shadow of a doubt, not only vindicates the character of the first editor of the Massorah, but is important to textual criticism.
Leaving out the reading in the Septugint which critics of the Hupfeld School ascribe to a Christian hand, this reading is attested by Aquila who renders it - they have made hateful- which was sufficient evidence even for Graetz that "at the time of the earlier Tanaites in the beginning of the second century the text of some Codices had כארו. The reading כארו as a verb preterite third person plural is, moreover, perserved in the Midrash on the Psalms where it is rendered by הוכרו, they made hateful, or according to others they made happy. There is, therefore, no doubt that the two rival readings were preserved in two different Schools of textual redactors and that by way of compromise one was put into the text and the other in the margin. Indeed from the Chaldee rendering of this passage it would appear that at one time both these readings were in the text which is not at all improbable since it not unfrequently happened that one of pairs which are alike, is dropped out of the text. Accordingly the text in some MSS was כארו כארי ידי ורגלי - like a lion they tore my hands and feet.
Such a paranomasia is of frequent occurence and is regarded as imparting force to Hebrew diction.
As had already been remarked, the text of Jacob b. Chayim's edition exhibits most scrupulously the Massoretic recension. It is therefore of supreme imporatnce to see how far the innovations which have been introduced into some modern editions called Massoretic are in harmony with this Massoretic editio princeps.
There is not only a hiatus in Gen IV 8, but the Massorah Parva on it distinctly remarks that it is one of the twenty-eight instances in which there is a break in the middle of the verse. בשגם in Gen VI 3 is with Kametz under the Gimel. With regard to the orhography of Chedor-laomer which occurs five times the editor is inconsistent, since it is in two words in three instances and in one word in two instances. Beth-el, however, is not only uniformly printed in two words in all the seventy passages in which it occurs in the Hebrew Bible, but is in two separate lines in no fewer than ten instances, Beth being at the end of one line and El at the beginning of the next line. AS has already been stated, this is the first printed edition of the Hebrew Bible in which the two verses are omitted in Josh XXI viz 36, 37 neither has it Neh VIII 68.
It cannot be too much emphasized that this Standard edition of teh Massooretic text is against the innovation of (1) inserting Dagesh into a consonant which follows a guttural with Sheva (2) into the first letter of a word when the preceding word with which it is combined happens to end with the same letter or (3) of changing Sheva into Chateph-Pathach when a consonant with simple Sheva is followed by the same consonant, as will be seen from the following examples (see list yourself on page 974).
As to the relation of this edition to that of Felix Pratensis, though Jacob b. Chayim never refers to it, there is no doubt that he was greatly indebted to it. We have seen that Felix Pratensis was the fist who not only printed the Keri in the margin but also variants from MSS. Jacob b. Chayim does the same, but more regularly and consistently. From the edition of Felix Pratensis, Jacob b. Chayim reprinted the TArgums on the Prophets and the Hagiographa which, however, he did not improve inasmuch as he omitted the Targum of Jonathan on the Pentateuch and the second Targum of Esther, which appeared for the first time in the edition of Felix Pratentis. Moreover, Jacob b. Chayim omitted the Dikduke Ha-Teamim which is also given for the first time by Felix Pratensis, though he promised to give it when mentioning it in the Massorah Finalis under letter Cheth. At the end of Volume IV, however, he etells us that he omitted it because he regarded it as superfluous.
Of this edition I collated two copies, one in the British museum, press mark 1900, 1. 3-6, and the second copy is in my own possession.
~
I now skip to: All subsequent editions are in so far Massoretic as they follow the Standard edition of Jacob b. Chayim. Every departure from it on the part of editors who call their texts Massoreetic has to be explained and justified on the authority of the Massorah and MSS which exhibit the Massoretic recension of the text.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Showtime
Sometimes I just want to pinch off little pieces of my heart and scatter them like so much glittery confetti throughout the roads and vicissitudes of someone else's life.
The problem, of course, is that the more I give away, the harder it is for me to breathe.
So let's send long-distance love by email.
And buoy you up on imaginary balloons.
I'll blow you kisses in a snow-covered New York.
And send happy thoughts your way.
I'll imagine you covered in golden motes of light.
I'll see you healthy in my mind's eye.
And maybe that way I'll fix it so that I really believe what I am pretending is true.
I wish I could bear this burden for you.
But you've passed through the tollbooth of heaven and accepted the cross.
What can I do now? Except tell the Governor
that He'd better let me dance in your crazy.
Explore the shifting panic in your brain.
What's a costume for me is your forever life.
But together, we can make it all right.
I'd swim in your darkness forever and ever.
The rope's in my hand when you come up for air.
I'll lasso you to your other self.
Grieving is a process I am too familiar with.
Let us grieve. Then let us dance.
And proclaim the joy that is our crazy.
The psych ward is only one of our stages;
put on your wig and I'll do the makeup.
The problem, of course, is that the more I give away, the harder it is for me to breathe.
So let's send long-distance love by email.
And buoy you up on imaginary balloons.
I'll blow you kisses in a snow-covered New York.
And send happy thoughts your way.
I'll imagine you covered in golden motes of light.
I'll see you healthy in my mind's eye.
And maybe that way I'll fix it so that I really believe what I am pretending is true.
I wish I could bear this burden for you.
But you've passed through the tollbooth of heaven and accepted the cross.
What can I do now? Except tell the Governor
that He'd better let me dance in your crazy.
Explore the shifting panic in your brain.
