We are living in a world of illusion

Scustin Bieburr

Baby baybee baybee UUUGH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
20,928
Reputation
10,028
Daps
119,491
I've found it interesting how man made ideas are treated like forces of nature like the economy or interest rates.

Its wild how people will kill and die for these things that are literally a fiction that we recognize as such.
 

DoubleClutch

Superstar
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
16,539
Reputation
-2,230
Daps
29,984
Reppin
NULL
Got two new questions for @Koichos

First is pretty simple but just annoying how I recently was talking to a Hebrew Israelites and they kept going on about names and proper names to use (as they seem to obsessively focus on :beli: ) to the extent they were afraid to even say the word “god” or “Jesus” in English:snoop:

Anyways the question is, what is the word “YAHUAH” in Jewish context

what does it derive from and what’s the translation back to in Hebrew if it even does work that way

Is that word/title even in the Torah and was it used (said) by the Israelites instead of YHWH similar to Jehovah or Yah, Yaweh, etc.... and what does it matter today?

If you ask me it’s not even a big deal. But people are so caught up on language these days and
I know your an expert on language so....:manny:
 
  • Dap
Reactions: MMS

MMS

Intensity Integrity Intelligence
Staff member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
26,309
Reputation
3,646
Daps
31,275
Reppin
Auburn, AL
Got two new questions for @Koichos

First is pretty simple but just annoying how I recently was talking to a Hebrew Israelites and they kept going on about names and proper names to use (as they seem to obsessively focus on :beli: ) to the extent they were afraid to even say the word “god” or “Jesus” in English:snoop:

Anyways the question is, what is the word “YAHUAH” in Jewish context

what does it derive from and what’s the translation back to in Hebrew if it even does work that way

Is that word/title even in the Torah and was it used (said) by the Israelites instead of YHWH similar to Jehovah or Yah, Yaweh, etc.... and what does it matter today?

If you ask me it’s not even a big deal. But people are so caught up on language these days and
I know your an expert on language so....:manny:
there are two ways to look at language, in the normal way like most folk in here

or in an occultic way: say "x" and hopefully get "y"...its an illness of israel specifically that they teach others without thinking about it (kabbalistic thought processess)

an interesting paradox i showed another poster is in genesis 3 here regarding the identity of "the serpent" with respect to Rahab I mentioned earlier in this thread

The Hebrew אשה זונה (ishah zonah), used to describe Rahab in Joshua 2:1, literally means "a prostitute woman".[6] In rabbinic texts, however, she is explained as being an "innkeeper," based on the Aramaic Targum: פונדקאית. Rahab's name is presumably the shortened form of a sentence name rāḥāb-N, "the god N has opened/widened (the womb?)".
as I said before, its tricky :banderas:

behold Rahab's two spies @Koichos And :mjgrin:
 
Last edited:

Koichos

Pro
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
1,567
Reputation
-792
Daps
2,155
Reppin
K'lal Yisraʾel
Got two new questions for @Koichos

First is pretty simple but just annoying how I recently was talking to a Hebrew Israelites and they kept going on about names and proper names to use (as they seem to obsessively focus on :beli: ) to the extent they were afraid to even say the word “god” or “Jesus” in English:snoop:

Anyways the question is, what is the word “YAHUAH” in Jewish context

what does it derive from and what’s the translation back to in Hebrew if it even does work that way

Is that word/title even in the Torah and was it used (said) by the Israelites instead of YHWH similar to Jehovah or Yah, Yaweh, etc.... and what does it matter today?
'YAHUAH' is not a real name, but know-it-alls and ignoramuses insist on using it because it artificially begins with the letters Y, a, h. It seems to me that some people have an unhealthy obsession about 'names'. I remember when these nutcases used to go around claiming the 'original Hebrew name of messiah' to be 'Yaohushuwa' (or any of the several other similarly impossible and absurd transliterations).

There is a very good reason why it is [normally] forbidden to pronounce the Sacred Name: it is DANGEROUS. The Sacred Name was spoken on [at least] three occasions in the T'na"ch and in all three instances the consequences to the people it was spoken against were disastrous (Sh'moth 2:12, Sh'muʾel ʾAlaf 17:45, M'lochim Béth 2:24)—this is why the correct vowels are kept a closely-guarded secret.

It appears from B'reshıth 18:3, 18:27 and 18:31 that ʾAvrohom ʾOvinu was already addressing Hashem as אֲדֹנָי, which is how the Sacred Name is [normally] vocalized. Indeed, our Sages report that when the Head Kohen uttered the Sacred Name as part of the Confessional Service on Yom Kippur, he used to muffle his voice so that the congregation should not be able to hear how the Name was pronounced!

Finally, our commentator Rash"i, quoting from our Sages of the past, notes that the word lʿolom ('forever') in Sh'moth 3:15 is unusually written לעלם instead of the standard spelling לעולם, so that it can also be read as לְעַלֵּם lʿallem ('to conceal'), which would make the verse in chapter 3 of Sh'moth effectively say: זֶה־שְּׁמִי לְעַלֵּם 'this
[i.e., the Sacred Name—the four letters י״ה ו״ה] is my Name which is to be concealed'.


