u/patachveamar

It's not in Jastrow or Even-Shoshan. Milog says it means rubber, but that does not fit the context at all. I encountered this word in the Sefaria edition of Ketem Paz by R. Shimon ibn Lavi (written in 16th century Libya, printed in the late 18th century). He's talking about how a particular passage of the Zohar (in 1:31a) has been lost:

ר' אלעזר קפץ בקדמיתא ודרש קול יי' על המים. בהיות האמת הרובור הזה מלוקט מלקט שכחה ופאה. מהחבור הגדול הראשון אשר שמענו שהיה משא מ' גמלים ובעונותינו שרבו אבדנוהו הוא וספרים רבים כמו ספרא דחנוך ספרא דשלמה ספרא דרב המנונא סבא ויותר מהמה זולתם רבים ונכבדים והיה הסבה בזה אורך הגלות וטלטול ישראל ממקום למקום שזה היה סבה שנתמעטו הלבבות וטח עיניהם של אחרונים מראות מהשכיל לבותם בספרים ההם עד שלא היו נפתחים מראש השנה לראש השנה שהיו בעיניהם כדברי הספר החתום אשר יתנו אותו אל יודע ספר לאמר קרא נא זה ואמר לא אוכל כי חתום הוא והיו מניחים הספרים בזוית בתיהם עד אשר בלו ועש אכלם או דלף טורד נפל עליהם וספו תמו מן בלהות ולולי חסדי יי' כי לא תמו בהשאר הראשונים אחריהם ברכה בניהם קמו תחתיהם נתן אלהים בלבם לתור ולבקש ללקוט הנשאר מהספרים ההם יתר הפליטה הנשאר זעיר שם זעיר שם ויצברו אותם מפה ומפה ויחברו ענין אל ענין כפי מסת ידיהם ובדרך זה נעשה החבור הזה הנמצא אצלנו היום ואשר לזאת הסבה לפעמים לא תמצא קשור ענין אל ענין כאשר בתחילה ולפעמים לא נמצא תחילת הענין עם סופו ולא סופו עם תחלתו

Of course native Sumerian disappears from the written record around the demise of Ur III. How long did it survive as a learned language of Mesopotamian high culture? What's the latest datable non-native Sumerian text?

I know that the latest datable cuneiform inscription is an astrological tablet from around 80 CE, but I can't find what language it's written in.

There is a content creator who goes by the name "Rabbi Mordy" who makes content about Jewish apologetics, debunking Christians and Muslims, and I/P politics. He recently got into a tiff with the scholar/academic Dan McClellan over the interpretation of Deut 22:28-29, in which "
Rabbi Mordy claimed that the verse does not refer at all to rape. I found the entire thing extremely odd. His arguments relied entirely on a novel interpretation of the verbs שכב and תפש which I can't find anywhere in any commentary, and I checked dozens of the secondary references linked by Sefaria to Deut 22:28-29. The general thrust of his arguments ran directly contrary to the interpretations of Chazal, not to mention commenters like Rambam, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and R. Adin Steinsaltz z"l to name a few. He mispronounced and stumbled over several Hebrew words in his videos, mixing up שׁ with שׂ and ק with פ in a few places for example. And overall he just did not sound like any rabbi I've ever heard before.

His profile says he is a "Torah / Biblical scholar, historian, and writer", but I can't even find his last name, let alone any of his writings/publications, or where he received smicha. He has no contact information anywhere, either. Is this a real rabbi? Does anyone know who he is and where he got his smicha? What's his last name, even? It seems odd to me that a rabbi and online Jewish apologist would not to advertise their full name, titles and credentials.

