Author Archives: yishmaelgunzhard

A 2,700-year-old seal impression on clay unearthed in Jerusalem this February piqued enormous interest, after its finder, the leading Jerusalem archaeologist Dr. Eilat Mazar, said it may have been the personal seal of Isaiah the Prophet himself. Biblical scholars have been quarreling ever since.

The ancient Hebrew script, engraved with a sharp point, says Yeshayahu NBY, Mazar deciphered.

Yeshayahu is the Hebrew form of Isaiah: that much is clear. The question is about the three letters following the name: nun-bet-yod, “NBY”.

That could spell the start of the four-letter Hebrew word navi, meaning “prophet,” if we assume that there was a fourth letter, aleph, which broke off. Mazar thinks that could well be the case, and that they may have found proof that Isaiah the Prophet, contemporary King Hezekiah, really existed. But as with so many artifacts from antiquity, the truth is far from categorical.

Finding Isaiah

In antiquity, seals were used as signatures to mark ownership, authenticity, or agreement. The name of the person would often be followed by the name of the person’s father, ancestral location, or profession. Finding a personal name alone was the exception.

Unfortunately, the clay bulla (seal impression) that Mazar found was damaged. The second word is broken off after three letters, NBY (or NVY: the letters B and V are the same in Hebrew).

To be the word “prophet,” the missing fourth letter would have to be an aleph. But who knows if it was? That is just one reason many take issue with interpreting NBY as “prophet,” Nadav Na’aman, professor of Jewish history at Tel Aviv University, tells Haaretz.

Alan Millard, professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages at Liverpool University, is also skeptical, for another reason. The word “prophet” would not have followed the personal name without the definite article “the” (ha in Hebrew), Millard argues. So, if it belonged to the prophet, the bulla should have read “Yeshayahu HaNavi” – i.e. HNBY.

“There are other Hebrew seals or impressions which have a profession after the owners’ names and they all have the definite article (HSPR, meaning “the scribe”, for instance),” Millard points out.

Mazar herself agrees that rather than designating occupation, the “NBY” could have been part or all of a personal name. Unless we find more impressions of this seal, we will never know.

Isaiah the son

For his part, Na’aman suggests that the second word, NBY, could be a Middle East patronymic. In other words, he postulates that the impression originally read “Isaiah (son of) NBY” – for instance, possibly “Isaiah son of Nebai” – another name from biblical sources.

If Naaman is right, the Hebrew word for “son of,” ben (BN), is missing. Millard disagrees, feeling that the seal would have plenty of space to add the letters “BN” for “son of”.

What can be said is that the name “Nebai” existed in biblical times and meant “from the city of Nob”, which was a priestly town not far from Jerusalem, though we aren’t sure today where exactly it was.

The Book of Nehemiah describes how the children of Israel confessed their sins to the Lord, praised him, enumerated his achievements (for instance, “You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws” – Nehemiah 9:13). The Israelites then entered into a covenant with the Lord that was written out and sealed by the princes, Levites and priests. Among the many, many names mentioned as having signatory rights on that occasion was one “Nebai,” listed among the leaders of the people (Nehemiah 10:19).

By the way, if this Isaiah really was the son of this Nebai, then he wasn’t the prophet, if only on the grounds that the prophet said his father was named Amoz.

Incredibly, archaeologists have found four sets of seal impressions featuring the name Nebai, but three are non-provenanced – meaning, the researchers can’t be sure where they originate.

The fourth was unearthed in Lachish, and the impression gained is that Nebai is indeed a personal name. (The four seal impressions are described in “Corpus of West Semitic Stamp Seals,” originally written by Nahman Avigad and revised by Benjamin Sass: Nos. 227, 379, 530 and 693, and see p. 513.)

Lastly, this wasn’t the first time that archaeologists found the name “Isaiah” outside the context of the Bible in a contemporary inscription. The Avigad-Sass “Corpus of West Semitic Stamp Seals” lists three seals (Nos. 212, 213, and 214) belonging to men named Isaiah, complete with patronymics: the three had different fathers, none of whom was Amoz.

What can be said that the Hebrew script on Mazar’s seal impression is typical of the 8th century B.C.E., the period Isaiah was supposed to have lived.

With the last word not said, who then was Isaiah the Prophet, anyway?

Who was Isaiah?

