.
The Great Tartan Disputation. Round Three
Round THREE
TG Versus Brit-Am
TG Rides Again! Brit-Am Replies to TG.
TG said:
Yair, you are a less clever than you think you are, and now I
know that I have nothing to worry about since you proved this abundantly in
public.
Since I suspect you have never been to an institution of higher learning in
your life,
BA (Brit-Am) Replied:
Quite the little snob, are we not?
Get real.
The academics read our researches, use our informational leads, buy our books
and sometimes even send us queries of their own.
A not insignificant portion of our readership are quite learned.
TG said:
I suggest you start here
https://academicskills.anu.edu.au/resources/
handouts/referencing-basics
The Committee for the Hebrew Language was actually called the
Hebrew Language Committee (Va'ad ha-lashon ha-Ivrit) until replaced by the The
Academy of the Hebrew Language in 1953. See
http://hebrew-academy.huji.ac.il/english.html
BA (Brit-Am) Replied:
OK so, working from memory, I got the
official title wrong?
Does that change the point we made?
We knew on the essential point what we were talking about while you did not.
You were the one implying the Academy was unimportant and had no academic
authority behind it.
Are you backtracking now?
TG said:
Do you suggest that you have access to The Historical Dictionary Project? If
you don't, then please don't patronise me with citing it as a source,
BA (Brit-Am) Replied:
Where did I cite it as a source?
I am not sure if I ever heard of it.
TG said:
since it is unattainable for most of your members. Stick to
something more attainable.
I quoted from an academic who is readily available online, you did not.
BA (Brit-Am) Replied:
What and who are you talking
about?
If you are referring to us using the Dictionary of
Iben
Shushan
In our article Joseph and the Scottish Tartan, versus the unknown
(in Israel) source you quoted from then you have a losing case.
I quoted from a source about the Hebrew Language that Hebrew-speakers who know
Hebrew use.
I quoted from a source that I myself regard as an authority.
TG said:
You can't even get sectioning right on pages. The Conclusion in
the start of the page is marked section e), but at the end is section d).
BA (Brit-Am) Replied:
What can one do?
You actually paid attention?
Bright of you to notice.
TG said:
However, the entire conclusion is a joke. I illustrate:
BA had said (in the article
Joseph and the Scottish Tartan):
The Brit-Am approach
(which really is that of leading Rabbinical Authorities and Commentators) is
to regard the Hebrew text as the sacred words of the Almighty.
TG said:
This is not true. Your approach is to copy names of cited
commentators, primarily from Kaplan's Living Torah it seems while not giving
references to their actual sforim.
BA Replies:
Not so.
We did go to Kaplan but we also went to the sources we quoted from and mostly
translated verbatim what they said.
The only source we took solely from Kaplan was Kaplan ("The Living Torah" on Genesis 37:3) himself. All the others we checked. We did however take the quotation from
Yonah
iben
Janach
as given in Daat Mikra since it was not available in the original to us.
Yonah
iben
Janach
was quoted as having said:
#Each strip [pas, pisah]
of the woven cloth was of a different color# (Rabbi
Yonah
iben
Janach
ca. 990-1050 CE Spain).
Apart from that, what does it really
matter?
If Kaplan quotes from somebody it is worth noting. Kaplan is reliable.
Your problem seem to be that you put too much emphasis on how and by whom the
information is transmitted.
[Even though in practice your success is less than ours, even on this point. By your own criteria you are not up to our standards!]
Whether or not the information is correct should be what is being aimed at.
Look at what we wrote and the sources we
quoted from.
None of this is in Kaplan.
TG said:
Some of these commentaries were made in Hebrew, but many in other
languages.
BA Replies:
Where are you living?
We went to the sources which is not hard to do since they are freely available
in Israeli Study Halls and in some cases in our own private library.
ALL OF THEM ARE IN HEBREW!
Have you been smoking something?
On medication?
You are stating something which is not true and balantly false. Is this due to your innate wickedness and frowardness of character or simple a mental aberration?
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
Every word used is there
for a reason. The different nuances of a certain word or group of words may
all have significance at one and the same time. This approach is not just one
based on faith but may be justified objectively by an examination of the text.