Just came across this quote and thought it was rather beautiful:

וגם בלילה לא שכב לבה ולא כבה נרה: הספר הקלסי של הקבלה, חזיון לילה זה של העם העברי, בשפתה וברוחה נברא. ומה שיש בזה מן הפלא, הוא, כי בימי ה"זהר" הלשון הארמית הרי כבר מתה מיתה גמורה בפי העם העברי. ואולי משום כך יפה היתה זו למסתורין כאור החור של הלבנה המתה לבעלי חלומות

"And even at night its [Aramaic's] heart did not sleep and its candle was not extinguished: the classic text of the Kabbalah, that nocturnal vision of the Hebrew people, was created in its language and spirit. And what is so wondrous about it is this: that in the days of the Zohar, the Aramaic tongue had already died a complete death in the mouths of the Hebrew people. Perhaps it was for this reason that it was meet for the mysteries, like the pale light of the dead moon for the dreamers." - Haim Nahman Bialik, in his essay HaSefer HaIvri, p. 47, 1959.

(He was of course mistaken--Aramaic is still a living vernacular among some Jewish communities, although it is severely endangered. But the quote is beautiful nonetheless!)

I have a linguistics BA but I know absolutely nothing about coding. I'm working on a personal project and would like to learn some coding skills for it. Specifically I need to create a concordance of rather large text. Eventually I would hope to add morphological and lexical glosses to the words, but for now just having a digital concordance (list of words, their frequencies, where they occur) would be massive. Where can I learn the coding skills needed for this kind of lexicographic/ text corpus analysis? [EDIT: The text is in Aramaic, if that makes any difference.]

https://musescore.com/user/32748350/scores/36439403

Been out of practice for many years. Decided to start writing music again, starting with some practice work on my transcription and rearrangement skills. This is a piano arrangement for one of my favorite works by one of my favorite 20th century composers, Bird's Lament by Moondog. I need to add more dynamics.

I wanted to make this post for Tu B'Av, but life got in the way. I have had cause to reflect on the nature of love, especially love of G-d, and felt like Tu B'Av was appropriate. Sorry for the lateness! :)

The first mitzvah of the Torah is not found until Exodus 12:2, the mitzvah of Rosh Chodesh:

>הַחֹ֧דֶשׁ הַזֶּ֛ה לָכֶ֖ם רֹ֣אשׁ חֳדָשִׁ֑ים רִאשׁ֥וֹן הוּא֙ לָכֶ֔ם לְחׇדְשֵׁ֖י הַשָּׁנָֽה׃
"This month shall mark for you the beginning of the months; it shall be the first of the months of the year for you." (JPS)

But Rashbi in the Zohar HaKadosh explains that there is a hidden mitzvah--in Aramaic, פִקּוּדָא piqquda--contained in the first word of Genesis 1:1, בְּרֵאשִׁית be-reshit 'in the beginning'. Zohar I:11b:

>בראשית ברא אלקי״ם הדא היא פקודא קדמא״ה דכלא ואקרי פקודא דא יראת ה׳ דאקרי ראשית דכתיב ראשית חכמה יראת יי׳. יראת יי׳ ראשית דעת. בגין דמלה דא ראשית אקרי ודא איהי תרעא לאעלא גו מהימנותא ועל פקודא דא אתקיים כל עלמא
(Gen 1:1) "In the beginning G-d created." This is the First Commandment of all, and that commandment is "Fear of Hashem", which is called "Beginning", as is written, (Psalm 111:10) "The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the LORD", (Proverbs 1:7) "The beginning of knowledge is the fear of the LORD." Because this word is called Beginning, and it is the gate to enter into faith, and because of this commandment the whole word is sustained.