Millard for one sees no reason to doubt that Isaiah was a real person who lived in the reigns of Sargon II, then Sennacherib – Sargon being the Assyrian king who marched through Judah, conquering 46 of King Hezekiah’s fortified cities, but who mysteriously withdrew after reaching Jerusalem just as victory over the cowed Judahite king seemed assured.

Millard’s indicator lies in how Sargon’s name is spelled in the Book of Isaiah.

Isaiah was a contemporary of Sargon II, who ruled from 722 to 705 B.C.E. (Isaiah 20:1-2), the prophet himself says in the biblical narrative.

In Isaiah 20:1, the Assyrian king’s name is spelled SRGN, which is the Aramaic version. The Assyrians spoke Aramaic (a language very like Hebrew, originally spoken by the Aramaeans that would eventually become the international language for trade in Assyria and Babylon too).

We know the Assyrians spelled Sargon the same way, SRGN, from an Aramaic seal imprint found at Khorsabad, the site of the king’s new palace near Nineveh, Millard explains.

If the Book of Isaiah was a later artifact, written or revised during the Jews’ Babylonian exile, Sargon would presumably have been written the Babylonian way – “SHRKN.”

Scourge of kings

In the first verse of his book, Isaiah introduces himself as “Isaiah son of Amoz” and tells us that he served as a prophet “during the reigns of Uzziah Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah” (Isaiah 1:1).

If so, this means that Isaiah was active no less than 46 years, probably beginning his career at the end of Uzziah’s reign around 743 B.C.E.

According to the Bible, this was a period of international tension and inner turmoil. Political unrest was rife, bribery tainted the courts, and hypocrisy was tearing the religious fabric of society. Even some Judahite kings persisted with pagan worship, not caviling at human sacrifice:

“Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. Unlike David his father, he did not do what was right in the eyes of the Lord. He followed the ways of the kings of Israel and also made idols for worshiping the Baals. He burned sacrifices in the Valley of Ben Hinnom and sacrificed his children in the fire” (2 Chronicles 28:1-3; and the list of Ahaz’s sins goes on. Judah is punished for Ahaz’s sins.)

There are other elaborations of pagan worship by the Judahic kings in 2 Kings 16:5-8 and Isaiah 7:1-12, for example.

Isaiah, who seemed to have been quite outspoken even to kings, did not spare them his rhetoric, calling the rulers of Judah “dictators of Sodom” (Isaiah 1:10).

Secular records and archaeological finds in Judah and Jerusalem support Isaiah’s account of the religious and political affairs in Judah at the time, by and large.

Archaeologists have found hundreds of terracotta pagan figurines in Jerusalem and Judah, mainly in the ruins of private homes. Most were nude females with exaggerated breasts, which some scholars identify with fertility goddesses such as Asherah – talismans aiding in conception and childbirth. (Others argue that they bear no signs of divinity.)

At some “high places,” so-called bamah, a sort of open-air altar dedicated to sacrifices to Yahweh, archaeologist have found inscriptions saying, “I bless you by Yahweh of Samaria and by his Asherah,” and another says, “I bless you by Yahweh of Teman and by his Asherah!” Namely, YHWH, God of the Jews.

No toady Isaiah

Although Isaiah may not have been popular with all of the kings of Judah, he seemed to have got along with some, not that he was necessarily a bearer of cheer. When King Hezekiah fell gravely ill, Isaiah came to him and told him he was going to die (Isaiah 38:1).

King Hezekiah, who ruled from around 727 to 686/7 B.C.E., was one of the more important kings of Judah, and he seems to have tolerated the influence of the opinionated prophet. Nothing less than the king’s own seal imprint seems to have been found in 2009, during Mazar’s excavations in Jerusalem. In fact the recent “Isaiah seal” was found just a few feet from the Hezekiah seal mark.

(Several examples of bullae imprinted by seals bearing Hezekiah’s name appeared on the antiquities market before Mazar found the one in situ in Jerusalem. There was more than one seal inscribed ‘Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, king of Judah’: the seals were probably delegated to high officials. We know Assyrian kings’ seals were so used.)

The discovery of the “Isaiah seal” so nearby the king’s does not prove the theory that the “Isaiah seal” was the seal impression of Isaiah the Prophet himself, who was an adviser to the king, as Mazar herself observes. But it is intriguing.

