Talk:Qahal

Kahal

If Kahal has a disamb linked to this page, how is the word 'kahal' related to kehilla? Who uses kahal? Malick78 (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

A wider, earlier usage noted

I noted the following at Judah Leon Magnes; it would indicate that the current article is too narrowly described as ‘In pre-World War II Europe. That page says, “In America, he spent most of his professional life in New York, where he helped found the American Jewish Committee in 1906. Magnes was also one of the most influential forces behind the organization of the Jewish community in the city, serving as president throughout its existence from 1908 to 1922. The Kehillah oversaw aspects of Jewish culture, religion, education and labor issues, in addition to helping to integrate America's German and East European Jewish communities. He was also the president of the Society for the Advancement of Judaism from 1912 to 1920.”

It seems that dating this movement to the ‘early 20th century’ might be more accurate. Adding ‘America’ is a needed, based on Magnes’ involvement in the movement; possibly it might be more accurate to describe it as ‘in the diaspora’ more generally. The similarity between efforts to develop Kehillah and points 2 and 3 of the Basel Program also should be mentioned. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 08:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reference to Rabbi Magnes. I could not find this page before, and I need it for the Young Israel page, as he helped found the organization. (The page now wcredits Rabbi Kaplan with this, which is a bit of nonsense from (surprise!) the Jewish Virtual library. There is too much over-reliance on internet sources here.

However, the part on Mamzerim appears to be utter nonsense; the usual speculation about the Talmud as opposed to what it actually says. I've got plenty of secondary sources; anyone have some good tertiary ones to fix this?Mzk1 (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I checked the source. It doesn't say any of this, and to some extent contradicts it. I removed all of the verbiage. I suggest that this article appears (and I repeat, appears) to have quite a bit of OR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mzk1 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Original research?

The final section of this wiki article entitled 'Conspiracy theories' has no citations at all. As all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable, published source, this section therefore appears to be WP:OR. Anybody got any references for it, or should we remove it? --Mystichumwipe (talk) 06:54, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Mystichumwipe Ten and a half months later, after your comment, and still no citations have been added. — al-Shimoni (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

why does this page exist?

as has been mentioned, this page seems to include somwhat dubious sources and a large amount of personal speculation. morever, though, i wold like to add that the assumed nature of the word itself is etymologicaly precarious. the word is generally understood to be a general term for "the public", and its usage as a term to refer to some governing body in its basic sense, seems to me to have been motivated somewhat by antisemitic conspiracies. the assemblies in Europe, wich where governing bodies, in my opinion should be moved to a historical article, as the use of the word there is an aplication of a generall term only relevant to a specific time and place. the other aspects of this article could be made into a page discussing the term, but it seems to me clear that it would be better served by a dictionary article. i apologize for what i am sure is somwhat sloppy writing, and lack of included sources, but i encounterd this article at a somewhat inopportune time, and felt that it required immediate comment. i hope i will remember to return to adress this. 109.253.192.11 (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)