Rashbi links Reshit with Yir'at Hashem--Fear of G-d--through the appearance of the word reshit in Psalm 111:10 and Proverbs 1:7. There is sefirotic symbolism at work here and in the passages following, but I am choosing to ignore them here, since the wisdom of this section can be appreciated even exoterically without appealing to Kabbalistic metaphysics. Rashbi is saying that, on a hidden level, even though the first exoterically revealed mitzvah is Rosh Chodesh, the first mitzvah revealed to the Kabbalist is the commandment to fear the Creator, as revealed in the Torah from the very first word. From this commandment, all the others depend. It sustains the world, as in the passage above. A few sentences later, he says:

>ודא עקרא ויסודא לכל שאר פקודין דאורייתא מאן דנטיר יראה נטיר כלא לא נטיר יראה לא נטיר פקודי אורייתא דהא דא תרעא דכלא
And it is the root and foundation of all the rest of the commandments of the Torah. Whoever keeps Fear keeps them all; whoever does not keep Fear does not keep the commandments of the Torah. For it is the gate of everything.

Since the Kabbalists are called to obey the mitzvot, it would seem that Rashbi is saying that the single most important quality of all for a Kabbalist to cultivate is Fear of Hashem, for all matters of faith emerge from it. Yet this is a troubling idea, is it not? Isn't fear a negative emotion based on anxiety and the anticipation of harm?

But Rashbi describes that this is not true Fear of Hashem. In the same section, he says that there are those who fear G-d because they fear for their lives, their property, their children, their health, their years, and there are those who fear G-d because they fear the punishments of That World and Gehinnom. Rashbi says that these are not at all true Fear: תרין אלין לאו עיקרא דיראה אינון ושרשא "these two [types of fear] are not the root nor source of Fear." He says that one who fears G-d for the sake of punishments and loss actually transgresses the commandment to fear Hashem, and ch"v strengthens the Other Side, what he calls the יראה רעה "evil fear" below. The true Fear of Hashem which the Kabbalist should cultivate is something much different. True Fear is:

>למדחל ב״נ למאריה בגין דאיהו רב ושליט עקרא ושרשא דכל עלמין וכלא קמיה כלא חשיבין כמה דאתמר וכל דיירי ארעא כלא חשיבין ולשואה רעותיה בההוא אתר דאקרי יראה
that a human being should fear his Master, because He is ruler and sovereign, root and source of all worlds. Everything before Him is considered as naught, according to what is said, (Daniel 4:32) "And all the inhabitants of the earth are considered as naught." And to set his mind in that place which is called Fear.

This is the Fear of G-d that the Kabbalist should strive towards. Not fear of pain and punishments, but something more akin to awe, majesty: to know that all that exists is as naught before the One. It is, I think, like the fear that I feel when I see a great mountain towering in the horizon, or how I imagine an astronaut must feel looking down upon the little blue marble from space. The feeling of one's own smallness in comparison to something vast and awesome, that feeling of wonder, amazement, astonishment. That is the Fear of G-d which we are commanded to keep, hidden in the first word of the Torah.

Rashbi could have ended there--he has, after all, revealed the root of all the mitzvot. But he continues, revealing a second commandment hidden within the Torah:

>פקודא תניינא. דא איהי פקודא דפקודא דיראה אתאחדת בה ולא נפקא מינה לעלמין ואיהי אהב״ה למרחם בר נש למאריה רחימו שלים. ומאן איהו רחימו שלים דא אהבה רבה דכתיב התהלך לפני והיה תמים שלים ברחימות
The second commandment. This is the commandment with which the commandment of Fear is joined, never leaving it--namely, Love: that a human being should love his Master with Perfect Love." And what is Perfect Love? It is the Great Love, as is said, (Genesis 17:1) "Walk before Me and be perfect"--Perfect in Love.

Here again, Rashbi has discovered a hidden commandment in Genesis, before the exoteric revelation of the mitzvah of Rosh Chodesh in Exodus 12:2. And it parallels the first commandment he revealed: if Fear is the root of all the commandments, the second root is Love, and the two never leave one another. Rabbi Eleazar calls it a אהבה שלימתא בשלימו דתרין סטרין "Perfect Love, in two-sided perfection".