During Hezekiah’s reign, the kingdom was invaded by King Sennacherib of Assyria, an event described in detail (Isaiah 36-37) and corroborated by the extra-biblical account inscribed in the Annals of Sennacherib Prism, the Rassam Cylinder and also Histories, written by the 5th century B.C.E. Greek Herodotus. Sennacherib’s siege of Jerusalem was so dramatic that it was still inspiring writers eons later, including Dante and Lord Byron:

“The Assyrians came down like the wolf on the fold, and his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold; And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea, when the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee” – Lord Byron

Isaiah the scribe?

Not only did Isaiah seem to have been close to the kings of Judah, having access to Ahaz and Hezekiah: he also seemed to have had training in scribal skills.

Isaiah was evidently familiar with the way scribes worked in 8th -century B.C.E. Judah, such as using wax-covered wooden tablets as instant notebooks, and only later copying the text onto papyrus or leather (which may have been more common, as papyrus had to be imported from Egypt): “Now come, write it upon a tablet with them, and inscribe it even in a book…” (Isaiah 30:8).

“Isaiah was a member of the upper class in Judah and could well

have been able to write and read,” says Millard. In fact he is convinced

that writing was widespread in Israel and Judah in the 8th and 7th

centuries B.C.E. The sheer number of sites with texts, the quantity

of short texts and the multitude of seals and impressions bearing

their owners’ names should dispel any notion that writing was rare, Millard argues.

It bears adding that a lot of historians and archaeologists do not agree that reading and writing were commonplace 3,000 years ago, but many do. If the Judahite scribes were doing menial legal and administrative duties such as making lists, setting out legal deals and writing letters – Millard for one thinks it reasonable to expect some to have spent time writing other texts, as was done in Mesopotamia and Egypt.

Hebrew compositions found on ancient ostraca (pottery fragments) and walls (they had graffiti then too) prove that somebody at least was writing things other than laundry lists and praise to the king. One ostracon found in the Israeli desert outpost of Arad bears part of a literary text. Another from the fort at Horvat Uzza is of literary nature, possibly a sapient work by a local author.

Elsewhere, at Kuntillet Ajrud in the Sinai, lines of a prophetic verse written on wall plaster have been dated to the early 8th century B.C.E.

Isaiah may not have been a professional scribe per se, but some scholars assume that he was well versed, not only delivering his prophecies orally but writing them down. Na’aman however begs to note that there are no other examples of prophets who delivered their prophecy in a written form.

“Jeremiah is the only prophet in the days of the Kings who is recorded as having his prophecies written down,” Millard adds.

Revelation: Predicting the Messiah

Whether Isaiah is fact or figment is a matter of interest to both Jews and Christians, since among other things Isaiah foretold a number of details about the coming of the Messiah.

It is a paragraph by Isaiah that has become one of the most controversial passages in the Old Testament. As the King James Version translates Isaiah 7:14: “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son.“

More modern translations take issue with the translation of the Hebrew word alma as “virgin,” arguing that it merely means “young woman”.

Isaiah also foretold that the Messiah would be a descendent of David (Isaiah 11:1-5). He predicted that the Messiah would not be accepted by the majority of Israel and instead be a “stone of stumbling” to them (Isaiah 8:14,15).

In the book of Isaiah, the Messiah prophetically says: “My back I gave to the strikersmy face did not conceal from humiliating things and spit” (Isaiah 50:6). He even gave details of the Messiah’s death, foretelling: “He will make his burial place even with the wicked ones, and with the rich class in death” (Isaiah 53:9).

Finally Isaiah spoke of the meaning of the Messiah’s death:

“The righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people; and their errors he himself will bear” (Isaiah 53:8,11).

Many Christians today identify the Messiah with Jesus Christ, and view Isaiah’s prophecies regarding the Messiah as fulfilled by the works and life of Jesus Christ.

Victory by rodent

For Jews, Isaiahic prophecies of Exile and Restoration attest to his divine inspiration. He foretold that Assyria would not dethrone the kings of Judah and destroy Jerusalem – but Babylon would.

When Assyria “flooded” Judah “up to the neck”, Isaiah gave King Hezekiah the comforting message that the Assyrian forces wouldn’t take Jerusalem (Isaiah 8:7,8).

Ultimately, the prophet was right. Assyrian accounts describe how Sennacherib surrounded, besieged and conquered 46 of Hezekiah’s fortified walled cities, and seized 200,150 people and all kinds of domestic animals as spoils of war. Sennacherib mockingly describes how he trapped Hezekiah:

“Himself [Hezekiah] I made a prisoner in Jerusalem, his royal residence, like a bird in a cage”.