TG said:
Nowhere do you objectively examine the text/s.
BA Replies:
Nearly everywhere we examine the texts
and mostly quote them in full so that our readers may see for themselves.
See:
http://www.britam.org/tartan.html
We quoted from:
Radak,
Nachmanides,
Sforno,
Natziv,
Daat
Sofrim,
Daat
Mikra,
Midrash
Chafets
in Torah Shleymah,
etc.
These represent most of the major and most respected authorities.
We even quoted from the Talmudic source you used and would have translated the
source in Midrash
Tanchuma
you mentioned but you are apparently too selfish and narrow minded to give us the
reference to.
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
"Cotonet"
means some type of garment. Nearly everyone seems to agree on this point.
"Pas" according to the Concordance of
Iben
Shushan
[Hebrew] means "retsuah"
i.e. "strip" as in Cotonet
Pasim
(Genesis 37:3].
TG said:
I don't have my Concordance handy right now, but he gives several
meaning. However, if you have yours, then I'm sure you won't have any problems
providing the page on which this is said.
BA Replies:
Iben Shushan does not give several
meanings but only the meaning we quoted him as giving, i.e.
#
"Pas" according to the Concordance of
Iben
Shushan
[Hebrew] means "retsuah"
i.e. "strip" as in Cotonet
Pasim
(Genesis 37:3]. #
Why do you say he gives several meanings when he does not?
Why do you say such a thing when you yourself in the very same breath admit that you have not yet seen the source you are speaking about?
The source is "Koncordantsia
Chadasha"
(Hebrew), 1980, Publisher Kiryat
Sefer,
Jerusalem, 1980, vol.3, p. 953.
What we said concerning Safer
HaShorashim by the
Radak
also applies here.
You should not need the page number etc.
The work by
Iben
Shushan
has gone through several editions but it always goes according to the order of
the Hebrew Alphabet.
If you know the order of the Hebrew Alphabet and you know how the word is spelt
in Hebrew you should have no trouble in finding the entry no matter what edition
you use.
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
The
Cotonet
Pasim
was therefore made out of strips (pieces) or bore a striped design.
TG said:
No. It had precisely two stripes, bottom and top halves of the
garment.
BA Replies:
Prove it. Why do you not give a source
for what you say?
There is none.
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
"Pas" can also connote
"piece", "part of", end, trim, finish, etc.
TG said:
Yes, "part of".
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
The word "pas" is used
for the palm (or piece of) the hand in Daniel 5:5.
TG said:
Yes, but it has a deeper meaning here than just that.
BA Replies:
Are you dealing in mysticism or
something?
You do not sound like a whiskey man to me.
It must be those funny cigarettes.
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
One interpretation is
that "cotonet
pasim"
meant a garment reaching to the ends (pasim)
of the body i.e. the ankles and hands.
TG said:
Yes, but again, has a different, deeper meaning.
BA Replies:
Toke. Smoke. Joke.
Is this the result of your
superior higher education?
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
It can mean "stripe" or
line. The Talmud (Shabat
10b) said it meant "stripe".
TG said:
No, it said nothing of the sort. I suggest you actually open the
Sha"S [i.e. Talmud] and have a read.
BA Replies:
I did:
http://www.britam.org/tartan.html
But then you yourself
(evidently quoting from a commentary) gave us more enlightened information on
the subject as to what the Talmudic passage and
Rashi
were saying:
Go to our article where we have given you the honor of having your own words
immortalized on our pages in your own very special colored table-box. Scroll
down to the nicely-colored Table with the heading:
# A correspondent of ours (signing
himself as "TG") points out:#
This is what you will find:
A correspondent of ours (signing himself as "TG") points out:
# Rashi,
in his commentary on this passage [Talmud, Shabat 10b], explains ketonet passim
as keli milat karpas, a term for clothing of fine wool similar to
karpas in the Book of Esther, and to the striped garment of Tamar in II
Samuel 13:18. Esther was in Persia of course, so the sound of the word is
similar to the Persian karafs, defined as "a plant of which a salad is
made from . . . parsley . . . [and] celery."