Like how Rashbi explains that there is a false kind of fear of Hashem, along comes his son Eleazar to explain that there is a false kind of love of Hashem. He says (Zohar I:12a):

>אית מאן דרחים ליה מגו דאית ליה עותרא אורכא דיומין בנין סחרניה שליט על שנאוי אחרוי מתתקנן ליה ומגו כך רחים ליה ואי להאי יהא בהפוכא ויהדר עליה קב״ה גלגולא דדינא קשיא יהא שניא ליה ולא ירחם ליה כלל ובג״ך רחימו דא לאו איהו אהבה דאית ליה עקרא
There is one who loves Him because he has wealth and long life, children surrounding him, dominant over his enemies, his ways prepared for him, and for this reason he loves Him. If there should be a reversal for this [person], and the Holy Blessed One should turn the wheel of harsh judgment against him, he would hate Him and not love him at all. And therefore this "love" is not a love which has root.

So, just as Rashbi taught us above that one must not fear G-d from a place of hatred for punishments, so too is the Perfect Love of G-d not rooted in selfish appreciation for the good things He has given us. Rabbi Eleazar instructs us sharply that the commandment to love G-d extends:

>אפילו הוא נטיל נשמתך מינך דא איהו רחימו שלים דהוי בתרין סטרין
even if He should take your life from you--that is the Perfect Love which has two sides.

Between these two teachings, we have learned the most important lesson about the Kabbalist's relation to Hashem: It is utterly selfless. We do not fear G-d because of punishment and we do not love G-d for the sake of reward. The Kabbalist's service to Hashem is a state of unconditional surrender to the One, accepting both the good and bad that comes into one's life. Rashbi and Rabbi Eleazar have given us a Kabbalistic interpretation of the principle passed down by the Sages in the Mishnah in Berakhot: מברך על הרעה מעין הטובה, ועל הטובה מעין הרעה "One blesses the bad just as the good, and the good just as the bad." It is a teaching of radical acceptance of Hashem's mystery and His sovereignty, unselfish, unconcerned with one's own ego. It truly is as Daniel said: "And all who dwell on the earth are considered as naught" before Him.

So much of modern Kabbalah is concerned with what the Kabbalah can "do for you". Teachers of certain modern iterations promise that it can make you more productive, more peaceful, more 'powerful' ח״ו. But these teachings forget the lessons of Rabbi Shim'on bar Yochai and Rabbi Eleazar: The Kabbalah is not about "you" at all. It is about the Fear and Perfect Love of the One, selfless and unconditional. Everything else flows from these commandments, which are joined together and never leave one another. If one forgets them, one loses the entire point.

Throughout his writings, Gershom Scholem repeatedly refers to "gnostic" elements in Jewish mysticism, especially in its purported connection with the Sefer HaBahir and the early Kabbalah. Considering how much the scholarly understanding of gnosticism has evolved since his time, how have more recent scholars responded to Scholem's views on the relationship between gnosticism and the Bahir/Kabbalah?

The plain sense of the Hebrew Bible proscribes the death penalty for numerous offenses. Yet, Jewish law (halakhah), as described in the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, places so great a number of caveats, evidentiary burdens, and opportunities for remission, that it is difficult for me to imagine the halakhic death penalty ever actually being carried out. Has there ever been a documented case of someone actually being sentenced to death by a rabbinic court operating under the auspices of Talmudic jurisprudence?

Obviously Qumran itself was destroyed and abandoned during the First Jewish-Roman War. But the Qumran texts themselves, as far as I understand, do not contain very much material composed during the 1st century CE. So the Qumran community seemingly reached a literary nadir several decades prior to its destruction. Why were the final decades of the Qumran community in the 1st century seemingly so much less literarily active than during the 2nd-1st centuries BCE?