The Assyrian leader imposed a heavy tribute of 30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver and all kind of luxury items – as well as the king’s daughters, palace women and singers. The annals tell how Hezekiah dispatched messengers to deliver the tribute.

But just as victory seemed to be at hand, Sennacherib suddenly lifted the siege and did not depose Hezekiah from the Judahite throne.

Even the ancients puzzled over why the Assyrians did not capture Jerusalem despite his reputation for mercilessness.

Could Assyrian ambitions have been tamed by the mouse? The Greek historian Herodotus tells us, based on tales told him by Egyptian priests:

“During the night a horde of field mice gnawed quivers and their bows and the handles of shields, with the result that many [Assyrian soldiers] were killed, fleeing unarmed the next day” – Herodotus 2.141.

Mice were a symbol of pestilence in the ancient world, and may have been employed here allegorically. But Herodotus’ story is that mouse attack devastated the Assyrians outside Jerusalem and the rest is, well, perhaps history.

Or, perhaps the Assyrian forces were decimated by a pestilence carried by rodent. Or something else.

Ultimately, however, Jerusalem was captured by the Persian king Cyrus in 587 B.C.E. – an event also predicted by the prophet (Isaiah 45:1,2).

How many Isaiahs were there?

The issue of prophecy is one thing that has caused many scholars to question the authorship of the Book of Isaiah.

In the 12th century, the Jewish commentator Abraham ibn Ezra suggested that the second half of the book, from Chapter 40, was written by somebody else who lived during the post-Isaiah period of the Babylonian exile.

Today many scholars believe that as many as three Deutero-Isaiahs may have contributed later than the 6th century B.C.E., during or after the exile. That would explain the “prophecies” of Judah’s desolation.

It bears adding that in the Isaiah manuscript among the roughly 2,200-year-old Dead Sea Scrolls, Chapter 40 begins on the last line of a column and ends in the next column. There is no sign of change in writer or division in the book at that point.

Then there is the testimony of first-century Jewish-Roman historian Flavius Josephus, who not only indicates that the prophecies in Isaiah pertaining to Cyrus were written in the 8th century B.C.E. – but also says that Cyrus was aware of these prophecies.

“These things Cyrus knew,” Josephus writes, “from reading the book of prophecy which Isaiah had left behind two hundred and ten years earlier.”

According to Josephus, knowledge of these prophecies may even have contributed to Cyrus’ willingness to send the Jews back to their homeland. As Josephus writes: Cyrus was “seized by a strong desire and ambition to do what had been written.” (Jewish Antiquities, Book XI, chapter 1, paragraph 2).

“I have no difficulty in positing a single author for the Book of Isaiah on grounds of faith. If we allow that books might be revised, then that could account for the otherwise awkward appearance of the name Cyrus,” Millard explains.

Was Isaiah a historic figure with prophetic powers? The authors of the Gospels thought so, crediting Isaiah with writing the book, and so did Josephus, and Shimon ben Yeshua ben Eliezer ben Sira, the Jerusalemite sage who wrote in the 2nd century B.C.E.

These writers may not have been contemporary, but they weren’t 850 years in delay, basing their assumptions on medieval manuscripts from the 12th century C.E., as some modern biblical scholars today tend to do.

Did the clay bulla found in Jerusalem belong to Isaiah the prophet of the 8th century B.C.E.? As he himself exclaimed in his book, “Here I am, Send me!” (Isaiah 6:8). Who knows, maybe that did happen, and we will find solid evidence of his existence one day.

Por: David Malowany

Hoy hace dos años del asesinato de David Fremd. También es el día Internacional de la Mujer. Los uruguayos estamos tan imbuidos de las verdades a medias que se nos inculcan en nuestro proceso educativo, que pensamos que no hay emancipación posible sin tomas de las posibles bastillas y declaraciones de la independencia.  Pero la realidad es que un proceso para ser duradero y no cruento, deber ser gradual. Las mujeres fueron consiguiendo su liberación paulatinamente y todavía falta mucho camino por recorrer.

Frecuentemente les pregunto a los intelectuales que visitan nuestras playas como vislumbran que se solucionará el conflicto árabe – judío en Eretz Israel Palestina. Unánimemente me comentan que no tienen ni idea. Que no pueden imaginar que será de esa región dentro de cien años.