I know your an expert on language so....:manny:
Wow! Thank you for your kind words, but I lay no claim to any expertise in linguistics.
 

Koichos

Pro
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
1,567
Reputation
-792
Daps
2,155
Reppin
K'lal Yisraʾel
there are two ways to look at language, in the normal way like most folk in here

or in an occultic way: say "x" and hopefully get "y"...its an illness of israel specifically that they teach others without thinking about it (kabbalistic thought processess)
In other words, you can't answer the questions—but thereagain, they weren't even addressed to you! When a post is addressed directly and explicitly to me, by name, it is not very polite of you to jump in with both feet and reply to it without giving me a chance to do so.

From the wisdom of our great Sages of antiquity:

חָכָם אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁגָּדוֹל מִמֶּֽנּוּ בְּחׇכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן
וְאֵינוֹ נִכְנָס לְתֽוֹךְ דִּבְרֵי חֲבֵרוֹ
...וְאֵינוֹ נִבְהָל לְהָשִׁיב
A wise person does not speak before another who is greater than he in wisdom or in importance;
he does not interrupt when another is speaking;
and he is not hasty in replying...

The passage goes on to list four more דְּבָרִים ('things' or attributes) before ending with וְחִלּוּפֵיהֶן בְּגוֹלָם ('but the opposite [is true] in a גּוֹלֶם').

Why does גּוֹ
לֶם suddenly change to גּוֹלָם in this passage? The vowels פַּתַּח (or אַ) and סֶגּוֹל (or אֶ) regularly change to קָמַץ (or אָ) to indicate a pause (i.e., at the end of a clause or sentence). For example, No'ah's eldest son was called יֶפֶת (B'reshιth 7:13, 9:23, 9:27, 10:2, 10:21) but his name is pointed with a קָמַץ and changes to יָפֶת whenever it coincides with a linguistic pause (as it does in ibid., 5:32, 6:10, 9:18, 10:1). The pausal form even occurs in the opening verse of the T'na"ch: אֶרֶץ is 'Earth', but the first verse ends with הָאָרֶץ and not הָאֶרֶץ.

There are also examples of short vowels (אַ, אֶ) changing to long ones (אָ) in our blessings before drinking wine and before eating bread:

בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה׳ . . . בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגָּפֶן׃
You are blessed, Hashem . . . who creates the vine's fruit.
and
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה׳ . . . הַמֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ׃
You are blessed, Hashem . . . who brings food out of the ground.
—instead of בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגֶּפֶן and הַמֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאֶרֶץ.

an interesting paradox i showed another poster is in genesis 3 here regarding the identity of "the serpent" with respect to Rahab I mentioned earlier in this thread
The spurious chapter-division at 'Genesis 3' (which, incidentally, occurs in the middle of a sentence) obfuscates a pun, a play on words.

The Hebrew אשה זונה (ishah zonah), used to describe Rahab in Joshua 2:1, literally means "a prostitute woman".[6] In rabbinic texts, however, she is explained as being an "innkeeper," based on the Aramaic Targum: פונדקאית. Rahab's name is presumably the shortened form of a sentence name rāḥāb-N, "the god N has opened/widened (the womb?)".
Hardly! פּוּנְדְּקָאִית is Hebrew, not Aramaic. The term used to describe Rohov in Y'hoshuʿa 2:1 is זוֹנָה, which is derived from the verb-stem זון (to feed) and means 'a [female] innkeeper', whereas the seemingly identical word זוֹנָה in B'reshıth 34:31, 38:15 et al., is derived from the verb-stem זנה (to wander, go astray, commit offense) and means 'a prostitute'. Furthermore, Yonothon ban ʿUzziyʾel (floruit late first century BCE) translates זוֹנָה in his tarğum on Y'hoshuʿa 2:1 (the officially recognized tarğum of the N'viʾim) using the Aramaic פּוּנְדְּקִיתָא.
 
  • Dap
Reactions: MMS

Koichos

Pro
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
1,567
Reputation
-792
Daps
2,155
Reppin
K'lal Yisraʾel
@Koichos I know you read what I wrote earlier, I'm alittle dismayed that you dont see any parallels yet or express deeper interest in Sullam...
I wasn't moved...

something I meditated on that is building off of the "female assembly" post and its link to Cain and Abel with respect to the history of the Old Testament. A lady in a group that I follow said that the last day to some would be like a sledgehammer. The first story that came to mind was of Sisera and the battle in Judges 5 also called "The Song of Deborah and Barak" or "The Song of Bee and Lightning"
I have never heard שִׁירַת דְּבוֹרָה וּבָרָק referred to as 'The Song of Bee and Lightning' because, in truth, ordinary personal names in Hebrew do not really have 'meanings'. In ancient times, a Jewish newborn would often (note: often, not always) be given a name that was based on, or a derivative of, a comment that had been made by the mother or father, or even by the midwife (for example, in B'reshıth 38:29), to reflect something that had happened at, or around the same time as, the birth; e.g., פֶּרֶץ was given his name (B'reshıth 38:29) because the midwife exclaimed: מַה־פָּרַצְתָּ עָלֶיךָ פֶּרֶץ ('What a strong effort you made!')—but פֶּרֶץ actually 'means' a breach, or possibly an opening.

