Talk:Chad Gadya

Judaism Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Aramaic fail[edit]

The song is called חד גדיא, and it's Aramaic. >> Siúnrá (talk) 18:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When is it from?[edit]

Any evidence of when the song was composed? I mean, even if the tune is traced to Medieval German music, the song itself has a feel of being older... if only because it feels weird that Ashkenazim would have composed folklore for themselves in Aramaic... it could be Hebrew (if from a learned source), or Yiddisch (if more popular in origin), but use of Aramaic feels off, like something the Ashkenazim had actually kept along the centuries (or adopted from whoever converted them to Judaism). --Svartalf (talk) 04:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really weird, medieval and early modern Jewish writers were studding the Babylonian Talmud and Hebrew and Aramaic were both used, particularly in Ashkenaz--Nngnna (talk) 15:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aramaic and German?[edit]

I'm intrigued. How could be in Aramaic and derived from German? Could someone with knowledge of tis topic please source it? Dloh cierekim 16:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the words are Aramaic, the tune German. Cultures adopting tunes from neighbors, or slapping the lyrics of a traditional oldie to more modern music is not precisely a rare phenomenon.--Svartalf (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Symbolism[edit]

The comment about the "uneducated" should go. This is Wikipedia, not an Artscroll publication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.172.0.194 (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fail is the Word - the symbolism of this song that is sometimes recited on passover concerns the bride of the wanderer and his fail to marry her by the grace of g-d but is exiled to jerusalem to become an brokenhearted rabbi to write down this song.... its an sad song about an lost soul, about lost childhood, lost dreams and lost ideals. The chain of events represent the "wonderous" signs that g-d implants in the wanderer, who turns like an beaten girl on an showplatform around and around, to carry the wanderer like prey on an long stick to the gates of jerusalem, where by the mercy of g-d the wanderer may have the chance to take an virgin maiden, like its tradition for priests. Echad Gadja, some say enough fire cures all pain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.131.189.83 (talk) 21:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Language[edit]

The "Language" section criticizes the use of certain Hebrew words in the Aramaic text. However, even the Babylonian Talmud usually uses the Hebrew word שוחט for "slaughterer", rather than anything deriving from the Aramaic root נ-כ-ס. Likewise, מלאך המות is more common in the Aramaic of the Babylonian Gemara than מלאך מותא. And the use of הקדוש ברוך הוא rather than קודשא בירך הוא cannot possibly be evidence of "the composer's grasp of Aramaic was limited", because it is almost certain that the composer would anyway have been familiar with "קודשא בירך הוא" from Kaddish, meaning that the composer had to have made a conscious decision to use the Hebrew phrase instead of the Aramaic one. I think these points should be removed from the article. --- Wikitiki89 (talk) - 21:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chad Gadya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927202543/http://www.bacfilms.com/presse/freezone/dpus.pdf to http://www.bacfilms.com/presse/freezone/dpus.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Version by Stephen Lewis Fuchs[edit]

Maybe it's worth mentioning the version mentioned April 5, 2016 at https://findingourselvesinbiblicalnarratives.net/category/passover-seder/ (republished April 20 at https://reformjudaism.org/blog/why-i-wrote-kinder-gentler-chad-gadya). Mcljlm (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In popular culture: The West Wing Season 1, episode 14[edit]

I'd be grateful Artem.G if you'd explain why you deleted my citation of M4ufree Movies as a "non reliable source"; also the meaning of rm which precedes that. The whole episode is there and the relevant passage from 12:16 to 12:37. Mcljlm (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"the whole episode is there" means that this site is most likely illegal. Other than that, WP requires secondary sources for notability. Artem.G (talk) 11:29, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]