Desde esta columna he expresado que mi pensamiento mas o menos utópico, es que Israel abandone su carácter judío y se constituya un Estado binacional, tal vez dividido en cantones a la manera suiza o canadiense. Presumo que no voy a vivir para ver como termina todo esto, pero cada día estoy más convencido que los árabes al oeste del Río Jordán no tendrán su toma de la Bastilla o Declaración de Independencia, sino que el fin de la opresión que sufren por parte de  los judíos será más o menos gradual, tal cual fue la emancipación de las mujeres o de los afrodescendientes en distintos países o Estados Unidos.

Vean, según informa el matutino Haaretz, a pesar del boicot oficial, más de la mitad de los palestinos de Jerusalén oriental quieren votar en las elecciones municipales. A medida que crece la desesperación sobre las posibilidades de una solución de dos estados, las llamadas a participar dentro del sistema israelí crecen, a fin de reducir la desigualdad entre las partes occidental y oriental de la ciudad.

Casi el 60 por ciento de los residentes palestinos de Jerusalén Oriental creen que deberían participar en las elecciones municipales de la ciudad, mientras que solo el 14 por ciento se opone a hacerlo, según una nueva encuesta.

Los encuestados que apoyan votar en las elecciones municipales tienden a ser más jóvenes, más educados y  privilegiados económicamente.

En los últimos años, especialmente cuando la desesperación sobre las posibilidades de una solución de dos estados ha decrecido, ha habido llamadas crecientes dentro de la comunidad palestina de Jerusalén Este para participar en elecciones municipales para mejorar la situación en los vecindarios palestinos y reducir la desigualdad entre el este de la ciudad y parte occidental. Pero tales declaraciones han sido vehementemente opuestas por los principales partidos palestinos, y los palestinos que buscaron postularse para las elecciones fueron atacados violentamente hasta que retiraron sus candidaturas.

Los palestinos actualmente comprenden alrededor del 40 por ciento de las 865,000 personas de Jerusalén. Después de que Israel se anexó Jerusalén Este en 1967, el estado israelí,  le dio a los habitantes palestinos de la zona  derecho a votar en las elecciones municipales, pero no en las nacionales. Sin embargo, los palestinos han boicoteado consecuentemente las elecciones al alcalde y al ayuntamiento. En las últimas elecciones municipales de Jerusalén, por ejemplo, votó menos del 1 por ciento de los palestinos elegibles.

La encuesta, encargada por la Universidad Hebrea de Jerusalén, se basa en entrevistas cara a cara con 612 palestinos de Jerusalén Oriental. Fue tomada en enero, luego de que el presidente de los Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, reconociera a Jerusalén como la capital de Israel.

“Participar en elecciones es visto como una forma de expresar insatisfacción con la situación existente tanto a nivel cívico como diplomático, dada toda la incertidumbre que se deriva de la continuación de la situación existente, sin posibilidad de cambio visible en el horizonte”, dijo Prof. Dan Miodownik, director del Instituto de Relaciones Internacionales Leonard Davis de la universidad.

Miodownik y el estudiante de doctorado Noam Brenner, del departamento de ciencias políticas de la universidad, diseñaron y encargaron la encuesta junto con el IPCRI – Israel-Palestina: iniciativas regionales creativas. La encuesta real fue realizada por el Centro Palestino de Opinión Pública, encabezado por el Dr. Nabil Kukali. “Parte de la historia aquí es una de protesta: contra la situación, contra Israel, contra la falta de un horizonte diplomático”, continuó Miodownik. “No es que se estén diciendo a sí mismos, ‘si participamos en las elecciones, todo estará bien’.

“También vemos en las otras preguntas que hay una gran oposición a la normalización con Israel, pero participar en las elecciones municipales es la única forma en que los palestinos tienen que protestar legalmente en Israel”, agregó. “Es el único método que la ley no les impide usar”.

Pero a pesar de los resultados de la encuesta, Miodownik cree que aún está lejos el día en que un gran número de palestinos de Jerusalén Oriental votarán en las elecciones municipales, debido a la feroz oposición de los partidos palestinos. “Para que esto suceda, necesitarían al menos el consentimiento tácito de Fatah”, dijo el partido que controla la Autoridad Palestina.

