Talk:Yitzchak Kaduri
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Age of Kaduri
Was he actually born in 1895? That makes him 110. JFW | T@lk 07:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
As far as I know there are 2 versions about his age: 104 and 110--Fivetrees 23:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- No one is actually certain when he was born. It is estimated he was somewhere between 104 to 112. Killtan
-
- If nobody is certain when he was born, then the exact date of 7 September 1898 should probably be removed. Ardric47 18:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Reverted. 212.201.72.122, please cite sources before changing the date. --Shuki 08:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
According to the most recent article in the English Hamodia, his doctor says he was 112. Other estimates vary from 106 to 115. I changed his birthdate to "1894?" to conform to his doctor's assertion. Yoninah 21:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Pulling unsourced info from an interwiki site does not give it legitimacy. The Hebrew wiki is also not the basis for all Israel/Jewish-related pages for other language wikis. If we are comparing pages/versions, then it's obvious that the English page is much more expanded than the Hebrew and the Hebrew article should be copying info from here. --Shuki 19:18, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] official Website
It is obviously not his official Website. This should be corrected.Ortho 03:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rebbe
Apparently the Lubavitcher Rebbe promised him in 1990 that he would see Moshiach. The Arutz 7 sources do emphatically not say that in 2003 he met the Rebbe! I therefore stand by my edit comment[1] that such suggestions are Meschichist propaganda, even if the user who inserts them may not be a meschichist. JFW | T@lk 08:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Again... I NEVER SAID SO. And one source from A7 does not say so (nor did I say it says so). This source (and it is very easy to find other sources, though most be`ivrit) says that the Rav Kaduri zya"a said he met the man he considers to be today's candidate for being Mashia`h ben David on Nov. 4th 2003. Obviously it is not the Rebbe he is speaking about. Re-read my statement re. the illogism of saying I said so. Again, to make it clear, my sentence properly read does NOT say that in 2003 he met the Rebbe. OF COURSE NOT. Your edit comment did not speak of Meshichist propanda (i.e. Meshichism) but of a "Chabad Meshichist" which naturally is taken personally with words like "go away". hasofer 09:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Possibly I misread the original version. Please avoid jargon, hebraisms and non-English terminology as much as possible. It should make sense to a non-Hebrew-reading non-Jewish reader. JFW | T@lk 11:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have rewritten the paragraph to make more sense to the English reader. Nowhere is there proof that Kaduri's passing is regarded as a sign that Moshiach should be coming. If anything, the Ben Ish Chai and the Lubavitcher Rebbe promised him that he would live to see the Moshiach, something that has not happened. JFW | T@lk 11:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Well... he`hakham Kaduri zya"a did say (and the different "news" do say so [2]) that not only he was revealed the identity of what `Haza"l called Mashia`h ben David but he met him in person on that day, 9 Mar`Heshvan 5764! Nowhere did I write that the passing is regarded as a sign..., I just wrote that it fosters hopes. hasofer 17:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Though I understand the sound purpose of your edits I find many details to be then far from exact. I will try to correct what I can. hasofer 17:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
What is not exact? And "fostering hopes" is also original research if this cannot be backed up with reliable sources. JFW | T@lk 17:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Converting 9 Mar`Heshvan 5764 to only 3 November 2004 (since though it starts with the evening if one retains only one date, it should be 4 November 2004); `Het of nachalat as "ch" and then as "h" in Yitzhak; ... This fostering of hopes is no original research since one can find many examples of ref. on the internet which speak about that. Nevertheless, thanks for this work/discussion ... now the page looks much better and unless someone comes in to break everything (which is normal for a wiki, I am aware of that), this is a good start for the page on this great meqoubal zya"a. hasofer 18:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] need for picture
Maybe to show how modest the Rabbi was, but the article deserves a picture. If anyone has a personal non-copyrighted picture, please upload. --Shuki 19:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Is this article still a stub?