What's a costume for me is your forever life.
But together, we can make it all right.
I'd swim in your darkness forever and ever.
The rope's in my hand when you come up for air.
I'll lasso you to your other self.
Grieving is a process I am too familiar with.
Let us grieve. Then let us dance.
And proclaim the joy that is our crazy.
The psych ward is only one of our stages;
put on your wig and I'll do the makeup.
YU Beacon
It seems like my desire - and Eitan Kastner's- has finally been realized in the form of a coed Yeshiva University newspaper. It's not The Commentator and it isn't The Observer; it's the YU Beacon which you can check out at yubeacon.com.
I think Tali Adler and Simi Lampert (Editors-in-Chief) ought to tell us a bit about who they are, how they decided to found this online newspaper, and who their staff is comprised of. Do they have an agenda and what is it? Why were the other news outlets not good enough for them? "YU Beacon" has the potential to be interesting- but first I would need to have a better handle on who is running it and whether we as members of the Yeshiva University audience ought to trust them. The only thing I can tell thus far by perusing their articles is their left-wing Modox tilt (they've interviewed Eli Winkler about being gay in the Orthodox world, are talking about JQY and decided to review "Not in Heaven" - see my blogpost about that book here). I'm not someone who minds pushing the envelope- in fact I support it- but I'm also not someone who is a big fan of agendas, unless they're announced outright. (Like "The Forward's" socialist outlook.)
I think Tali Adler and Simi Lampert (Editors-in-Chief) ought to tell us a bit about who they are, how they decided to found this online newspaper, and who their staff is comprised of. Do they have an agenda and what is it? Why were the other news outlets not good enough for them? "YU Beacon" has the potential to be interesting- but first I would need to have a better handle on who is running it and whether we as members of the Yeshiva University audience ought to trust them. The only thing I can tell thus far by perusing their articles is their left-wing Modox tilt (they've interviewed Eli Winkler about being gay in the Orthodox world, are talking about JQY and decided to review "Not in Heaven" - see my blogpost about that book here). I'm not someone who minds pushing the envelope- in fact I support it- but I'm also not someone who is a big fan of agendas, unless they're announced outright. (Like "The Forward's" socialist outlook.)
Monday, January 24, 2011
Generation Gap
Chicago's Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon has put out an interesting new short entitled "Generation Gap", a film about the impact of the Holocaust on three generations of his family. It was blogged by Jewschool and I'm reblogging it from there. I haven't watched it yet but Eliyahu is someone who asks tough, thought-provoking questions and offers sincere, genuine answers. Sometimes his questions and opinions bring us into uncomfortable territory, but I think it's imperative for any thinking individual to consider those questions.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The OU Is Coming To Boro Park!
So first an OU Employee (moi) marries a Hasid.
Then the OU decides to actually go to Boro Park!
They're going to be leading a cool 'Ask OU' session focusing on kashrus. I really want to know what the connection between OU and heimish hechsherim is, so everyone in Boro Park, you should totally go and tell me what you learn by commenting to this blog! Thanks.
Then the OU decides to actually go to Boro Park!
They're going to be leading a cool 'Ask OU' session focusing on kashrus. I really want to know what the connection between OU and heimish hechsherim is, so everyone in Boro Park, you should totally go and tell me what you learn by commenting to this blog! Thanks.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
A Medley Of Things I Decided You Should Know About Me
1. I like the name 'Brandon'
2. I also like the name 'Jared'
3. My favorite name for a girl is 'Aurora'
4. I have no patience for just about anything except for when someone is crying, in which case I have all the patience in the world
5. My sense of humor is hard to pin down, but there are some things that I find unbelievably funny and want the whole world to enjoy; most of the time, this takes the form of Calvin-and-Hobbes-esque entertainment that happens in real life.
6. A nice black lady was my Mommy on the subway today and instructed me to tell the gentleman in front of me to move so that I could hold on to a pole and resist getting thrown against her.
7. I have dreams that involve putting my cousin's twins to sleep in two separate beds that have the same kind of guards that I used to have on my bed as a child and that the Boys used to have. So it's a mixture of this and pillows. I also dreamed that a green gummy-thingy with gummy black eyes that looked like a Flubber but wriggled on the ground like a snail was given to all of us in a huge auditorium and we needed to kill it as a Korban. But, as I wailed to Heshy first thing in the morning upon waking up, "I didn't kill my Korban, Heshy! It had sad black gummy eyes and I couldn't kill it. Because it talked to me in English and could fly kind of like a little horse and said 'Sit Down.'" At which point Heshy remarked that if the cow at the shechita we observed had spoken to me in English, I wouldn't have been able to kill that cow either. Which led to worries about King Solomon who could speak the animals' languages and how if I were King Solomon I wouldn't be able to eat anything anymore. And resolved itself in Heshy saying he had never watched Flubber and falling back asleep.
8. I love people who have red hair, copper-colored hair or any wig that has any variation thereof. There's just an innate attraction between me and red-haired folks.
9. I love my long subway commute because it means I get to read lots of books. Except I am running out of books that I own and am now re-reading books, which can be fun but is a bit sad.
10. I watch "Pretty Little Liars" for no other reason than because all the main characters are so devastatingly pretty. Particularly Aria. I just stare at Aria all day. I've tried to explain to Heshy that he must come over to the Aria-love by telling him all about how she is the prettiest person anyone has ever seen but he mostly yawns and tells me I need to look in the mirror. At which point I do and sigh unhappily. But anyway, Aria was totally meant to be an arresting medieval portrait that would have earned the painter patronage for the rest of his life.