Hace aproximadamente seis meses, Eyad Bahbouh, un maestro del vecindario A-Tur de Jerusalén Este, anunció el establecimiento de un partido político en Jerusalén Este para presentarse en las elecciones municipales y ha estado tratando de movilizar apoyo para ello. Ramadan Dabash, jefe de la administración del vecindario de Sur Baher y activista en el partido gobernante Likud de Israel, también está tratando de postularse para el consejo municipal.

La encuesta preguntó a los encuestados sobre su solución preferida para la ciudad. Un enorme 97.4 por ciento se opuso firmemente a la idea de que Jerusalén en sus fronteras actuales permanezca anexionada a Israel. Pero una mayoría no menos arrolladora, el 96.6 por ciento, se opuso firmemente al regreso a las líneas de 1967 sin acceso libre a ambos lados de la ciudad.

Cuando se le preguntó acerca de regresar a las líneas de 1967 mientras mantenía el acceso libre a ambos lados de la ciudad, la oposición bajó al 34.5 por ciento. Sin embargo, solo el 22 por ciento en realidad apoyó esta solución.

Otra opción que provocó una oposición radical -95 por ciento- fue que todos los barrios palestinos de Jerusalén pasaran a formar parte de un estado palestino, excepto la Ciudad Vieja, donde Israel retendría el control, pero también defendiera el status quo religioso en los lugares sagrados. Cuando se le preguntó acerca de una solución similar en la que los palestinos obtendrían el control del Monte del Templo, la oposición bajó al 50 por ciento, pero solo el 12 por ciento lo apoyó.

“Aquí hay dos soluciones opuestas: una división clásica a lo largo de las líneas de 1967 y una anexión completa, y todos los encuestados se oponen a ambas,” Miodownik.

En octubre del año pasado, el presidente del Consejo Comunitario del barrio de Tzur Baher en Jerusalén, el Dr. Ramadan Dabash,  se reunió en a Knesset con el partido comunista israelí  para la presentación de un proyecto de ley que  homenajee al  primer Rabino Ashkenazi de Eretz Israel Palestina , Rabino Abraham Isaac Hacohen Kook.

Hablando con Arutz Sheva, se le preguntó a Dabash qué causa que un Mukhtar provenga de un vecindario que ha producido terroristas para homenajear la figura del rabino Kook. “Necesitamos paz”, respondió. “Todos vivimos en el mismo estado, bajo la soberanía del Estado de Israel, y necesitamos que [los parlamentarios] se preocupen por todas las poblaciones y religiones en Israel”.  Dijo además Dabash, “Para mí, el rabino Kook es una figura de paz, y uno puede aprender mucho de él. Cuando vi sus escritos, comprendí que estaba preocupado por las minorías, y que todos tenemos el mismo Dios. El rabino Kook es un hombre del sionismo correcto, y no está en conflicto con el Islam “.

Según tomado de, http://diariojudio.com/opinion/eretz-israel-palestina-dentro-de-cien-anos/265372/

Por Alan Dershowitz

Una visita a Marruecos muestra que la pretensión palestina del derecho al retorno tiene poca base histórica, moral o jurídica.

Los judíos estaban Marruecos siglos antes de que el islam llegara a Casablanca, Fez y Marrakech. Junto con los bereberes, eran la columna vertebral de la economía y la cultura locales. Su impronta histórica es evidente en los centenares de cementerios judíos, en las sinagogas abandonadas, omnipresentes en las ciudades y pueblos de todo el Magreb.

Visité la casa de Maimónides, que hoy es un restaurante. El gran filósofo y médico judío era profesor de universidad en Fez. Otros intelectuales judíos contribuyeron a dar forma a la cultura del norte de África, desde Marruecos a Argelia y desde Túnez a Egipto. En estos países, los judíos fueron siempre una minoría, pero su presencia se dejaba sentir en todos los ámbitos de la vida.

Ahora apenas quedan unos pocos en Marruecos, y han desaparecido de otros países. Algunos se marcharon voluntariamente para irse a vivir a Israel después de 1948. Muchos se vieron obligados a huir por las amenazas, los pogromos y los mandatos legales, dejando atrás miles de millones de dólares en propiedades y las tumbas de sus antepasados.

Hoy, la población judía de Marruecos no supera los 5.000 individuos, frente a los 250.000 que llegó a haber. El rey Mohamed VI merece crédito por su decisión de preservar la herencia judía, especialmente los cementerios. Mohamed VI tiene con Israel mejores relaciones que los gobernantes de otros países musulmanes, aunque sigue sin reconocer y mantener relaciones diplomáticas con el Estado-nación del pueblo judío. Es un proceso en marcha. Su relación con su pequeña comunidad judía, la mayor parte de la cual es fervientemente sionista, es excelente. Algunos israelíes de origen marroquí mantienen el vínculo con su herencia marroquí.