Later references to karpas in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Talmud, derive it from
the Greek karpos, meaning "fruit" of the land or of rivers. Thus, in Talmudic
usage the word is similar to Greek karpos and Persian or Sanskrit
kirpas, i.e. resembling a vertically-striped vegetable.#
TG also points out that:
Midrash Tanchuma also refers to the many colored coat of Joseph.
There you have it. Stripes. Pasim means stripes.
Midrash Tanchuma is another early source.
|
You (or the commentary you used) said:
#Thus, in Talmudic usage the word is similar to Greek
karpos
and Persian or Sanskrit kirpas,
i.e. resembling a vertically-striped vegetable.#
Did you misquote your own source?
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
Iben
Shushan in his Hebrew-Language Dictionary (HaMilon
HaHadash)
in the entry:
"Cotonet
Pasim"
says # According to the accepted meaning of Genesis 37;3: A garment made of
different colored stripes#.
TG said:
The accepted meaning is not understood. It is based on Rashi, but
Rashi did not explain, and so it has been misunderstood since Rashi thought it
was pashut.
BA Replies:
If
Rashi
thought along the same lines as every other major commentator (as well as our
humble selves) that does not mean that they all took it from
Rashi.
Rashi
was a great commentator but the other commentators emphatically disagree with
him when they think it necessary.
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
Iben
Shushan
also notes that in Midrashic
Literature Pas means line or thick line i.e. stripe.
TG said:
If it meant a stripe, he would say a stripe, but it does not. it
means 'a thick line'.
BA Replies:
Iben Shushan uses the Hebrew word "retsuah"
which means what we translated it as meaning.
Apart from that, what difference does it make?
BA had said (in the article Joseph and
the Scottish Tartan):
There is a certain logic
in considering Pasim
to refer to the design on the garment rather than the cut or tailoring aspects
of the garment itself.
The word Pas (singular) or
Pasim (plural) may also be
related to the word "Pas" or "Pasah"
meaning spread and the spreading of color as in the cease of the signs of
leprosy (Leviticus chapter 13).
Pasah
meaning the spreading of color is spelt with a "Sin" (for the "s" sound) and
not with the "samech"
(as in the word Pas meaning stripe) but "sin" and "samech"
can interchange (e.g. Tosefta,
Yom HaKipurin
1;9).
It may be therefore that another meaning of "pas" connotes "color".
TG said:
The swapping of letters is only allowed under certain conditions,
and usually Hazal [the Sages] says so, but not here. So again you rank
yourself up there with hakhamim [the Wise Ones i.e. the Sages].
BA Replies:
What do you mean "again"?
You said:
# again you rank yourself #
You are the one who when the Sages say something you disagree with dismiss it
and impute they were mislead by the Greek influence of their surroundings.
Historically that is not true and anyone who was familiar with the source in
question (Midrash
Tanchuma)
would not have said what you said.
This is what you said:
TG (see Round Two) said:
The reason is that over the centuries there were many editing of the Septuagint, and corruptions crept in.
Even Midrash Tanhuma which was written before the [Talmud] Bavli was completed also uses 'coat of many colours' because it was likely to have also been influenced by the Greek version then in use in the region.
|
You denied the independence of thought of the Sages when you came across a source you did not fancy!
As for Brit-Am pointing out that the letters "sin" and "samech" (both with the same or highly similar "s" sound) may interchange we were making a linguistic
point which is valid.
It is conventionally accepted and not something new that we were proposing.
In Hebrew a Samech
and a Sin can sometimes interchange and we brought an example (quoted in the two Hebrew-language Dictionaries we looked at)
as to where that
occurred concerning the word "PAS" we are dealing with.
BA had said (in the
article Joseph and the Scottish Tartan):
We saw that most of the Classical
Commentators did say that the garment was of different colors in addition to
which several mentioned stripes while others said squares or both stripes and
squares.
TG said:
Again this is your restated presumption. Most commentators
(classical is such a goyishe term, try Aharonim [Earlier Rabbinical Authorities] and Rishonim [Later Rabbinical Authorities]) do not say this,
but in any case, you don't understand why they say this, because if you did
you would know it definitely does not mean 'stripes' and only three colours
that are not in the pattern you suggest equates to a kilt weave.