11. We bought me Steve Madden leggings that have shimmery silver buttons and a zipper going down the sides and they are awesome-looking and cool and I like wearing them.
12. Whenever I reflect on my life and realize, in wonder, that I am in fact a human being, I'm reminded of the amazing Elephant Man scene where he asserts the same.
What random things would you like to share?
2. I also like the name 'Jared'
3. My favorite name for a girl is 'Aurora'
4. I have no patience for just about anything except for when someone is crying, in which case I have all the patience in the world
5. My sense of humor is hard to pin down, but there are some things that I find unbelievably funny and want the whole world to enjoy; most of the time, this takes the form of Calvin-and-Hobbes-esque entertainment that happens in real life.
6. A nice black lady was my Mommy on the subway today and instructed me to tell the gentleman in front of me to move so that I could hold on to a pole and resist getting thrown against her.
7. I have dreams that involve putting my cousin's twins to sleep in two separate beds that have the same kind of guards that I used to have on my bed as a child and that the Boys used to have. So it's a mixture of this and pillows. I also dreamed that a green gummy-thingy with gummy black eyes that looked like a Flubber but wriggled on the ground like a snail was given to all of us in a huge auditorium and we needed to kill it as a Korban. But, as I wailed to Heshy first thing in the morning upon waking up, "I didn't kill my Korban, Heshy! It had sad black gummy eyes and I couldn't kill it. Because it talked to me in English and could fly kind of like a little horse and said 'Sit Down.'" At which point Heshy remarked that if the cow at the shechita we observed had spoken to me in English, I wouldn't have been able to kill that cow either. Which led to worries about King Solomon who could speak the animals' languages and how if I were King Solomon I wouldn't be able to eat anything anymore. And resolved itself in Heshy saying he had never watched Flubber and falling back asleep.
8. I love people who have red hair, copper-colored hair or any wig that has any variation thereof. There's just an innate attraction between me and red-haired folks.
9. I love my long subway commute because it means I get to read lots of books. Except I am running out of books that I own and am now re-reading books, which can be fun but is a bit sad.
10. I watch "Pretty Little Liars" for no other reason than because all the main characters are so devastatingly pretty. Particularly Aria. I just stare at Aria all day. I've tried to explain to Heshy that he must come over to the Aria-love by telling him all about how she is the prettiest person anyone has ever seen but he mostly yawns and tells me I need to look in the mirror. At which point I do and sigh unhappily. But anyway, Aria was totally meant to be an arresting medieval portrait that would have earned the painter patronage for the rest of his life.
11. We bought me Steve Madden leggings that have shimmery silver buttons and a zipper going down the sides and they are awesome-looking and cool and I like wearing them.
12. Whenever I reflect on my life and realize, in wonder, that I am in fact a human being, I'm reminded of the amazing Elephant Man scene where he asserts the same.
What random things would you like to share?
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Amy Chua, You've Got Nothing On My Mom
The whole world is going gaga over this article.
But to me, this is old hat. Clearly Amy Chua has never met my mom.
Yeah, Chinese moms may be tough. But you want to know from tough? Welcome to the Uzbekistani mother, shipped straight from the Old Country, tough as nails, opinionated, realistic, someone who calls it like it is and takes no crap from anyone. This is a woman who taught herself English as a god-knows-what-number language (she already spoke Farsi, Russian, Uzbek, Italian and so forth), took the TOEFL, got into Princeton, turned it down to go to Stern, worked her heart out to go to nursing school and raised a daughter who got an 800 on her verbal SAT. I'm an immigrant's daughter who arguably should be speaking heavily accented English and stumbling over words. But that's not what my mother wanted and that's not what she allowed.
The only difference between me and Amy Chua's kids is that my mother expected more from me than Amy expects from her children. I had to get straight As in everything and I was permitted and expected to participate in extracurricular activities as long as this did not bring my grades down. Furthermore, if I was going to do something, I had to do it in the best way possible. If I was trying out for Drama, I had better land the lead role. This pressurized environment wasn't always easy, as I wrote:
But with her strictness my mother raised a disciplined, intelligent girl who got straight As through elementary school, high school and most of college. That girl read the canon of great classics (Russian, English, French) by age 14 and the entire 'David Copperfield' by age 11. She had mastered Lord of the Rings by 9, when she was in fourth grade. She won awards for her writing and was consistently published in various forums. She attended a fancy prep school and caught up on a trimester's worth of work when she was 15. The girl managed to do this while participating in drama performances, taking Tae Kwon Doe, writing for the school newspaper or acting as its Editor, participating in Israel Club, Medical Ethics Club, NCSY, the Honors Society and an assortment of other clubs and conferences. She managed to keep her head above water even when faced with great adversity and injustice. And this is only one out of the four children, each of whom possesses outstanding qualities far and away removed from others of their age.