¿Qué relación tiene todo esto con la pretensión palestina del derecho a volver a sus hogares en el actual Israel? Una muy directa. El éxodo árabe de Israel de 1948 fue consecuencia directa de unaguerra genocida declarada contra el recién creado Estado por todos sus vecinos árabes, y también por los árabes de Israel. Si hubiesen aceptado el plan de paz de la ONU –dos Estados para dos pueblos– no habría refugiados palestinos. En el transcurso de la feroz lucha de Israel por su supervivencia –lucha en la que perdió el 1% de su población, incluidos numerosos supervivientes del Holocausto–, aproximadamente 700.000 árabes locales fueron desplazados. Muchos se marcharon voluntariamente, con la promesa de un glorioso retorno tras la inevitable victoria árabe. Otros fueron obligados a irse. Los hogares de algunos de esos árabes llevaban cientos de años en lo que sería Israel. Otros habían llegado hacía relativamente poco desde países árabes como Siria, Egipto y Jordania.

En ese mismo periodo, aproximadamente la misma cantidad de judíos fueron desplazados de sus hogares en tierras árabes. Casi todos ellos llevaban ahí miles de años, desde mucho antes de que los árabes se convirtieran en la población dominante. Como los árabes palestinos, algunos se marcharon voluntariamente, pero muchos no tenían opciones viables. Las similitudes son llamativas, pero también lo son las diferencias.

La diferencia más significativa está en cómo trató Israel a los judíos que fueron desplazados ycómo trató el mundo árabe y musulmán a los palestinos que lo fueron como consecuencia de una guerra que habían empezado ellos.

Israel integró a sus hermanos y hermanas del mundo árabe y musulmán. El mundo árabe metió a sus hermanos y hermanas palestinos en campos de refugiados, y los utilizó como como peones políticos y heridas abiertas en su guerra incesante contra el Estado judío.

Han pasado ya setenta años desde que se produjera ese intercambio de población. Es hora de acabar con la mortífera farsa de llamar “refugiados” a los palestinos desplazados. Prácticamente ninguno de los casi cinco millones de árabes que reclaman la etiqueta de refugiado palestino ha estado jamás en Israel. Son descendientes –algunos bastante lejanos– de los que verdaderamente fueron desplazados en 1948. La cifra de supervivientes de entre los que fueron obligados a abandonar Israel como consecuencia de la guerra lanzada por sus correligionarios no pasa probablemente de unos pocos millares, y seguramente sean menos. Quizá alguien tendría que compensarlos, pero no Israel. Deberían hacerlo los países árabes que se apoderaron ilegalmente de los bienes de los judíos a los que obligaron a marcharse. Esos pocos miles de palestinos no tienen reclamos morales, históricos o legales superiores a los de los supervivientes judíos que fueron desplazados en el mismo periodo, hace siete décadas.

En la vida como en las leyes, hay plazos de prescripción que reconocen que la Historia cambia elstatu quo. Ha llegado la hora –llegó hace demasiado tiempo– de que el mundo deje de tratar a esos palestinos como refugiados. Esa condición caducó hace décadas. Los judíos que se fueron a Israel desde Marruecos hace mucho que no son refugiados. Y tampoco lo son los parientes de los palestinos que llevan fuera de Israel casi tres cuartos de siglo.

Según tomado de, http://diariojudio.com/opinion/que-es-un-refugiado-los-judios-de-marruecos-vs-los-palestinos-de-israel/265534/

Columbus’ interpreter Luis de Torres knew Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, French, Spanish and Portuguese. He also shmoozed with the natives about that strange plant.

The landing of Columbus in America in an 1840s Currier & Ives print.H.

Armstrong Roberts/ClassicStoc/Getty Images

Does the anti-Semitic stereotype about the Jews as the contaminators of humanity originate with Jewish interpreter Luis de Torres, who is largely responsibility for the arrival of cigarettes to Europe? No, it doesn’t, but the story is still interesting.

The purveyors of modern anti-Semitism were referring more to literal epidemics, and back then the damage caused by smoking had not yet been discovered. Still, in the history of smoking, Luis de Torres merits a special chapter.