BA Replies:
You said:
# classical is such a goyishe term, try Aharonim and Rishonim #
TG, Please get a hold of yourself!
Try and keep yourself
relevant.
We are using the English
Language and I will use whatever terms express my intention and are
understandable to others.
You are big on the Jewish issue when it suits you but deny the Sages authority
when it does not.
You claim they were influenced by the Greeks when they were not.
All your terms of reference and attitude towards knowledge and its verification
are questionable.
Your education has been lacking.
You also show no familiarity with the original sources in the Hebrew language.
I assume you really are Jewish as you present yourself.
For all I know you may also live in Israel since you mentioned accessing
Hebrew-language works at a library. Apparently you also spent time in some
tertiary institute? This however is not enough.
[Did you attend some Conservative or Reform College or the equivalent?]
Academic commentaries may help a little but they are no substitute for the real
thing.
Having tried both options I can testify to that.
You mentioned a "kilt weave" and:
# only three colours
that are not in the pattern you suggest equates to a kilt weave. #
Have you now become an authority on Scottish kilts?
Or are you quoting somebody else?
Your spelling of "colours"
(instead of "colors") suggests a British source.
Who?
From what year?
You criticize us about the use of sources and properly referencing them. We
however do give the sources and we give them in a way that anybody who wishes to
check them may easily do so. You do not give any sources at all. You just make
assertions while it is obvious that in reality you are quoting from somebody
else.
Concerning the definition of "tartan":
You have not read properly what we wrote.
For our purposes it does not really matter.
Joseph received a garment with a pattern based on stripes of several colors. The
pattern indicated rank or status.
The stripes or lines were probably arranged in a diamond (tartan-type)
interlocking pattern. This is what the Major Commentators said.
Similar garments worn by dignitaries from the region of Israel (or Canaan as it
was then know) also depict the use of a tartan type pattern.
Later in Scotland and Ireland simple colored lines, or checks, or the classical
tartan were all used in the same way.
They emanated ultimately from the same cultural traditions. This is the whole
point.
TG said:
I suggest you get yourself an Artscroll Chumash. Better still the
set with Rashi.
BA Replies:
We do not usually use Translations, TG.
We make them.
Re-read our articles about the Tartan,
especially the first one.
You deny the accuracy of what we say but have not related directly to a single
one of our sources.
The
Cotonet
Pasim
according to the Major Commentators bore a tartan-type pattern of several
colors.
This is confirmed by Egyptian depictions of dignitaries and Hebrews from Ancient
Canaan and is echoed from the historical usages of Ireland and Scotland.
Continued in Round Four.
The Great Tartan Disputation
Contents:
Introduction
Round One.
Round Two.
Round Three. See Above
Round Four.
Round Five.
Round Six.
Discussion and Queries.
Discussion and Queries.
Joseph and the Scottish Tartan
Contents:
Detailed List of Contents
1. Introduction.
2. The Term.
3. Tartan Type Patterns and the Area of Ancient Israel
4. David Rohl, Joseph, and Tartan Cloak.
5. Scottish Tartan and the Temple Garments.
6. Tartan in Ancient Times.
7. Tartan from the British Isles in Masada, of Judah.
8. Tartan in Scotland
9. Tartan in Ireland
10. Tartan in Ulster
Part One. Welcome to Ulster.
Part Two: Titanic Tartans and Clifford Smyth.
Pleased with what you read?
The Brit-Am enterprise is a Biblical work.
God willing, they who assist Brit-Am will be blessed.
Brit-Am depends on contributions alongside purchases of our publications
Click Here to make an offering.
Click Here to view our publications.
|
'It is impossible to rightly govern the
world without
God or the Bible.'
George Washington
Brit-Am is the "still small voice" that contains the truth.
[1-Kings 19:12] AND AFTER THE EARTHQUAKE A FIRE; BUT THE LORD WAS NOT IN THE
FIRE: AND AFTER THE FIRE A STILL SMALL VOICE.
Home
