Jump to content

Talk:Jewish religious clothing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joe Lieberman image

[edit]

Joe Lieberman is a religious Jew. I"ve added this image of Joe Lieberman meeting President Ronald Reagan. It is illustrative of Jewish religious clothing. Bus stop (talk) 18:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. He"s not wearing anything "Jewish" in that picture. He"s wearing a business suit meeting the President. Nothing inherently Jewish in the picture. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you do want Joe"s pictures, I found some that might be copyrighted, but they are of him and of McCain, at the Western Wall that might be appropriate. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to do the same thing and for the same reason. Debresser (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • From where are either of you deriving that certain items qualify as religious and certain other items do not qualify as religious? I have reverted. Joe Lieberman is a religious Jew. If he has dressed himself with deliberation then his clothing is religious in accordance with the subject area of this article. The identity of clothing in this instance would follow from the identity of the individual wearing the clothing. Religious Jews commonly wear business suits to synagogue or for other religious functions such as Shabbos and Jewish weddings. If the person is religious then the clothing of that person is Jewish religious clothing. This is not to say that there are no standards as to what constitutes Jewish religious clothing. But the standards are not the stereotypically strict standards which might maintain that only a Tallit is an item of Jewish religious clothing. Some much more casual items are commonly encountered in Jewish religious settings, especially among the more liberal branches of Judaism. The lede of our article is saying "Jewish religious clothing has been influenced by Biblical commandments, modesty requirements, and the contemporary styles of clothing worn in the many societies in which Jews have lived". Do you know that Lieberman is not wearing Tzitzit tucked into his pants? Do you know that his suit is in violation of Shatnez? Obviously "modesty requirements" are being met. You have no reason whatsoever to reject the clothing seen in the image as not being religious. Bus stop (talk) 18:58, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I reverted again. There is nothing in the picture to show what clothing is distinctive and Jewish. Please discuss on the talk page before reverting again. If you really want an image of Joe, then find one of him in distinctive Jewish religious clothing. Him in common business attire is not appropriate. If you find an image of him with tzitzis, then that would be appropriate, but we can"t show a picture of him in a suit and then say there"s tzitzis underneath. Do you know that Lieberman is wearing tzitzis? Do you know his shatnes status? Sir Joseph (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There is nothing in the picture to show what clothing is distinctive and Jewish." Nor need there be. Religious Jews wear religious Jewish clothing, axiomatically. Bus stop (talk) 19:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don"t think I need to supply a "purpose" for the particular way in which a religious Jew attires himself. He knows he is a religious Jew. He knows this when he shops for clothes and he knows this when he gets dressed in the morning. From where do you derive that Jewish religious attire needs to be distinctive to qualify for inclusion in this article? We would not deliberately pick a photo of a religious Jew in uncharacteristic clothing. Thus the "Hanes underwear" photo would not make much sense. But a business suit and shirt and tie is typical dress for a religious Jew. Contrary to the present state of the article we are not seeking exotic clothing for inclusion in this article. The range of types of clothing is far wider than you are allowing. I think this is an exceptionally idiotic a flawed article, as it exists. But there is a notion at Wikipedia that an article can be written on anything. If we want to write an article on the subject area that you are suggesting, it should could be titled "Stereotypes of Jewish religious clothing". Alternatively this could be a list, with links to articles on stereotypically Jewish religious clothing and accouterments. But the present title certainly allows for a wide range of clothing that would constitute acceptable attire for religious Jews. "Usage" is what matters. Lieberman uses the particular attire in the photo. In fact he uses it to meet the President of the United States. He certainly chooses his clothing for that occasion carefully. Bus stop (talk) 21:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Firstly, not to get into semantics, you would need to clarify that he is religious. He himself likes to say that he isn"t because he doesn"t want to be a spokesman for Orthodox Judaism. Secondly, again, his dress is that of a Senator. So again, you can take a picture of anyone wearing clothing and show it. Should I take a selfie and put it up? The article is "Jewish religious clothing", not "Religious Jews in clothing". A person in a suit is not religious clothing. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • For a very long, exhaustive version of this article we could have a spirited debate about whether to include such an image as an illustration of cultural assimilation with respect to clothing. In today"s article, this image is disruptive and frivolous. Ibadibam (talk) 23:19, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

as well as rules for the clothing of Israelite priests.[1]

[edit]