His story begins with his boss, Christopher Columbus, yes, in 1492. Spain’s King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella signed two crucial documents.

The first, which was signed on March 31, was the expulsion edict that required all Jews who had not converted to Christianity to leave Spain by July 31. The order, which was published at the end of April, gave the Jews only three months to leave. Most of the Jews, about 200,000, managed to leave by August 2 – the fast day the Ninth of Av.

Historian Charles Alperin, relying on testimony from the period, describes the final days of the expulsion. He writes that the roads to the ports and borders were packed: the old and the young, the ill and the lame, and children of all ages – most of them on foot, a few lucky ones in wagons, a few on horses and mules.

Alperin adds that up to the last moment, priests tried to persuade the Jews to consent to baptism. But the rabbis encouraged the tired and desperate on, and as the lines moved, women and children sang, danced and played the drums to keep the community’s spirits up.

According to Alperin, when the Jews finally reached the shore, they wept and prayed for a miracle that would change the edict. For hours they stared at the waves, but no miracle occurred. From the moment they boarded the ships they were looted, murdered or sold to pirates, and many countries refused to let them in. Those were the consequences of the first document.

Many of Jewish origin

The second crucial document was signed by the king and queen on April 17; the subject was the approval of an ambitious project to find a western sea route to Asia. The project was headed by Columbus, a captain of Italian descent – or at least that’s how he declared himself. Columbus embarked from Palos de la Frontera in southwestern Spain on August 3, the day after the last of the Jews had left.

The proximity between the expulsion and the voyage has fired the imagination of many historians – mainly Jews. They have insisted, based on both findings and assumptions, that Columbus was of Jewish descent, and that the purpose of sailing west was to find a place of settlement for his brothers and sisters, the expelled Jews.

One thing is certain – the people close to Columbus were of Jewish origin. The most outstanding were the man who financed Columbus’ first journey, Luis de Santángel; the treasurer of the Spanish kingdom, Gabriel Sánchez; and the head interpreter on the trip to discover America – Luis de Torres.

When the expulsion of the Jews was announced, De Torres converted to Christianity in order to save himself; he thus became a converso. De Torres, who knew Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, French, Spanish and Portuguese, had served as the interpreter for the governor of the province of Murcia, who recommended the talented man to Columbus.

At the time, as well as throughout the journey, Columbus believed that he was headed for the Far East. He believed that De Torres’ knowledge of Hebrew would help him make contact with the local Jewish merchants in Asia. That’s how the Jewish interpreter came to take part in history’s most famous sea voyage.

Burning time way back then

Three months later, on November 2, 1492, the Santa Maria anchored near the shores of a large island – present-day Cuba. According to the records, Columbus sent De Torres and another Spanish sailor named Rodrigo de Jerez to check out the island. The two spent a long time getting to know the territory and were welcomed by the natives, who also showed them how they “burned” time with the help of “smoking dry leaves that emit a special smell.”

The natives explained that the leaves were placed on palm leaves and dried until they looked like paper. They then were lit and the smoke that arose was inhaled. De Torres tried smoking the tobacco and apparently became the first European to smoke a cigarette. He and his fellow sailor liked the stuff, and when they returned to the ship brought many samples with them.

Columbus returned to Spain in 1493, but De Torres and about 38 other Spaniards chose to remain behind in the Spaniards’ first settlement in America – La Navidad, in Hispaniola (today’s Santo Domingo).

Details about De Torres’ life have since been lost, though the legends about him are many and varied. Some claim that the first words by these visitors uttered on the American continent were said in Hebrew by De Torres, others believe that he became a wealthy estate owner in the New World, and others even attribute the discovery of the turkey to him.

And what about the tobacco? After De Jerez returned to Spain with the tobacco that he and De Torres had brought aboard the ship, he let his friends and neighbors inhale the strange grass. The rumor reached the institutions of the Inquisition.

His accusers ruled that smoking was sinful and insisted that “only the Devil could give a man the power to exhale smoke from his mouth.” They sentenced the Spanish sailor to seven years in prison for smoking the dry leaves – apparently the most severe punishment ever handed down for smoking a cigarette.

It didn’t help. At the time smoking had already picked up speed and spread, yes, like wildfire in a tobacco field. First Spain became addicted, then all of Europe.

As taken from, https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-the-conversos-who-played-their-part-in-europe-s-love-of-tobacco-1.5911251