It's true my mother mellowed a little when it came to Dustfinger and the Boys, mostly because I pointed out that she was making our lives as social individuals very difficult by refusing to conform to certain norms. But the core 'Boss' is still there. And I don't know about you- but I prefer the way I was raised to the mollycoddling and neglect that passes for parenting in certain parts of the world today. My mother was strict, but I see her as the blacksmith who forged me on the anvil, pounding away until I could become who I was meant to be. I may not have appreciated it then, but boy, do I ever appreciate it now. Amy Chua goes a little overboard in her parenting, especially when it comes to being hurtful towards her kids and calling them names. But the essence of what she is trying to do is good. My mom grew up in a world where every student who had failed had their name called publicly at assembly during their elite KGB School homeroom. These kids were shamed into doing better. That shame culture isn't something I think is good or healthy for most children- but the expectation that the child can do better and what is more, owes it to her parents to do better than she knew was possible- is one that I welcome. The fact that any grade below A was not acceptable in my house made me hate my mother at times. But it also made me try harder. And the end result was that I was empowered when I realized I could do much more than I had formerly imagined.
But to me, this is old hat. Clearly Amy Chua has never met my mom.
Yeah, Chinese moms may be tough. But you want to know from tough? Welcome to the Uzbekistani mother, shipped straight from the Old Country, tough as nails, opinionated, realistic, someone who calls it like it is and takes no crap from anyone. This is a woman who taught herself English as a god-knows-what-number language (she already spoke Farsi, Russian, Uzbek, Italian and so forth), took the TOEFL, got into Princeton, turned it down to go to Stern, worked her heart out to go to nursing school and raised a daughter who got an 800 on her verbal SAT. I'm an immigrant's daughter who arguably should be speaking heavily accented English and stumbling over words. But that's not what my mother wanted and that's not what she allowed.
The only difference between me and Amy Chua's kids is that my mother expected more from me than Amy expects from her children. I had to get straight As in everything and I was permitted and expected to participate in extracurricular activities as long as this did not bring my grades down. Furthermore, if I was going to do something, I had to do it in the best way possible. If I was trying out for Drama, I had better land the lead role. This pressurized environment wasn't always easy, as I wrote:
- I remember angrily accusing my mother that she was too strict with me, that I never had friends because of her high standards (she believed in friends who would challenge you, not people who you were always benefiting), that she didn't give me enough candy, the way the other parents did, that her idea of a birthday party wasn't "cool" enough. I hated her rigid attitude and how she disliked me "enabling" others (a favorite word of hers, or so I thought), her demands that I finish what I start, that I take what I touch. I hated the way she cared so much about grades and was displeased if I brought home an A- or B+ instead of an A. Oh, I hated many things. Let no one ever accuse me of being grateful.
But with her strictness my mother raised a disciplined, intelligent girl who got straight As through elementary school, high school and most of college. That girl read the canon of great classics (Russian, English, French) by age 14 and the entire 'David Copperfield' by age 11. She had mastered Lord of the Rings by 9, when she was in fourth grade. She won awards for her writing and was consistently published in various forums. She attended a fancy prep school and caught up on a trimester's worth of work when she was 15. The girl managed to do this while participating in drama performances, taking Tae Kwon Doe, writing for the school newspaper or acting as its Editor, participating in Israel Club, Medical Ethics Club, NCSY, the Honors Society and an assortment of other clubs and conferences. She managed to keep her head above water even when faced with great adversity and injustice. And this is only one out of the four children, each of whom possesses outstanding qualities far and away removed from others of their age.
It's true my mother mellowed a little when it came to Dustfinger and the Boys, mostly because I pointed out that she was making our lives as social individuals very difficult by refusing to conform to certain norms. But the core 'Boss' is still there. And I don't know about you- but I prefer the way I was raised to the mollycoddling and neglect that passes for parenting in certain parts of the world today. My mother was strict, but I see her as the blacksmith who forged me on the anvil, pounding away until I could become who I was meant to be. I may not have appreciated it then, but boy, do I ever appreciate it now. Amy Chua goes a little overboard in her parenting, especially when it comes to being hurtful towards her kids and calling them names. But the essence of what she is trying to do is good. My mom grew up in a world where every student who had failed had their name called publicly at assembly during their elite KGB School homeroom. These kids were shamed into doing better. That shame culture isn't something I think is good or healthy for most children- but the expectation that the child can do better and what is more, owes it to her parents to do better than she knew was possible- is one that I welcome. The fact that any grade below A was not acceptable in my house made me hate my mother at times. But it also made me try harder. And the end result was that I was empowered when I realized I could do much more than I had formerly imagined.
Monday, January 17, 2011
There's An OU For You
What does the Orthodox Union do?
Before I started working here, I didn't know either.
Watch this video to find out.
Before I started working here, I didn't know either.
Watch this video to find out.
How To Determine Whom To Marry
Heshy and I were discussing different ideas and philosophies last night and I mentioned that I felt very lucky that he found me. After all, he's the one who found me, who wrote to me and the one who courted me (at the beginning I couldn't get past the fact that he was a Hasid). It occurred to me that a problem that I found in my own personal life may be a problem that other young women have as well.
It's like so: I'm not naturally attracted to people who are good for me.
This directly stems from my personality. People with certain personalities are more prone to have certain good qualities and similarly, certain bad tendencies. As I've often mentioned, I'm an Enneagram Type 4. While this assures me certain special qualities that help me in many ways, such as my creativity, it also means that a major part of my life stems from how I feel. What this means is that I like to exist at very high or very low points because either of these means that I am at the height of my ability to feel and I feel most alive when I am emotionally invested. Obviously, I am attracted to feeling alive.
The problem is that invariably the people who make me feel the most alive are also those who switch from high points to low points quickly- people who are similar to me. There's lots of fireworks, excitement, passion and drama but little stability. Two people of my temperament in a marriage would doubtless lead to a rather explosive relationship with the good times being wonderful and the bad times reflecting nightmares. Yet even though I may have known this somewhere in the back of my mind, that doesn't mean I would have acted on the knowledge.