Similarly, the first man to be called יְהוֹשֻעַ (occasionally spelled in full יְהוֹשׁוּעַ) was originally called הוֹשֵׁעַ and Moshah changed his name to יְהוֹשֻעַ as a prayer when he (i.e., יְהוֹשֻעַ) was dispatched as one of the Twelve Explorers to take a first look at the Land of K'naʿan (the prayer being יָהּ יוֹשִׁיעֲךָ מֵעֲצַת מְרַגְלִים 'May Yohh rescue you from the other explorers' counsel'). So, Moshah gave his [eventual] successor the name יְהוֹשֻעַ based on the words of his prayer יָהּ יוֹשִׁיעֲךָ (meaning 'May Yohh rescue you..'), but the word does not actually mean this. Have you ever heard the joke about the native North American who was given the name 'Two Dogs Mating'? Well, this is quite similar.

רָחֵל means a 'ewe' (i.e., a female sheep); but was Yaʿaqov's favorite wife—the mother of Yosef and Bin'yomin—a sheep? דְּבוֹרָה means a 'bee', but did the sixth Judge of Yisroʾel (although only the fourth in the book Shof'ṭim) who defeated the K'naʿani king Yovin's general Sis'roʾ at Mount Tovor (Shof'ṭim 4:4ff) live in a hive and make honey? (D'voroh was the sixth Judge because Moshah (Sh'moth 18:13) and Y'hoshuʿa also held the status of 'Judges'; I cannot find any verse that explicitly associates Y'hoshuʿa with 'judging' but, as he was preceeded by a 'Judge' and followed by a long sequence of leaders called 'Judges', it is reasonable to assume that he, too, was a Judge.)


Now look here:
According to the Talmud, Jael engaged in sexual intercourse with Sisera seven times, but because she was attempting to exhaust him in order to kill him, her sin was for Heaven's sake and therefore praiseworthy
One need not look further than the T'na"ch itself (Shof'ṭim 5:27), where it says that Sis'roʾ went down בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ (lit., 'between her legs').

Also according to the Midrash,[17] Sisera had previously conquered every country against which he had fought. His voice was so strong that, when he called loudly, the most solid wall would shake and the wildest animal would fall dead. Deborah was the only one who could withstand his voice and not be stirred from her place. Sisera caught fish enough in his beard when bathing in the Kishon to provision his whole army, and thirty-one kings followed Sisera merely for the opportunity of drinking, or otherwise using, the waters of Israel.[13]
The keyword here is 'according to the Midrash'. Midrosh is not p'shoṭ (the actual meaning), but d'rush (sermons derived from, or based on, it). You ought to know better than to use midrosh to derive the meaning of a text as midrosh is never meant to be taken too literally; it is essentially an amazing exaggeration (or 'flight of fancy') intended to teach some supplementary message. This is why, for example, prophecy, can only be derived from a text's p'shoṭ, not d'rush. You must understand that these 'interpretations' are all at the d'rush level.

the real controvery in the bible exists between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 why that is...I still dont comprehend
For starters, although there is more than one account, there was only one sequence of events. Secondly, the first Hebrew division of our Holy Scriptures starts at B'reshıth 1:1 and ends at B'reshıth 2:3; the chapter breaks are arbitrary inventions and, at any rate, non-Jewish. The first four Hebrew divisions of the book B'reshıth—as regards the chapter-division referencing system—are 1:1-2:3, 2:4-3:21, 3:22-4:26 and 5:1-6:8; accordingly, you will see that account (i., 1:1-2:3) of Man's creation occurs in the first division, account (ii., 2:4-4:26) occurs in the second and third divisions, and account (iii., 5:1-5:2) occurs in the first two p'suqim (that is, verses) of the fourth division.

Many people (myself included!!) have never understood why we continue to duplicate in T'na"ch editions printed by Jews the spurious chapter breaks between the verses numbered 'B'reshıth 2:25' & 'B'reshıth 3:1', and between the verses numbered 'M'lochim ʾAlaf 22:54' & 'M'lochim Béth 1:1'—both of which are right in the middle of their respective paragraphs and the first of which is even in the middle of a sentence! There are many other examples of this kind of thing, too. Take a look at the following picture, which is a scan of the last four lines of page 3 (containing B'reshıth 2:23b-3:1a) of the standard T'na"ch edition published by Koren Publishers Ltd, Y'rusholayim:


VAbYo3h.jpg

This extract contains the last couple verses of 'chapter 2' and part of the first verse of 'chapter 3' of B'reshıth, the first book of the Bible. Can you spot where 'chapter 2' ends and 'chapter 3' begins? I very much doubt it, because the 'chapters' do not exist in the Hebrew text. But there is an even greater deception at work here: I bet you were not aware that there is a Hebrew 'play on words', a 'pun', created by the repeated use of the same word (עָרוּם) in two very different senses in the two verses (עָרוּם - plural עֲרוּמִּים - means 'naked' in 2:25 and 'sneaky' or 'crafty' in 3:1), which very strongly demonstrates that the two verses numbered 'B'reshıth 2:25' and 'B'reshıth 3:1' are linked:
:וַיִּהְיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם עֲרוּמִּים הָאָדָם וְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא יִתְבֹּשָׁשׁוּ: וְהַנָּחָשׁ הָיָה עָרוּם מִכֹּל חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה ה׳ אֱלֹקִים וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־הָאִשָּׁה אַף כִּי־אָמַר אֱלֹקִים לֹא תֹאכְלוּ מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן
25Now they were both ʿarummim [plural of ʿorum] – the man and his woman – and they were not sexually inhibited; 1but the nohosh ['snake'] was more ʿorum than any other wild animal that Hashem-ʾAlohim had made, and [so] it said to the woman, 'Did ʾAlohim really say you are not to eat from any of the tree [sic] in the Garden?'
Not only is it impossible to bring this point out in a translation, but the pun is further obfuscated by the separation of 2:25 and 3:1 into two separate artificial 'chapters', which is concealed by inserting the chapter-divisions between the two halves of the sentence (and the two verses are one continuous sentence: 25Now the man and his woman were both naked but they were without any sexual inhibitions, 1and so the snake said to the woman...; in the Hebrew, verse 3:1 reads as an explanation of why the 'snake' behaved as it did). And yet, even without knowledge of the pun, it can be seen that the logical end occurs at B'reshıth 2:24, and a new subject begins with verse 25.

:ohhh:
to me, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil has to do with gorem philosophy
That passage is grammatically very difficult to translate into English accurately, without the text appearing somewhat clumsy.
 
  • Dap
Reactions: MMS

Koichos

Pro
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
1,567
Reputation
-792
Daps
2,155
Reppin
K'lal Yisraʾel
@Marks @Koichos

One more off the last post is the name "Deborah" most places say it means Bee, but here which i used for the "chaotic set theory" post this site says it means "To formalize"
The noun דְּבוֹרָה ('bee') is derived from the verb-stem דבר ('speak'), which is virtually synonymous in the T'na"ch with the verb-stem אמר ('say'), except that דבר is usually intransitive and אמר is usually transitive. However, that is not to say that the verb אמר can only be used transitively (i.e., to say); it can also sometimes be used intransitively, with the sense of to speak. For example, the text of B'reshıth: 4:8,
וַיֹּאמֶר קַיִן אֶל־הֶבֶל אָחִיו וַיְהִי בִּהְיוֹתָם בַּשָּׂדֶה וַיָּקָם קַיִן אֶל־הֶבֶל אָחִיו וַיַּהַרְגֵהוּ׃
Then Qayin spoke to his brother Haval and it happened, when they were [alone together] in the countryside, that Qayin attacked his brother Haval and killed him.

Another seemingly anomalous use of the verb אמר occurs in Sh'moth 2:14
...וַיֹּאמֶר מִי שָׂמְךָ לְאִישׁ שַׂר וְשֹׁפֵט עָלֵינוּ הַלְהָרְגֵנִי אַתָּה אֹמֵר כַּאֲשֶׁר הָרַגְתָּ אֶת־הַמִּצְרִי
Then he [the ʿIvri] retorted, 'Who made you a man [Moshah was then still only a boy]—a prince and a ruler over us? Are you going to speak to kill me, just like you killed that Egyptian?...'
The second part of the quoted speech in Sh'moth 2:14 is difficult to translate because it includes a vernacular usage—הַלְהָרְגֵנִי אַתָּה אֹמֵר—that translates literally as 'is it to kill me you speak?' It is understood from this rather odd phrasing that Moshah had killed the Egyptian by pronouncing the Four-Lettered Divine Title at him (this is one of [at least] three occasions in the T'na"ch where the Sacred Title was was used in this manner—two other instances of disastrous consequences can be found in Sh'muʾel ʾAlaf 17:45 & M'lochim Béth 2:24).

Similarly, there is an example of the verb דבר being used
transitively in N'hamyoh 13:24 where it is written

וּבְנֵיהֶם חֲצִי מְדַבֵּר אַשְׁדּוֹדִית וְאֵינָם מַכִּירִים לְדַבֵּר יְהוּדִית וְכִלְשׁוֹן עַם וָעָם׃
And as for their children—half of them spoke ʾAshdodhith [the language of ʾAshdodh] and did not even know how to speak Hebrew [lit., 'Jewish'], and [it was the same] with the language of every other people.

The amazing name Deborah: meaning and etymology

An indepth look at the meaning and etymology of the awesome name Deborah. We'll discuss the original Hebrew, plus the words and names Deborah is related to, plus the occurences of this name in the Bible.
www.abarim-publications.com

דבר​

The verb דבר (dabar) means to formalize: to deliberately establish and pronounce something's name or definition. This causes the thing to become "real" in the mind of whoever understands this word, name or definition, and this in turn explains why all of creation was spoken into being, and Man in turn "named" all the animals by their name and finally his Wife by hers (Genesis 2:19-23). This principle sits at the base of nominal reasoning and thus human awareness and ultimately Information Technology.

