Talk:Kareth

Bible Mid‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism Mid‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mishnah list of 36[edit]

im curious, on what grounds does rav gantzfried make his addition to the list, its not one of the 36 listed in the mishna (which someone should, btw post on here, I may if i get the time) thank you in advance g.j.g (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the grounds of the fate of Onan. Many try to dance away from the part that it "offended/disgusted" saying it was just the failure to do his levirite marriage duties, but they forget that it OFFENDED/DISGUSTED. So much that he was killed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.59.127 (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC) nobody denies the wrongness of imams actions, and I do not recall seeing somebody deny their nature, yet bad and liable to kareit are not synonymous, the Gemara has a list of the sins that make one liable to kareit and masturbation is not on that list, so I'd be curious where rav fantzfried makes this addition (exact source) , thank you in advance g.j.g (talk) 01:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC) On an unrelated manner, I'm now looking back at that last post and realizing how many spelling errors autocorrect made. imam should be Onan, and fantzfried should be Gantzfried g.j.g (talk) 02:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List for Karet[edit]

This list has issues. Some things are not defined properly. The Kitzur (Rabbi Ganzfried) is not the originator of this, nor is this necessarily meant literally. Violation of the Sabbath should be mentioned, prohibited relations should be combined, and perhaps an addendum on intermarriage.Mzk1 (talk) 21:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could provide the perfect list. I remember reading it in a book from the library decades earlier, but I do not remember what that book was, and I have been unable to find a comparable list online or through Google Books. Xyz7890 (talk) 19:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

per Wikipedia:naming conventions (use English), "cutting off"[edit]

Most English academic sources appear to use "cut off" or "cutting off" to discuss this, not karet/kareth. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of WP:RS[edit]

Dear User:Lisa Please can you give grounds, stating relevant Wikipedia policies, as to why you have [deleted these WP:RS from the article?] In ictu oculi (talk) 04:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick D. Miller The religion of ancient Israel 2000 Page 152 "It has been suggested that it once referred to expulsion from the community, from one's kin, but a more likely interpretation is that it had to do with cutting off one's life or one's line. That is, karet may have involved either .
I. S. D. Sassoon Destination Torah 2001 Page 182 "How many kinds of karet are there; that is to say, do all the different ways in which cutting off is expressed in the Torah stand for the identical punishment or for gradations thereof? These are examples: (1) 'That soul shall be cut off ."

Best regards. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As should be clear from the title of the article (WP:HE), the article is about a subject in Jewish law called Karet (or Kareth or Kares). It is not about general biblical studies. You are being disruptive. More, you are being deliberately obtuse. And don't cite WP:NPA. That's a valid description of someone who refuses to listen to anyone who knows more than he does on a subject.

You might also want to read WP:WL. Your incessant disruptions are not lessened by appeals to inapplicable rules such as WP:EN. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 15:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa,

Again, please lay off the personal attacks, and secondly, you do not own Wikipedia. But, have you actually read WP:HE? WP:HE isn't some sort of opponent to WP:naming conventions (use English), WP:HE just tells which romanizations of Hebrew to use. As for Wikipedia:Wikilawyering, I didn't write WP:naming conventions (use English), nor MOS:COMMONALITY etc., I didn't write any of these Wikipedia policies that are here to improve the quality of the encyclopedia and utility to general readers. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based on In Ictu's poor presentation (cherry picking?) of sources supporting his attempted move of B'rov am hadrat melech (see the move request on the discussion page), I recommend that his presentation of sources here be taken with a grain of salt until someone else has had the time to check the sources independently with Google Book Search. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 17:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa, how many times have you pasted this accusation around Wikipedia? :( And how does the 1x vs 2,770x Google Book search result against your preference on that RM justify e.g. deleting Miller and Sassoon on this article? In ictu oculi (talk) 03:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]