--Shuki 19:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reply
What u mean by stub, also his last name is mispelled! I corrected! - 64.107.3.126
- Nonsense. "Kaduri" is the spelling for correct prononciation for english speakers. hasofer 00:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that you should refer to that anonymous poster's contribution as vandalism. S/he should have looked at the talk page discussion first vis a vis the date discussion, and the spelling claim seems more French oriented, but it certainly was not vandalism. I suggest that 64.107.3.126 (from Illinois) registers and reads up on Wiki-ettiquette. --Shuki 07:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- I do think that changing the date to 1899 without bringing any info towards that claim and changing the name's spelling only once is "some-sort" of vandalism. I am also french speaking and as a sefaradi I would naturally write the name of the `hakham zekher tsadiq livrakhah as Yits`haq Kadouri... but that is not the point. As I was often reminded this is the Wikipedia for english speakers/readers. hasofer 08:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- I also agree that the correct spelling should be "Kadouri." This is the way I have always seen it in publications in Israel. I'm sorry I made a few goof-ups in moving this page to the proper spelling, but in the end I accomplished it, and fixed all the links as well. Yoninah 21:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Who let you move the page?! Did you set up a vote? I consider this bordering on vandalism. --Shuki 22:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- It is not vandalism, but it was done without any attempt to achieve consensus here. See my vote below: Google seems to favour the former spelling. JFW | T@lk 03:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spelling: Kaduri or Kadouri
[edit] Vote
Please vote:
- Kaduri - I suggest the article be moved back to the original spelling.--Shuki 01:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Kaduri. Google Yitzchak Kadouri yields 139 hits vs. 10,000 for Yitzchak Kaduri. Seems to be the favoured spelling in English publications. JFW | T@lk 03:12, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- I am really sorry I caused so much trouble and ruffled a few feathers. What happened was that last night I read an authoritative eulogy/biography about Rabbi Kadouri, and looked up whether Wikipedia had a page on it or not. Not finding one (or any redirects from Kadouri to Kaduri, or any alternate spellings within the article, like: Yitzchak Kaduri, also spelled Kadouri or Kadourie), I went ahead and composed my own article and saved it. When I entered it into Category:Orthodox rabbis, and checked into that category, lo and behold I saw the article already written under Yitzchak Kaduri! This necessitated another hour of going through the other article and adding my changes to it. I am sorry that I did not go through the consensus system. Perhaps there is no need for consensus if Kaduri gets so many more hits. How about if we just add the alternate spellings to the Kaduri article and call it a day? All the best, Yoninah 08:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for waiting! Was for Shabbat in NY and everyone I met back there would spell it Kadouri for the following reasons: "K" for the kaf, "ou" for the Sefaradi/french-spelling which more befits a Sefaradi 'Hakham like 'hakham hameqoubal Yits'haq Kadouri zekher tsadiq livrakhah, the presence of the resh after the waw makes the "oo" sound last longer. However, keeping in mind this is the Wikipedia for english readers, I would still vote in favour of Kaduri with a mention for Kadouri (but then also to the full spelling Yits'haq Kadouri). Hope this helps. Yirmiyahou signing from 67.142.130.23 00:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- OK. In the meantime, I vote for Kadouri. Yoninah 12:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Kaduri with prominent mention of Kadouri. Tomertalk 17:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Kaduri is the way I've seen it (mostly) written in the English language Jewish newspapers and books. IZAK 18:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- I have moved the page as it appears that, that is consensus here. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 06:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comments
The Kohen issue surprises me. I have never seen that spelling anywhere. If we're using google as a standard, then 'C' gets almost 70 miilion hits, 'K' gets a few hundred thousand. I've opened a discussion on Talk:Kohen too. --Shuki 14:07, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- It depends how you search. Cohen is a common surname. In those cases Google is not very helpful. In this case, I looked for alternative spellings of Yitzchak Kaduri and found that that is most common spelling. JFW | T@lk 03:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Why hasn't the spelling been changed to "Kaduri", as per consensus? HKT 16:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Birthdate
Dear Shuki: Are the two clues about Rabbi Kadouri's age independent of each other? If not, then it's obvious that he was born on Shabbat Chol Hamoed Sukkot. Yoninah 13:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Why is it obvious? Yes, I heard one (chol hamoed sukkot) from the Rabbi of the Nahalat Yitzhak Synagogue, and the other (Tishrei Shabbat) has been widely quoted elsewhere. --Shuki 14:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- OK, fine, so they're independent clues and we can leave as is. Yoninah 14:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Accuracy and sources
- "These statements were later refuted by his close associates."
Which associates? What's the source? If such a source exists, has the source been verified?
- "Kadouri reportedly received blessings from the Ben Ish Chai (Rabbi Yosef Chaim of Baghdad) in 1908[2] and from the Lubavitcher Rebbe (Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson) in 1990[3] that he would witness the coming of the Messiah."
The Baba Sali reportedly made a similar pronouncement, as well.
- "Other sources say these blessings were for arichat yamim, long life, which was certainly reflected in his advanced age."