Noun דבר (dabar) means word. It also means "thing" since the naming of a thing causes the experienced reality of the thing. All thus created "things" together form the whole of experienceable reality, which in turn is called the Word of God.

Noun דבר (deber) describes any deadly pestilence, which is a "word" that breaks unstable compounds apart. In nature this occurs via the Weak Nuclear Force. The ability of unstable compounds to break apart sits at the heart of all progress and thus all reality.

The rare noun דבר (dober), refers to a pasture; probably a well-defined fenced-in field upon which sheep graze. Figuratively this word obviously refers to some specific Holy Book from which a community feeds (the books of the Bible originated as separate works, with their separate adherers). Noun דברה (dibra) means matter or issue, and the similar noun דבורה (deborah) describes the bee (this probably because bees make honey, and "milk and honey" denote essential sustenance). The noun דביר (debir) was a nickname for the Holy of Holies and means "place of the word".

The noun מדבר (midbar) literally means "place of wording" and is used once to mean mouth and 270 times to mean wilderness, and because a wilderness is a place without cultivation, any cultivation needs to spring up in a wilderness. And anybody serious about the quest for true insight needs to leave the culture (or religion) of his heritage behind and spend a stint in the uncharted wild. All major players in the Bible did so.
I suggest you forget about 'Abarim Publications' (which, incidentally, ought to be transliterated 'Avarim' because עברים is pointed עֲבָרִים and not עֲבָּרִים); the author does not include fully conjugated verb paradigms and even the definitions he/she gives of Hebrew words are very dubious in many cases. Furthermore, seven of the eight transliterations are incorrect: the only ב that is marked with dogésh (i.e., בּ - changing its value from 'v' to 'b') should be the eighth word מדבר, which is correctly pointed מִדְבָּר. And 'dibrah', which is spelled דִּבְּרָה, is not a noun (that would be דִּבְרָה) but a verb in the feminine form and means 'she spoke'. The eight words listed are pointed as follows:
דָּבַר davar (verb)

דָּבָר davar (noun)

דֶּֽבֶר dever (noun, accent penultimate)

דֹּֽבֶר dover (noun, accent penultimate)

דִּבְרָה divrah (noun)

דְּבוֹרָה d'vorah (noun)

דְּבִיר d'vir (noun)

מִדְבָּר midbar (noun)


*Transliterated according to the הֲבָרָה יִשְׂרְאֵלִית (Yis'r'éli pronunciation).
For someone who has never used a Hebrew dictionary before, I would suggest he tries Marcus (Mordochai) Jastrow's Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Babli, Talmud Yerushalmi and Midrashic Literature first (it is available free online in its entirety at www.etana.org: volume 1 here and volume 2 here) and sees how he gets on with that; because in a Hebrew dictionary terms are listed under their verb-stems and anyone who is unfamiliar with diqduq (i.e., Hebrew grammar) will find it very difficult to find anything in one: for example נִרְאֶה ('is seen' or 'seems'), יֵרָאֶה ('he will be seen/appear') and מַרְאֶה ('is showing/manifesting') will all be found under the verb-stem ראה.

remember when i mentioned "Serug"? What is "lattice" in hebrew?
Given the subject of the Scriptural character שְׂרוּג, maybe you are thinking of סֽוֹרֶג, the 'lattice'-styled partitioning that was erected in the Second Temple for the purpose of separating the Jews from the non-Jews, similar in manner to the separation between men and women in Jewish prayer halls. סֽוֹרֶג is derived from the root סרג, corresponding to the earlier שׂרג; the latter occurs, for example, in ʾIyyov 40:17. In later Hebrew this word was spelled with ס sammach rather than שׂ sin, hence: סרג. The Scriptural שְׂרוּג is derived from the earlier שׂרג.
 
Last edited:
  • Dap
Reactions: MMS

MMS

Intensity Integrity Intelligence
Staff member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
26,309
Reputation
3,646
Daps
31,275
Reppin
Auburn, AL
I wasn't moved...


I have never heard שִׁירַת דְּבוֹרָה וּבָרָק referred to as 'The Song of Bee and Lightning' because, in truth, ordinary personal names in Hebrew do not really have 'meanings'. In ancient times, a Jewish newborn would often (note: often, not always) be given a name that was based on, or a derivative of, a comment that had been made by the mother or father, or even by the midwife (for example, in B'reshıth 38:29), to reflect something that had happened at, or around the same time as, the birth; e.g., פֶּרֶץ was given his name (B'reshıth 38:29) because the midwife exclaimed: מַה־פָּרַצְתָּ עָלֶיךָ פֶּרֶץ ('What a strong effort you made!')—but פֶּרֶץ actually 'means' a breach, or possibly an opening.