At some point during our friendship, Heshy lent me the book 'Awareness' by Miriam Adahan which focuses on the Enneagram through the prism of Orthodox Judaism. There was an interesting part there regarding my personality type:
I was thinking that the yeshivish dating system lends itself to creating a trap for young women like me. If they must determine within two or three dates whether to proceed onward and they're not naturally attracted to the man because their personality craves fireworks, excitement and volatile explosions, they'll dismiss him. And that cycle could potentially continue for a long while. It's difficult to realize that what one naturally craves and the person who actually can be your helpmate and lover may be two different things.
I don't think that people should make wholly intellectual decisions regarding whom to marry, just "bite the bullet" as it were without there being any love or affection between them. I do think the key to determining whom to marry lies in self-knowledge. Knowing oneself, one's flaws, weaknesses, strengths, talents and that which you are naturally drawn to, may allow you to question certain assumptions you may have. If you know you have a predilection or preference for certain people who may not actually be ideal for you, it's something you can keep in mind when you date lest you dismiss the person too hastily. Maybe in your case friendship before marriage is an absolute necessity.
Let me also add a caveat. I don't think that people who are single at certain ages are single because they are too particular, picky or are otherwise flawed. I think that approach is largely condescending and unhelpful. Rather, embarking on a journey to know and find out who you are and your natural inclinations may make you aware of issues that you need to focus on carefully, both in your own life and during the dating process, which can only be to the good.
It's like so: I'm not naturally attracted to people who are good for me.
This directly stems from my personality. People with certain personalities are more prone to have certain good qualities and similarly, certain bad tendencies. As I've often mentioned, I'm an Enneagram Type 4. While this assures me certain special qualities that help me in many ways, such as my creativity, it also means that a major part of my life stems from how I feel. What this means is that I like to exist at very high or very low points because either of these means that I am at the height of my ability to feel and I feel most alive when I am emotionally invested. Obviously, I am attracted to feeling alive.
The problem is that invariably the people who make me feel the most alive are also those who switch from high points to low points quickly- people who are similar to me. There's lots of fireworks, excitement, passion and drama but little stability. Two people of my temperament in a marriage would doubtless lead to a rather explosive relationship with the good times being wonderful and the bad times reflecting nightmares. Yet even though I may have known this somewhere in the back of my mind, that doesn't mean I would have acted on the knowledge.
At some point during our friendship, Heshy lent me the book 'Awareness' by Miriam Adahan which focuses on the Enneagram through the prism of Orthodox Judaism. There was an interesting part there regarding my personality type:
- AVOID ROMANTIC RESCUE FANTASIES: All normal people want to love and be loved. But you have an especially intense hunger for love. You dream of the Grand Love- the person who can match the intensity of your passion and understand the depth of your poetic soul! However, if you look for excitement, you are likely to be drawn to someone who is volatile or abusive.
It is better to seek an "average" marriage with someone who is stable and caring. Your challenge is not to chafe at your partner's lack of inspiration and profundity, not to see him or her as mediocre and boring, not to complain that, "She says the stupidest things"; "He can't possibly understand me"; "It's so unromantic to talk about mundane matters."
After marriage, it is important not to blame your spouse when you are depressed. Your bad mood conveys the message to your spouse, "You've failed to make me happy! You've let me down." This attitude isolates you. Unless your spouse is truly abusive, withdraw until this mood passes. Afterwards, show constant appreciation to him/ her for the good traits which s/he does have.
I was thinking that the yeshivish dating system lends itself to creating a trap for young women like me. If they must determine within two or three dates whether to proceed onward and they're not naturally attracted to the man because their personality craves fireworks, excitement and volatile explosions, they'll dismiss him. And that cycle could potentially continue for a long while. It's difficult to realize that what one naturally craves and the person who actually can be your helpmate and lover may be two different things.
I don't think that people should make wholly intellectual decisions regarding whom to marry, just "bite the bullet" as it were without there being any love or affection between them. I do think the key to determining whom to marry lies in self-knowledge. Knowing oneself, one's flaws, weaknesses, strengths, talents and that which you are naturally drawn to, may allow you to question certain assumptions you may have. If you know you have a predilection or preference for certain people who may not actually be ideal for you, it's something you can keep in mind when you date lest you dismiss the person too hastily. Maybe in your case friendship before marriage is an absolute necessity.
Let me also add a caveat. I don't think that people who are single at certain ages are single because they are too particular, picky or are otherwise flawed. I think that approach is largely condescending and unhelpful. Rather, embarking on a journey to know and find out who you are and your natural inclinations may make you aware of issues that you need to focus on carefully, both in your own life and during the dating process, which can only be to the good.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Happy 2-Month Anniversary to Us!
Yay! Mr. Curious and Mrs. Hasid today celebrate our 2-month anniversary. That's exciting. It doesn't preclude me from sometimes waking up and thinking, "There's a man in my room," with a bit of confusion. But hey. That's all to the good.
As an aside, I'm super excited to see "The Fiddler on the Roof" today! Dov (my IDF cousin's brother) is going to be in it and I'm looking forward to seeing him perform.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Jewish Literature Party
Today's assignment:
Compare and contrast Malamud's The Fixer and Kafka's The Trial.
Once you're done with that, compare Proctor of Arthur Miller's The Crucible to Yakov Bok.
