From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Expanding Universe[edit]

The Nahmanides quote about an expanding universe are not his words. They are Schroeder's words. The full context of the quote states that: "Nahmanides's account of the first seconds of the universe reads like this:". It doesn't seem that the page on Nahmanides should attribute a quote to him that he never said. Skinrider (talk) 03:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chavel's translation says nothing about mustard seeds or an expanding universe. Skinrider (talk) 04:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I do not understand this; "Shortly after his arrival in Jerusalem he addressed a letter to his son Nahman, in which he described the desolation of the Holy City..." The Sefardim do name after the living. Would he name his first son after himself? It would be our custom that he would name his first son after his fathers given name.Elsewhere I read that his oldest son was named Salomon. Respectfully, Benjamin Nahman

His name isn't Nahman, its Moshe ben Nahman. So the son, Nahman is named after his [the son's] grandfather...

This is also incorrect.I have traced our history,so far, to 365 bce., and the name Nahman was a family name and did not follow the practice of those who did not have one. Those who had no surname used the procedure you outline. Respectfully, Ben Nahman

Bonastruc ça Porta[edit]

This article says that his Catalan name is Bonastruc ça Porta, and so does the article in the Catalan Wikipedia. I also find his name as Bonastruc da Porta. Seems like it's not just a typo - according to "ça" was indeed used as an article in the middle of names.

Can anyone show a more complete picture? What would his name really be in 13th century Girona? Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

of Gerondi[edit]

I think this is more correct. Since he lived in Spain, and ultimately left, for Israel, it is unlikely he adopted this last name pejorative. He is not even known by this name. It is more correct to say "of". I labeled this a minor edit. I think it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannyza1981 (talkcontribs) 22:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gerondi is not a pejorative. It just means that he lived in Girona. Gerondi already means "of Girona". It appears in many sources.
If you feel the need to explain an edit on the talk, then it is probably not minor. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 07:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. He is not known or called this title. 2. He is from Gerondi, not that his last name is Gerondi, and the current state gives the impression that his last name is Gerondi, not that he is from there.

The Ramban, Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman of Gerona is more accurate. Dannyza1981 (talk) 00:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ch, kh and h[edit]

How does this fit in with the current confusion over the entitled mistransliteration of the letters chaf and 'chet into English. While it might have been perfectly in order to have an "h" with a little dot under it to indicate the "h" sound as in "horse" is being made into a chet' or chaf sound, without this little dot, it comes out like "h" in "horse," which is totally inappropriate. His father's name was not Nahman as though it could be written Na'aman with an ayin, but Nachman. The article should be changed to "Nachmanidies." DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 17:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ramban's Grave[edit]

Rambanb may have been buried near Haifa, but he could not have been buried near R. Yehgiel of Paris as the latter never made it to the Land of Israel. This is borne out by a chronicle published by YM Ta Shma in Shalem V. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Did Israel exist in the 13th century? I, as a lay, was a little confused when I saw this term here. I think it should be more appropriate and clearer to write "Land of Israel", or the name of the city he died in, or simply Palestine. At least, no link to the modern day Israel estate's page should be added, but to that of Land of Israel,etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfC at Yeshu[edit]

We could really use some thoughtful and well-informed comments here. Thanks. Slrubenstein | Talk 11:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was Nahmanides a kabbalist? I think not.[edit]

How can Nahmanides have been a Kabbalist if the Zohar was not published till after he died? It seems to be a rather widespread assertion that Nahmanides was a "Kabbalist" or "Mystic" but I have never seen any proof from his writings or elsewhere that indeed he was one. Perhaps this is a case of "reinventing" history to match what later people believed about him. I seem to recall reading somewhere in his commentaries on the Torah that he wrote something to the effect of "... al pi sod" (according to secret or hidden) but that can hardly be termed Kabbalist! Anyone have more insights on this? Dstokar Template:Unsigned -->

1st of all the Holy Zohar was NOT & still is NOT the only book or teaching tradition of Kabbalah. In Morocco, Tunis & Yemen there are very old traditions of Kabbalah that have nothing to do with the Zohar. They are from teachings of teacher to student dating from generations of the eras of the "judges" & the prophets even before King David. Also long before the rediscovery & before the publishing of the Zohar, the Bahir, as basic & deep book of Kabbalah, was well known in circles of Kabbalist Rabbis.Until the publication of the Zohar, the Bahir, by Rabbi Nehunya of the Mishnaic era, was the most influential and widely quoted primary source of Kabbalistic teachings.

2nd - "... al pi sod" is always a referral to Kabbalistic understandings/teachings. In his commentaries on the Torah as well as other writings (e.g. Shaar Hagmul)anyone who truly knows Kabbalah will see many inclusions of it there. An example is his treatise on the proper conjugal relations, which along with Shulhhan Arukh (Codex of Jewish Law)& Musar (moral teachings) includes a good number of Kabbalistic inferences.

3rd though not published to the public eye, a good part of the teachings in the Zohar were passed down from teacher to student for centuries.


Derashah Vikuach Emunah u-vitachon Igeret On Torah: (talk) 14:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]