Similarly, the first man to be called יְהוֹשֻעַ (occasionally spelled in full יְהוֹשׁוּעַ) was originally called הוֹשֵׁעַ and Moshah changed his name to יְהוֹשֻעַ as a prayer when he (i.e., יְהוֹשֻעַ) was dispatched as one of the Twelve Explorers to take a first look at the Land of K'naʿan (the prayer being יָהּ יוֹשִׁיעֲךָ מֵעֲצַת מְרַגְלִים 'May Yohh rescue you from the other explorers' counsel'). So, Moshah gave his [eventual] successor the name יְהוֹשֻעַ based on the words of his prayer יָהּ יוֹשִׁיעֲךָ (meaning 'May Yohh rescue you..'), but the word does not actually mean this. Have you ever heard the joke about the native North American who was given the name 'Two Dogs Mating'? Well, this is quite similar.

רָחֵל means a 'ewe' (i.e., a female sheep); but was Yaʿaqov's favorite wife—the mother of Yosef and Bin'yomin—a sheep? דְּבוֹרָה means a 'bee', but did the sixth Judge of Yisroʾel (although only the fourth in the book Shof'ṭim) who defeated the K'naʿani king Yovin's general Sis'roʾ at Mount Tovor (Shof'ṭim 4:4ff) live in a hive and make honey? (D'voroh was the sixth Judge because Moshah (Sh'moth 18:13) and Y'hoshuʿa also held the status of 'Judges'; I cannot find any verse that explicitly associates Y'hoshuʿa with 'judging' but, as he was preceeded by a 'Judge' and followed by a long sequence of leaders called 'Judges', it is reasonable to assume that he, too, was a Judge.)


One need not look further than the T'na"ch itself (Shof'ṭim 5:27), where it says that Sis'roʾ went down בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ (lit., 'between her legs').


The keyword here is 'according to the Midrash'. Midrosh is not p'shoṭ (the actual meaning), but d'rush (sermons derived from, or based on, it). You ought to know better than to use midrosh to derive the meaning of a text as midrosh is never meant to be taken too literally; it is essentially an amazing exaggeration (or 'flight of fancy') intended to teach some supplementary message. This is why, for example, prophecy, can only be derived from a text's p'shoṭ, not d'rush. You must understand that these 'interpretations' are all at the d'rush level.


For starters, although there is more than one account, there was only one sequence of events. Secondly, the first Hebrew division of our Holy Scriptures starts at B'reshıth 1:1 and ends at B'reshıth 2:3; the chapter breaks are arbitrary inventions and, at any rate, non-Jewish. The first four Hebrew divisions of the book B'reshıth—as regards the chapter-division referencing system—are 1:1-2:3, 2:4-3:21, 3:22-4:26 and 5:1-6:8; accordingly, you will see that account (i., 1:1-2:3) of Man's creation occurs in the first division, account (ii., 2:4-4:26) occurs in the second and third divisions, and account (iii., 5:1-5:2) occurs in the first two p'suqim (that is, verses) of the fourth division.

Many people (myself included!!) have never understood why we continue to duplicate in T'na"ch editions printed by Jews the spurious chapter breaks between the verses numbered 'B'reshıth 2:25' & 'B'reshıth 3:1', and between the verses numbered 'M'lochim ʾAlaf 22:54' & 'M'lochim Béth 1:1'—both of which are right in the middle of their respective paragraphs and the first of which is even in the middle of a sentence! There are many other examples of this kind of thing, too. Take a look at the following picture, which is a scan of the last four lines of page 3 (containing B'reshıth 2:23b-3:1a) of the standard T'na"ch edition published by Koren Publishers Ltd, Y'rusholayim:


VAbYo3h.jpg

This extract contains the last couple verses of 'chapter 2' and part of the first verse of 'chapter 3' of B'reshıth, the first book of the Bible. Can you spot where 'chapter 2' ends and 'chapter 3' begins? I very much doubt it, because the 'chapters' do not exist in the Hebrew text. But there is an even greater deception at work here: I bet you were not aware that there is a Hebrew 'play on words', a 'pun', created by the repeated use of the same word (עָרוּם) in two very different senses in the two verses (עָרוּם - plural עֲרוּמִּים - means 'naked' in 2:25 and 'sneaky' or 'crafty' in 3:1), which very strongly demonstrates that the two verses numbered 'B'reshıth 2:25' and 'B'reshıth 3:1' are linked:

Not only is it impossible to bring this point out in a translation, but the pun is further obfuscated by the separation of 2:25 and 3:1 into two separate artificial 'chapters', which is concealed by inserting the chapter-divisions between the two halves of the sentence (and the two verses are one continuous sentence:
25Now the man and his woman were both naked but they were without any sexual inhibitions, 1and so the snake said to the woman...; in the Hebrew, verse 3:1 reads as an explanation of why the 'snake' behaved as it did). And yet, even without knowledge of the pun, it can be seen that the logical end occurs at B'reshıth 2:24, and a new subject begins with verse 25.