Compare and contrast Malamud's The Fixer and Kafka's The Trial.
Once you're done with that, compare Proctor of Arthur Miller's The Crucible to Yakov Bok.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Mikvah Attendants
Finding a good mikvah attendant is like finding a good therapist.
I'm not joking in the least. Not everyone clicks with the first therapist suggested to them. Suddenly, they happen across that one therapist with a golden tongue, the ones whose words are gems of wisdom, and hope suddenly appears on the horizon.
Here's one of those tidbits of useful information they don't teach you in kallah classes- you will simply not mesh with every mikvah attendant that you meet. Their personalities, ages, stringencies and qualifications will vary and thus you will feel more or less comfortable with each of them. The problem is that if you're not aware of this, you may end up feeling that you hate the mitzvah of Mikvah and all the attendant Niddah laws when in fact, it's not the mitzvah you hate but simply the experience you are having.
The aesthetics of the mikvah may be important to you as well. I know they are to me. I hate cramped rooms where I feel that I can barely breathe or move. I love spacious rooms. And I love rooms that are visually pleasing, with baths made of marble and floors of beautiful opal-colored tile. But then there's the flip side. Some mikvaot will provide you with anything you could possibly need in copious quantities- toothpaste, toothbrushes, shampoo, bars of soap, rubbing alcohol, cotton balls, nail clippers, razors, eye-makeup remove and suchlike. Others only offer them in little disposable packets. I have to decide what is more important to me- would I rather have a spacious room with little packets or a less spacious room where I don't worry about exhausting the shampoo supply?
Another question is whether your mikvah will be physically accessible to you. It may be that the mikvaot I have been to have a special section for those who are elderly or physically handicapped. If not, however, there are places I would specifically tell such people never to go because the simple process of stepping into the bathtub would be impossible for them. Rather than having steps leading down to a bathtub or a low bathtub, the baths are so high that one must agilely swing one leg over while carefully balancing on the other and holding on to the silver door handle with an iron grip.
Back to the attendants. I cannot stress how important it is that you feel comfortable with your mivkah attendant. It might even be worthwhile to travel to a mikvah that geographically is farther away if it means that you are happier with the person who escorts you and/or the amenities there. One important factor is age. Some people feel more comfortable with older, experienced mikvah ladies who are already grandmothers. These people figure these women have seen it all and are nurturing, maternal figures who help them along. In contrast, there are those of us who specifically want younger mikvah ladies. We can relate to them more easily, feel more at home with them. Their youth, sweetness and friendliness may be comforting.
Sometimes mikvah attendants don't mean to make you feel uncomfortable and yet they manage to do so anyway. One woman told me that the number of times I dipped was the most she had ever heard of, which made me feel very uncomfortable, as though I were taking up her time. A different woman made sure to put me at my ease and laughed blithely, telling me that she has had women come to the mikvah to dip 52 or 330 times as a segulah. Needless to say, that made me feel a lot better about taking up her time, since compared to that, my tevilah was nothing.
Some mikvah ladies are also very strict and manage to make you feel bad about your preparation if you accidentally forgot to do something. They mean to be helpful when they suggest that you should bring your checklist to the mikvah, for example (most mivkaot have checklists in the rooms anyway, for that matter), but in truth they just make you feel incompetent. Then there are other ladies who make it seem like a fun game: oh, there's just this little speck of dirt, let's see if we can get at it. You're involved in the process rather than being the incompetent person who is causing problems by not having noticed that little particle.
In short, definitely try out different mikvaot and different mikvah attendants- like all people, you probably have a particular style, age bracket and personality with which you mesh best. Take the time to try to find that person- it can really enhance your experience when you do. And if you have any questions about mikvah or if you would like advice regarding where you can find one if you're interested in starting to keep this mitzvah, as always, feel free to ask me.
I'm not joking in the least. Not everyone clicks with the first therapist suggested to them. Suddenly, they happen across that one therapist with a golden tongue, the ones whose words are gems of wisdom, and hope suddenly appears on the horizon.
Here's one of those tidbits of useful information they don't teach you in kallah classes- you will simply not mesh with every mikvah attendant that you meet. Their personalities, ages, stringencies and qualifications will vary and thus you will feel more or less comfortable with each of them. The problem is that if you're not aware of this, you may end up feeling that you hate the mitzvah of Mikvah and all the attendant Niddah laws when in fact, it's not the mitzvah you hate but simply the experience you are having.
The aesthetics of the mikvah may be important to you as well. I know they are to me. I hate cramped rooms where I feel that I can barely breathe or move. I love spacious rooms. And I love rooms that are visually pleasing, with baths made of marble and floors of beautiful opal-colored tile. But then there's the flip side. Some mikvaot will provide you with anything you could possibly need in copious quantities- toothpaste, toothbrushes, shampoo, bars of soap, rubbing alcohol, cotton balls, nail clippers, razors, eye-makeup remove and suchlike. Others only offer them in little disposable packets. I have to decide what is more important to me- would I rather have a spacious room with little packets or a less spacious room where I don't worry about exhausting the shampoo supply?
Another question is whether your mikvah will be physically accessible to you. It may be that the mikvaot I have been to have a special section for those who are elderly or physically handicapped. If not, however, there are places I would specifically tell such people never to go because the simple process of stepping into the bathtub would be impossible for them. Rather than having steps leading down to a bathtub or a low bathtub, the baths are so high that one must agilely swing one leg over while carefully balancing on the other and holding on to the silver door handle with an iron grip.
