This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On the issue of whether Aaron ben Moses ben Asher was a Karaite, while I am not an expert, I am now translating a long and detailed Hebrew article by Yosef Ofer for a website about the Aleppo Codex. Ofer is one of the authoritative scholars in the field and rejects the idea that the Ben Asher family was Karaite. It might be misleading to say that "most" scholars claim that they were Karaites, since scholarship is not a matter of majority rule. Dr. Jeffrey M. Green
My research on this subject shows that the claim ben Asher to be a Karaite is none other than pure propaganda. It was probably a made up claim to support the argument that Karaism existed as a minority during the Second Temple peirod. One disprove to this argument is the Karaite scriptual canon is the one of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. (The Christian canon...) There are many more proofs of post-Sanhedrin practices in Karaism. This claim is no different to those Christians and idiotic scholars think every reference Jesus is to the Christian Jesus.
Prof. Bernstein. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.217.65.253 ( talk) 11:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
"Documents found in the Cairo Geniza also indicate that ben Asher was a Karaite."
"Most of the secular scholars conclude that Aaron ben Asher was indeed a Karaite"
Mind my language but this article reads like some shit a high school child did for homework. Not one scholar is actually cited. This is not NPOV in any way. 124.168.28.42 21:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
This article has obvious NPOV problems. Wikipedia is supposed to be an online encyclopedia, but this section reads like the national enquirer. I have no idea what it is talking about, but it seems like it should be deleted. Aeknipe 18:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
This article says that "Maimonides accepted the views of ben Asher only in regard to open and closed sections". What does this mean or refer to? DSatz ( talk) 21:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Shalom Neria and Dovi. I noticed reference 11 looks like it was intended to be footnote c. I thought to ask you if that's right so I don't fix the wrong things. If you also want to fix it, that's cool. You've done well to make this article of good quality. Danidamiobi ( talk)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On the issue of whether Aaron ben Moses ben Asher was a Karaite, while I am not an expert, I am now translating a long and detailed Hebrew article by Yosef Ofer for a website about the Aleppo Codex. Ofer is one of the authoritative scholars in the field and rejects the idea that the Ben Asher family was Karaite. It might be misleading to say that "most" scholars claim that they were Karaites, since scholarship is not a matter of majority rule. Dr. Jeffrey M. Green
My research on this subject shows that the claim ben Asher to be a Karaite is none other than pure propaganda. It was probably a made up claim to support the argument that Karaism existed as a minority during the Second Temple peirod. One disprove to this argument is the Karaite scriptual canon is the one of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. (The Christian canon...) There are many more proofs of post-Sanhedrin practices in Karaism. This claim is no different to those Christians and idiotic scholars think every reference Jesus is to the Christian Jesus.
Prof. Bernstein. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.217.65.253 ( talk) 11:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
"Documents found in the Cairo Geniza also indicate that ben Asher was a Karaite."
"Most of the secular scholars conclude that Aaron ben Asher was indeed a Karaite"
Mind my language but this article reads like some shit a high school child did for homework. Not one scholar is actually cited. This is not NPOV in any way. 124.168.28.42 21:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
This article has obvious NPOV problems. Wikipedia is supposed to be an online encyclopedia, but this section reads like the national enquirer. I have no idea what it is talking about, but it seems like it should be deleted. Aeknipe 18:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
This article says that "Maimonides accepted the views of ben Asher only in regard to open and closed sections". What does this mean or refer to? DSatz ( talk) 21:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Shalom Neria and Dovi. I noticed reference 11 looks like it was intended to be footnote c. I thought to ask you if that's right so I don't fix the wrong things. If you also want to fix it, that's cool. You've done well to make this article of good quality. Danidamiobi ( talk)