That passage is grammatically very difficult to translate into English accurately, without the text appearing somewhat clumsy.
Well a Sullam must be a support for a reason :jbhmm:

i have not heard this tale of someone being named: "two dogs mating "? Can you explain? You say in jest, was deborah (to speak or to formalize) in a hive making honey...but you might be closer to the truth than you think allegorically atleast

my implications of the serpent in the other post have to do with the "N" sound in a literal sense...the most subtle moving thing could be argued as the "Nuh" or "Muh" sounds off someones tongue or lips respectively. So "Red" or "Adam" could represent the Tongue, and Eve could represent the lips.

pharoah adorned his crowns with symbols of letters which represented earthly and heavenly dominions

Hedjet which I believe represents "Heth" or house and the Deshret which represents Nun or Snake. To me the use of these sounds appears to be important in ancient times. This also is why I believe in the book of John 3 about Moses lifting up the serpent has a different meaning than we initially surmise

1660216738452.jpeg
 

Koichos

Pro
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
1,567
Reputation
-792
Daps
2,155
Reppin
K'lal Yisraʾel
Well a Sullam must be a support for a reason :jbhmm:

i have not heard this tale of someone being named: "two dogs mating "? Can you explain?
The point I was making is that Hebrew names were often chosen to reflect some remark or comment that the mother or the midwife (or the father or another person) made, based on an event that had happened at the time of the birth (e.g., Moshah's naming, Sh'moth 2:10). In any case, I really only included the joke about the Native who had been given the name 'Two Dogs Copulating' as a humorous aside.

Off topic, but I am reminded of a joke I heard years ago: A Jewish boy is worried about introducing his gentile girlfriend to his Jewish mother. She was then a pretty 19-year-old Native with long jet-black hair. He brings her home and says 'Ma, this is the girl I am going to marry. Her name is Running Deer.' To his surprise, his mother was rather calm. 'Hi,' she said. 'Glad to meet you. I'm Sitting Shivʿa.'


You say in jest, was deborah (to speak or to formalize) in a hive making honey...but you might be closer to the truth than you think allegorically atleast

my implications of the serpent in the other post have to do with the "N" sound in a literal sense...the most subtle moving thing could be argued as the "Nuh" or "Muh" sounds off someones tongue or lips respectively.
As a point of interest, how about the Hebrew word for a 'breath', נְשִׁימָה, which is subtly different from the word for a 'soul', נְשָׁמָה; both start with a נ nun, if that's what you're looking for. Moreover, the letter ה is connected with the property of speech, and all things were created by what the T'na"ch refers to as 'God's speech'. Put simply, the ה hei is the onset of 'breath' which develops into actual speech:
בִּדְבַר ה׳ שָׁמַיִם נַעֲשׂוּ
וּבְרוּחַ פִּיו כָּל־צְבָאָם׃
By a word from Hashem [the] heavens were made;
and with a breath from His mouth, all their 'hosts'.
The primary letters are three: א ʾalaf, מ mem, שׁ shin. The א ʾalaf is the beginning of sound, with the opening of the mouth; the מ mem is the conclusion of sound, with the closing of the mouth; and the שׁ shin is the synthesis between sound and silence, with the clenching of the teeth and the parting of the lips. Thus: א ʾalaf, the sound of voice; מ mem, the sound of silence; שׁ shin, the balance between the two.

So "Red" or "Adam" could represent the Tongue, and Eve could represent the lips.
Etymologically speaking, both אֲדָמָֽה ('soil' or 'land') and אָדָֽם ('man' or 'humanity') are connected with אָדֽוֹם, אָדֹֽם (the reddish-brown color of soil, also the color of red lentils (B'reshıth 25:29-30)); compare the feminine inflection of אָדֽוֹם, אָדֹֽם (i.e., אֲדֻמָּֽה) which crops up in the phrase פָּרָֽה אֲדֻמָּֽה (B'midhbar 19:2) and means 'reddish-brown cow'. אָדֽוֹם, אָדֹֽם (masc.) or אֲדוּמָּֽה, אֲדֻמָּֽה (fem.) is the reddish-brown color of the אֲדָמָֽה that the אָדָֽם was taken from—but אָדָֽם does not itself mean 'red'. אָדֹֽם and אָדָֽם may look alike, but they have different meanings.

Do you think that פָּרָֽה אֲדֻמָּֽה means a 'cow-man' or that בֶּן־אָדָֽם means a 'son of red'? Of course not; the terms mean a 'reddish-brown cow' and a 'son of man' (in fact, בֶּן־אָדָֽם is likely to to be heard by anyone who visits E"Y because it is much used colloquially and just means a 'person', a 'guy', or a 'chap': it occurs 93 times in Y'hazqeʾl and 14 other instances scattered throughout the T'na"ch (B'midhbar 23:19; Y'shaʿyohu 51:12, 56:2; Yirm'yohu 49:18, 49:33, 50:40, 51:43; Tahillim 8:5, 80:18, 146:3; ʾIyyov 16:21, 25:6, 35:8; & Doniyyeʾl 8:17)).