Which sources? HKT 16:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Dear HKT, thank you for these good points. As a resident of Jerusalem, I can tell you that many provocative statements are often issued in the name of kabbalists such as Rav Kadouri, as well as community leaders such as Rav Yosef Shalom Eliashiv, with no confirmation from the tzaddik or gadol himself. Usually it's something "someone heard in his presence," and when it reaches a fever pitch in the public arena, someone else finally goes to the tzaddik's or gadol's gabbai (shammas), who denies that the rabbi ever said it. (These are the "close associates" I wrote into the article. As far as I know, the claims are circulated by word of mouth, and the denials are circulated by word of mouth. My husband and I have long ago learned that unless a proclamation or statement is signed by the gadol himself, you don't know where it came from.) The claims made in the article that Rav Kadouri said he met the Messiah, or that he received blessings from the Ben Ish Chai and the Lubavitcher Rebbe that he would live to see the Messiah, fall into this category of unsourced claims. Moreover, all the statements cited in the article are lifted from Haaretz, which is not the most reliable newspaper when it comes to haredi interests, and which also doesn't give the sources for these statements—just that "Rav Kadouri said them." Considering that Rav Kadouri was a very private individual, quite inaccessible except to give brachot (blessings), talked little, and didn't even publish his own novellae, I would say that ANY statements about what he said are extremely suspect. Yoninah 07:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- In other words, the statements have not really been "refuted by his close associates"; you simply question the veracity of claims that Rabbi Kaduri made such statements, and you've heard rumors which seem to confirm your doubts. I appreciate your doubts regarding claims of Ha'aretz. Another source of these claims is Arutz 7. Arutz 7 reported that Yehoshua Meiri, both an Arutz 7 showhost and a student of R' Kaduri (reportedly a close student), reported as follows regarding R' Kaduri's activity a week before his passing:
- Famed Kabbalist Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri, who has been in serious condition in the hospital for 1.5 weeks, revived and spoke with his close associates for an hour and forty minutes after the end of the Sabbath, this past Saturday night. One of those people, Arutz-7 Hebrew radio showhost Yehoshua Meiri, related to Arutz-7 the rabbi’s words. The rabbi spoke in Hebrew; what follows is an approximate translation: “The Kabbalists will investigate my words... and will reveal the secret name of Moshiach which was revealed to me on Cheshvan 9, 5764 (November 4, 2003).” The rabbi said he actually met the person who will be Moshiach, on that date.
- Meiri also reported that he was one of the four people with R' Kaduri in the room at the time. As I recall finding elsewhere, one of R' Kaduri's grandsons confirmed this. This wasn't reported as a rumor, and Arutz 7 has a reputation of at least not making things up outright. Arutz 7 also reported shortly after Yom Kippur that, on the afternoon of Yom Kippur, R' Kaduri publicly told his entire congregation that the higher soul of Moshiach had just begun to "impregnate" itself into the individual destined to be the Moshiach. This was also based on testimony from eyewitnesses (including Meiri, as I recall). You'd think that Arutz 7 would shy away from such an easily falsifiable rumor if they couldn't confirm it!
- Further, regarding the statements of the Ben Ish Chai, et al., these have also been circulated by some of R' Kaduri's students. Perhaps some research on a search engine would yield more information and sources for this. It should at least be worthwhile to do some research or ask someone if they're aware of sources before dismissing these claims out of hand. A few months ago, a shammas of R' Kaduri denied that he made a certain statement, yet R' Kaduri summarily confirmed that he did indeed make the statement. The shammas had apparently not even bothered to ask the Rabbi.
- In any event, myself being familiar with the "facts on the ground" (I attended the funeral procession), I appreciate that false statements can appear in the name of a gadol, even with his name printed at the bottom. However, I didn't need to come to Jerusalem to be in touch with this reality, and I don't think that being here should be used as an intrinsic mark of credibility. HKT 17:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- In other words, the statements have not really been "refuted by his close associates"; you simply question the veracity of claims that Rabbi Kaduri made such statements, and you've heard rumors which seem to confirm your doubts. I appreciate your doubts regarding claims of Ha'aretz. Another source of these claims is Arutz 7. Arutz 7 reported that Yehoshua Meiri, both an Arutz 7 showhost and a student of R' Kaduri (reportedly a close student), reported as follows regarding R' Kaduri's activity a week before his passing:
[edit] Inaproppiate image
The image of the funeral is irrelevant and even offensive. OK, somebody uploaded this photo, but it does not say that it should appear in the article. 18:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's only your opinion. A funeral in which hundreds of thousands participate is a notable event at the end of anyone's life and pictures are actually encouraged on WP, not censored. --Shuki 19:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Age of Kaduri 2
While there is no contradiction to have several obituaries in the Ex links section, it is not productive to title them with their estiamte of the birthdate since that is not the main difference and it would simply detract from the article, and simply add more confusion. If you think it improves the article, please tell. --Shuki 11:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it is obituary article, i think we need to point out the years, i am not putting those years in the article itself, only the link.