Back to the attendants. I cannot stress how important it is that you feel comfortable with your mivkah attendant. It might even be worthwhile to travel to a mikvah that geographically is farther away if it means that you are happier with the person who escorts you and/or the amenities there. One important factor is age. Some people feel more comfortable with older, experienced mikvah ladies who are already grandmothers. These people figure these women have seen it all and are nurturing, maternal figures who help them along. In contrast, there are those of us who specifically want younger mikvah ladies. We can relate to them more easily, feel more at home with them. Their youth, sweetness and friendliness may be comforting.
Sometimes mikvah attendants don't mean to make you feel uncomfortable and yet they manage to do so anyway. One woman told me that the number of times I dipped was the most she had ever heard of, which made me feel very uncomfortable, as though I were taking up her time. A different woman made sure to put me at my ease and laughed blithely, telling me that she has had women come to the mikvah to dip 52 or 330 times as a segulah. Needless to say, that made me feel a lot better about taking up her time, since compared to that, my tevilah was nothing.
Some mikvah ladies are also very strict and manage to make you feel bad about your preparation if you accidentally forgot to do something. They mean to be helpful when they suggest that you should bring your checklist to the mikvah, for example (most mivkaot have checklists in the rooms anyway, for that matter), but in truth they just make you feel incompetent. Then there are other ladies who make it seem like a fun game: oh, there's just this little speck of dirt, let's see if we can get at it. You're involved in the process rather than being the incompetent person who is causing problems by not having noticed that little particle.
In short, definitely try out different mikvaot and different mikvah attendants- like all people, you probably have a particular style, age bracket and personality with which you mesh best. Take the time to try to find that person- it can really enhance your experience when you do. And if you have any questions about mikvah or if you would like advice regarding where you can find one if you're interested in starting to keep this mitzvah, as always, feel free to ask me.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Unmasking
Firstly, I love the song "Stand My Ground" by Within Temptation. It's my new theme song.
Late at night
things I thought I'd put behind me
haunt my mind
I just know there's no escape now
once its set its eyes on you
but I won't run, have to stare it in the eye
Stand my ground, I won't give in
No more denying, I gotta face it
Won't close my eyes and hide the truth inside
If I don't make it, someone else will
Stand My Ground
In other news, clearly my masqueraders want to unmask...I'm especially curious about who 'Colors' is because she left an actual peacock feather wrapped and pinned to my front door the other day. Now that's creative. So, a little late but that's all right- Unmasking time.
Late at night
things I thought I'd put behind me
haunt my mind
I just know there's no escape now
once its set its eyes on you
but I won't run, have to stare it in the eye
Stand my ground, I won't give in
No more denying, I gotta face it
Won't close my eyes and hide the truth inside
If I don't make it, someone else will
Stand My Ground
In other news, clearly my masqueraders want to unmask...I'm especially curious about who 'Colors' is because she left an actual peacock feather wrapped and pinned to my front door the other day. Now that's creative. So, a little late but that's all right- Unmasking time.
Sunday, January 09, 2011
Being Single & Finding Meaning
My friend wrote a deeply important, very beautiful post that I highly recommend you read. I think it will especially resonate if you are single, but it will also speak to you if you are simply a member of the Orthodox Jewish community.
Saturday, January 08, 2011
Ophelia
A short story, rated R. Read at your own risk.
She has milky white skin and long black hair that wraps itself around her waist, moving with the water as it ripples gently. She leans back, one languid finger skimming the marble tile, the rest of her body immersed within the translucent water of the porcelain bathtub. She looks like an angel resting. But she is dead. And what is more, she has been violated, raped, and only afterwards was she carefully cleaned and placed within this tub, where she now lies. She has been arranged like a portrait, a painting.
This is not a story about rape. This is a story about the aftermath of rape. This is the story of how I, as a husband, am to understand my life now that she is not in it. Now that she is the subject of a painting which is epic, dazzling in its horror and its beauty. The policemen were astonished by her beauty. She looked as though she were still alive, if not for the bruises on her throat, which are currently purpling, turning a blackish-blue. The red marks on her wrists, where she was either tied or forcibly held down.
The bathwater is still warm. The window is open. The breeze moves the shade and it is that motion which I see as laughing, mocking. He is gone, gone through the window, and the water is still warm.
I sink to the floor and put my head in my hands. The world is spinning.
Who is this man who creates art out of dead bodies? How is it that she seems to have so much grace even in this death? I picture him as an artist, this man, an artist whose medium is death. And violence. But I am trying to block the violence from my mind. I do not want to remember her that way. I do not want to think of the suffering she underwent. I wonder if perhaps this makes me a coward. Perhaps it is disrespectful to her if I do not acknowledge the agony and the fact that I was not here when it happened.
There is so much noise around me. The policemen are busy talking. They are evaluating the crime scene. One asks me whether I feel unwell. I shake my head. The world is spinning, but I am perfectly fine. It is the window that I cannot stand. I put my head down so as to avoid the window. That bright curtain shifting in the wind. It is like a calling card. It calls for my attention.
They probably want to dust for prints, though. I see that on television. That’s usually how it goes. But they don’t describe, on television, the way that the shifting curtain will mock me, the way it will call my name and laugh at me, demonic laughter that rings in my ears. I feel that she has accused me; I feel her voice crying out to me. She is a portrait now, my modern-day Ophelia. She has been transformed.