Did whoever wrote that consider that the clothing described in close detail concerning the ostensible priestly clothing prescribed in the Exodus period comes from a Torah recension that, at least in one hypothesis, may go back to the (late) Persian period, a 1,000 years perhaps separating the two in traditional chronological reckoning? What evidence is there that the dress thus described was "Israelitic" (historical reminiscence) and not "Jewish" (reflecting contemporary temple dress codes in the second half of the first millennium)? The link is utterly confused since that page describes this clothing as ordered by Aaron for the temple several centuries before the building of the First Temple. Sigh (in other words, please try to source the text from modern specialized scholarship, not guessing from a primary text, as everywhere in this kind of article. The result, as above, is sheer muddle). Nishidani (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was intended to get a well-sourced mention of priestly clothes into the article. Rewrite/expand as you see fit, here or at Biblical_clothing#Israelite_priests. If you consider A Cultural History of Jewish Dress a bad source for this, use others. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of describing history, your scrutiny is warranted, but in terms of current belief and practice, don"t forget that the scriptural definition remains part of the religion today, so that even if the use of these garments is considered suspended, the concept and definition of the garments is very much "Jewish". Ibadibam (talk) 07:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My problem is with linking to other pages whose sourcing quality is poor (b) or copy-and-pasting from them, without examining the quality of the sourcing on the original page. For example, Yemeni dress. The Yemenite Jews page tells one little of what modern anthropological studies state: you create all sorts of problems if you lift from it the bit about dark blue dress, without knowing that this concerned what foreign travelers observed only in large cities like Sana"a, where an imam"s authority was strictly en forced, but did not hold for the majority of Yemeni Jews in the generally outlying clan and tribal villages, where religious enforcement was weak, and the tolerance of tribal chieftains allowed Jews to dress like other Arabs in their areas.
Current belief. The question is not about current opinion, but what current scholarship tells one about Israelitic Temple dress. The source page in the link is for this devoid of adequate sourcing. It"s not about doubting any "Jewishness" (the Tanakh constitutes Jewish tradition). It"s about getting adequate scholarly coverage of period dress (which would note, incidentally, the parallel with Egyptian temple dress). As we have it it is primary source WP:OR, ignoring the fact that the Tanakh"s descriptions of each element are often inconsistent. Precisely for this reason, one needs adequate scholarly sources, which are lacking on this, and the linked page. Familiarizing oneself with the relevant scholarship is a simple procedure, and I don"t know why editors wanting to edit here seem reluctant to avail themselves of it, esp. since best policy privileges article construction via reliable secon dary sources. Poaching other articles, themselves defective, is not the way to go, for it only leads, as here, to replicating inexact "stuff". Nishidani (talk) 10:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Nishidani, this article deals specifically with every-day and ordinary Jewish religious clothing. This article does not focus on the Jewish High Priest, since we"ve already got a separate article that deals with the Jewish High Priest. If you wish to expand there, please do so.Davidbena (talk) 20:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Neither does my recent edit, predictably disemboweled, shift the focus of the article on high priests (which in any case is slightly inappropriate since ha-kohen ha-gadol though used in sources, shouldn"t stricto sensu be used of an Israelite priest, it being post-exilic usage) Since English is my mother tongue, I know what "Jewish religious clothing means": it accommodates, particularly in a background section, a single sentence on ritual religious garb in the Temple. No! Horror of horrors, excised, delete, expunge it, because editors (who don"t appear to be building the page) ply the worry beads over whether pre-rabbinical priestly garments are admissible. Huge amount of talk page socializing, nigh to zero article construction. If I tip you off that the historical anthropology of Yemeni Jews shows that the blue garb you copied and pasted in is misleading, no one moves, or checks the assertion out, or corrects the misimpression left on the page. Has no one any curiosity in here?
Were this place less hostile to editors like myself, you"d probably have a detailed three section account of historical and regional varieties of Jewish religious clothing, that doesn"t mention high priests. Since every attempt to start constructing that meets adamant reverting on sight, evidently, any work I do here is pointless. It"s no skin off my nose.Nishidani (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Disagreement should not be interpreted as hostility. I actually find it quite honorable that you, of all persons, will think it worthy to contribute to an article on Jewish clothing. I have no hard feelings against you, whatsoever, although we might not agree on political issues. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 21:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hear, hear. Debresser (talk) 21
17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • "Religious" does not mean "possibly fictitious". This article is addressing actual clothing worn by actual Jews. If a Biblical text such as Exodus depicts garments worn by a high priest, we have no way of knowing if this is fictitious or not. It is "clothing" and it would even be considered "religious clothing", but it is not the clothing know to be worn by actual Jews in the real world. I think this distinction would lead us to treat these two different situations in separate articles. Bus stop (talk) 00:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of 2/3 of the current images

[edit]

[1]. IMO, not an improvement. The leadimage is ok, but if someone has a better one, use that. There is also the march-RFC above. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:34, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For my part I don"t care what the lead image is, as long as there is one, so thank you for restoring it. I have no problem with the current image although if we found one depicting more variety I wouldn"t mind it. Ibadibam (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course hasidic garb is not the only type of Jewish clothing, but if is well-recognizable and well-know, so I think having this as the lead image is a good idea. I was one of those who held in the Rfc above that the image of a woman with tefillin should go, and frankly feel that the closing editor made more of a counting of votes than that he weighted the arguments (even though he mentions them), so I still feel that image should go. Debresser (talk) 20:29, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And I think it"s a pretty good one. The RFC also mentioned the possibility of a gallery. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Debresser: you can always challenge the closure. I wouldn"t want anyone to feel that Wikipedia policy has not been appropriately followed. Ibadibam (talk) 22:17, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hum111

[edit]

Reporting 136.158.11.56 (talk) 03:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jewish_religious_clothing&oldid=1274733418"