The T'na"ch tells us that the body of the אָדָֽם was made of אֲדָמָֽה (for which reason we are required to bury the body of a person who has died back into the 'soil' the first men were taken from) before being infused with נִשְׁמַֽת חַיִּֽים ('the soul of life' in B'reshıth 2:7). There are three Hebrew words that can be translated as soil (earth), in particular קַרְקַֽע ,עָפָֽר and אֲדָמָֽה, but technically עָפָֽר means 'dust', קַרְקַֽע means 'ground' and אֲדָמָֽה means 'land' (in the sense of real estate). However, only the last of these three (אֲדָמָֽה) is connected with the color אָדֹֽם.


pharoah adorned his crowns with symbols of letters which represented earthly and heavenly dominions

Hedjet which I believe represents "Heth" or house and the Deshret which represents Nun or Snake. To me the use of these sounds appears to be important in ancient times. This also is why I believe in the book of John 3 about Moses lifting up the serpent has a different meaning than we initially surmise
The meaning of the English word 'serpent' has changed since the early 17th century when King James' PerVersion was first published; serpens just means a 'snake' in Latin and 'serpent' was the regular word for that reptile in English at that time. For that matter, Charles Dodgson (aka 'Lewis Carroll') also used 'serpent' meaning a snake in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, and that was not written until 1865. Yet, today, nobody would ever refer to a snake as a 'serpent' (the use of the older term now being limited to mythical creatures).

The Hebrew word נָחָֽשׁ means a 'snake' and not a 'serpent'. A snake is long, scaly, legless reptile, while a serpent is a mythical creature which, like dragons and unicorns, are only found in the world of fantasy. The נָחָֽשׁ in the Garden story is just a snake, nothing more—and it did not tell any lies, either: in fact, the only one to tell a lie was the man's wife (in B'reshıth 3:3), as Rash"i is quick to point out in his explanatory notes. I invite you to search through the narrative and tell me where Hashem told them not even to touch the tree?


Well, the parallel may be seen in their worship by misguided individuals: the b'nei Yisroʾel were told to look intently toward the copper snake—that is to say, upward, toward Heaven (because Moshah was specifically instructed to mount the copper snake on top of a pole, B'midhbar 21:8). However, in time, some Jews began to worship it and burn incense to it (although there is no textual record of anyone PRAYING to it); thus the pious king Hiz'qiyyohu, responsible for the longest period of peace in the southern province, had it destroyed
וַיַּעַשׂ מֹשֶׁה נְחַשׁ נְחֹשֶׁת וַיְשִׂמֵהוּ עַל־הַנֵּס
וְהָיָה אִם־נָשַׁךְ הַנָּחָשׁ אֶת־אִישׁ וְהִבִּיט אֶל־נְחַשׁ הַנְּחֹשֶׁת וָחָי׃

...so Moshah made a copper snake and mounted it on a pole,
and if a snake bit anyone and he gazed
[up] at the copper snake he would recover. (B'midhbar 21:9)


הוּא ׀ הֵסִיר אֶת־הַבָּמוֹת
וְשִׁבַּר אֶת־הַמַּצֵּבֹת
וְכָרַת אֶת־הָאֲשֵׁרָה
וְכִתַּת נְחַשׁ הַנְּחֹשֶׁת אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה מֹשֶׁה
כִּי עַד־הַיָּמִים הָהֵמָּה הָיוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל מְקַטְּרִים לוֹ
וַיִּקְרָא־לוֹ נְחֻשְׁתָּן׃
He [i.e., King Hiz'qiyyohu] removed the idolatrous shrines,
smashed up the monuments
and cut down the ʾasheroh
[trees];
and he also pulverized the copper snake that Moshah had made,
because up to that time
[some of] the Yis'rʾélim had been burning incense to it—
he
[disparagingly] said, 'It is just a [silly] little piece of copper!' (M'lochim Béth 18:4)
Rash"i describes the word נְחוּשְׁתָּן n'hush'ton as לְשׁוֹן בִּזָּיוֹן l'shon bizzoyon ('a term of contempt'). נְחוּשְׁתָּן is actually a diminutive form of נְחוֹשֶׁת n'hoshath ('copper'), so that the last three words of M'lochim Béth 18:4 can be translated as וַיִּקְרָא־לוֹ נְחֻשְׁתָּן 'and he called it just a silly little lump of copper'. Note: the word נָחָשׁ nohosh (stressed on the second syllable) 'a snake' is no more related to נְחֹשֶׁת n'hoshath (stressed on the first syllable) 'copper' than either is to נַחַשׁ nahash (stressed on the first syllable) 'sorcery', 'magic'—B'midhbar 23:23.
 
  • Dap
Reactions: MMS

bigdaddy88

The King Of Power
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
14,502
Reputation
3,742
Daps
65,907
the world of maya, world is not illusion but there is an out there world that cannot be perceived by our senses/min, since our minds cannot beyond the veil so to speak.

and of course the mystics, and philosophers believe it that this world is the real world( of course even science is coming around to this pov)
 

MMS

Intensity Integrity Intelligence
Staff member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
26,309
Reputation
3,646
Daps
31,275
Reppin
Auburn, AL
the world of maya, world is not illusion but there is an out there world that cannot be perceived by our senses/min, since our minds cannot beyond the veil so to speak.

and of course the mystics, and philosophers believe it that this world is the real world( of course even science is coming around to this pov)
perhaps the real illusion is the "veil"

Thread started off dope then got derailed into religious babble :unimpressed:
youve made this same post atleast 3 times :patrice: in the same thread

if you think the unseen is interesting but dont understand how religion(s) are intertwined in that, thats on you
 
Top