And I? I have been violated. I feel my manhood slipping off of me. There, it sits on the floor. None of the policemen have noticed. I am alienated from this piece of me. This organ is a weapon and I refuse to have anything to do with it. It is not of me and it will not be again. I see it there, on the floor. It lies limp. But the window curtain still waves.
I lean my head forward and vomit, ruining the prettiness of the picture. I hear the policemen clucking in disgust. I am messing up their crime scene. But I am also saving her. Saving her from becoming his, his portrait, his artistic meaning. She will not belong to him in that way. Yellow spew from my mouth assures her of that. I have assured her of her dignity.
My penis is swimming in the yellow vomit. I feel that this is a just punishment.
The policeman leans forward to examine my eyes. I find it odd that he is not examining my penis, lying there in a pool of vomit. I see it there clearly.
“Are you all right?” he asks me.
Certainly I am. Certainly. Now the picture is gone and she no longer belongs to him.
Only him is me. The other side of me. The side I am willfully struggling not to remember. The pain in my head, the flashes, though; it all means something.
I know it with a certainty that terrifies me. I raped my wife. I laid her carefully in the bath. She is my Ophelia. She is my high art.
But the window. The window is my hope. He left through the window. Perhaps it was not me.
“Can we shut the window?” I ask, my voice unusually high.
“But sir,” the policeman looks at me, entirely confused. He kneels, a show of compassion, and looks at me tenderly, compassionately. Surely I have been shaken by the shock. “The window is not open.”
~
With thanks to/ credited to: The Phantom of the Opera, Lucky by Alice Sebold, the photograph "Ophelia" by Gregory Crewdson which hangs in the Art Institute of Chicago, "Black Swan" and "Private Practice"
She has milky white skin and long black hair that wraps itself around her waist, moving with the water as it ripples gently. She leans back, one languid finger skimming the marble tile, the rest of her body immersed within the translucent water of the porcelain bathtub. She looks like an angel resting. But she is dead. And what is more, she has been violated, raped, and only afterwards was she carefully cleaned and placed within this tub, where she now lies. She has been arranged like a portrait, a painting.
This is not a story about rape. This is a story about the aftermath of rape. This is the story of how I, as a husband, am to understand my life now that she is not in it. Now that she is the subject of a painting which is epic, dazzling in its horror and its beauty. The policemen were astonished by her beauty. She looked as though she were still alive, if not for the bruises on her throat, which are currently purpling, turning a blackish-blue. The red marks on her wrists, where she was either tied or forcibly held down.
The bathwater is still warm. The window is open. The breeze moves the shade and it is that motion which I see as laughing, mocking. He is gone, gone through the window, and the water is still warm.
I sink to the floor and put my head in my hands. The world is spinning.
Who is this man who creates art out of dead bodies? How is it that she seems to have so much grace even in this death? I picture him as an artist, this man, an artist whose medium is death. And violence. But I am trying to block the violence from my mind. I do not want to remember her that way. I do not want to think of the suffering she underwent. I wonder if perhaps this makes me a coward. Perhaps it is disrespectful to her if I do not acknowledge the agony and the fact that I was not here when it happened.
There is so much noise around me. The policemen are busy talking. They are evaluating the crime scene. One asks me whether I feel unwell. I shake my head. The world is spinning, but I am perfectly fine. It is the window that I cannot stand. I put my head down so as to avoid the window. That bright curtain shifting in the wind. It is like a calling card. It calls for my attention.
It laughs at me.
I want to shut the window.
They probably want to dust for prints, though. I see that on television. That’s usually how it goes. But they don’t describe, on television, the way that the shifting curtain will mock me, the way it will call my name and laugh at me, demonic laughter that rings in my ears. I feel that she has accused me; I feel her voice crying out to me. She is a portrait now, my modern-day Ophelia. She has been transformed.
And I? I have been violated. I feel my manhood slipping off of me. There, it sits on the floor. None of the policemen have noticed. I am alienated from this piece of me. This organ is a weapon and I refuse to have anything to do with it. It is not of me and it will not be again. I see it there, on the floor. It lies limp. But the window curtain still waves.
I lean my head forward and vomit, ruining the prettiness of the picture. I hear the policemen clucking in disgust. I am messing up their crime scene. But I am also saving her. Saving her from becoming his, his portrait, his artistic meaning. She will not belong to him in that way. Yellow spew from my mouth assures her of that. I have assured her of her dignity.
My penis is swimming in the yellow vomit. I feel that this is a just punishment.
The policeman leans forward to examine my eyes. I find it odd that he is not examining my penis, lying there in a pool of vomit. I see it there clearly.
“Are you all right?” he asks me.
Certainly I am. Certainly. Now the picture is gone and she no longer belongs to him.
Only him is me. The other side of me. The side I am willfully struggling not to remember. The pain in my head, the flashes, though; it all means something.
I know it with a certainty that terrifies me. I raped my wife. I laid her carefully in the bath. She is my Ophelia. She is my high art.
But the window. The window is my hope. He left through the window. Perhaps it was not me.
“Can we shut the window?” I ask, my voice unusually high.
“But sir,” the policeman looks at me, entirely confused. He kneels, a show of compassion, and looks at me tenderly, compassionately. Surely I have been shaken by the shock. “The window is not open.”
~
With thanks to/ credited to: The Phantom of the Opera, Lucky by Alice Sebold, the photograph "Ophelia" by Gregory Crewdson which hangs in the Art Institute of Chicago, "Black Swan" and "Private Practice"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)