I'm a professional language teacher (Classical Hebrew & Aramaic), and I sometimes work with students who have some previous knowledge of the language(s) through self-study, among whom I have noticed certain common patterns and errors. When my time with students comes to an end, if they do not pursue further coursework, they will often be left to improve their language skills through self-study. My undergraduate training in TESOL has led me to value scientific insights into language pedagogy. I want to be able to provide my departing students with advice for self-study that is grounded in modern scientific research on effective techniques among self-taught language learners. I also want to gain a better theoretical understanding of the processes that may have led my self-taught students into some of their errors, in order to be a better teacher to them. I would ask a language learning subreddit, but I suspect the answers I receive there would be anecdotal. I'm looking for peer-reviewed research on the relative effectiveness of various autodidact techniques based on trials or (less preferably) case studies. Thank you all, and have a nice day!

Trying to decide if I want to study with them. What was your experience like? I'm especially wondering 1) Did you read texts in English or in Hebrew & Aramaic? (I like to read in the original languages) and 2) Did the learning feel as rigorous as a traditional Yeshivah?

In 1925, Gershom Scholem z"l wrote a letter to Hayyim Bialik (published in 1976, pp. 59-63) in which he expressed his desire for a dictionary of the Zohar. He began work on such a project, but he never completed it, and to this day no one else has finished the task. But Scholem's card index for his planned Zoharic dictionary has been scanned and digitized for the public by the National Library of Israel, viewable here.

Independent scholar Judith Barrett z"l had been working with the help of Prof. Justin J. Lewis of the University of Manitoba to complete Scholem's dictionary, along with a planned grammar of Zoharic Aramaic to supplement Menaḥem Kaddari's grammar of the Zohar (PhD thesis, published 1976 [in Hebrew]). She passed away in 2022 with her dictionary and grammar still unfinished, but the final edition of her dictionary spans 196 pages, and was apparently near completion. The unfinished drafts of her work, both her dictionary and her grammatical notes, are still preserved here on her WordPress page.

Yehuda Liebes's 1977 dissertation [in Hebrew] on the close study of 20 roots and their meanings and usages in the Zohar is available online here.

Daniel C. Matt, lead translator of the Pritzker Edition of the Zohar, compiled a dictionary of difficult Zoharic terms that he used as a private reference while tranlating. He has helpfully uploaded it for free, available on his website here. Headwords are written in Latin transliteration, rather than in Aramaic script.

Boaz Huss has published a study [in Hebrew] of the Spanish and Arabic loanwords in the Zohar, available here on his academia[.]edu page. This is a critical edition of an old Hebrew text that has been published many times under various titles and attributed to different authors.

Gerrit Bos has published a series of articles titled "Neologisms and Other Difficult Terms in Sefer ha-Zohar: Novel Interprations". Currently he's published 6 entries in this series. All are available to read on his academia.edu page here.

There are some volumes available on hebrewbooks.org, all in Hebrew, written between the 17th and 19th centuries that attempt to describe some of the Zohar's vocabulary. They include: Imrei Binah by R. Isaachar Baer of Krimnetz (1611), Yesha Yah by Isaiah ben Eliezer Hayyim Nizza (1637), VaYe'esof David in addendum to Qadmut Sefer haZohar by David Luria (1837), and Sefer haMa'arikh by Menahem ben Judah de Lonzano (1853).

Andrea Gondos has an article Decoding the Language of the Zohar: Lexicons to Kabbalah in Early Modernity, available here, but requiring a subscription to the AJS Review. She discusses the history of attempts to study the language and vocabulary of the Zohar. In it she mentions a number of additional works which are not mentioned elsewhere in this post.

Some of these resources I had already been aware of, and some were first made known to me by Justin J. Lewis and Judith Barrett z"l, whom I never had the pleasure to meet, in their chapter "A 'Mind-Blowing' Project: Zoharic Aramaic for Beginners" published in Harry Fox, Daniel Maoz and Tirzah Meacham, eds. From Something to Nothing: Jewish Mysticism in Contemporary Canadian Jewish Studies. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019, pp. 349-373 (available here). I hope that others here may benefit from and admire Judith's work as I have.