Talk:Judgement of Solomon

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.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible 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.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East 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.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

As I recall how the Judgement of Solomon was tought, it was that two people disputed the division of something (an object, land, or whatever). Solomon invited one to specify the division whilst giving the other first choice on the result. By so doing, Solomon actually made no temporal judgement, and could therefore never be wrong, whilst the parties strained to their utmost to achieve agreement.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.217.238 (talk • contribs) 27 November 2007

That's a completely different problem. Trvsdrlng (talk) 08:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu Fable?

I remember reading a Hindu fable (in Amar Chitra Katha format) as a child that told the same basic story as the Judgment of Solomon, but obviously taking place in India, with some Hindu sage (I can't remember his name, nor am I having luck finding references to this on the internet) - does anybody know if this actually existed as a Hindu fable historically, or if this was merely a "translation" of sorts, transposing this Old Testament story into ancient Hindustan? And, if the former, is there any information about which predates which? If it indeed is an old Hindu fable, there could be a good chance that it pre-dates the Old Testament version (certainly wouldn't be the first time that the Judeo-Christian tradition "borrows" practices & folklore from other cultures in order to more easily integrate converts). Does anybody have more detailed information (or remember reading this fable in a Hindu format) or have any ideas as to where one might look? Unfortunately my parents long ago gave all our Amar Chitra Katha's (passed down from my dad to my sister & me, and after we grew up to cousins etc with young children), so I can't go rummaging in their basement to try to find details that might jock my memory... V krishna (talk) 04:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legal writers often misuse idiomatic expressions

(see, e.g. Hobson's choice or dilemma).

As of 2009-12-19, neither Hobson's choice nor dilemma discusses legal misuses. Could this be due to content drift, or is this pure invention?

edit: In the case of Hobson's choice, the text documenting legal misuses has been deleted on 2009-05-25.

Gelisam (talk) 21:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't we mention the fact that Mark Twaine wrote about this story in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.137.78 (talk) 00:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Political Allegory ?

Should the article mention the interpretation of the story as a political allegory -- that people were arguing whether Solomon's older brother Adonijah should be king, rather than the usurper Solomon, and Solomon's Judgment is saying that Solomon (the "false mother") would rather destroy Israel (the "child") than give it to Adonijah (the "true mother") ?70.179.90.182 (talk) 20:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a metaphor

The "Judgment of Solomon" does not fit the definition of a "metaphor" as commonly understood and as defined on Wikipedia, so I am removing that word and reworking this description: "It has become a metaphor referring to a wise judge who uses a stratagem to determine the truth, tricking the parties into revealing their true feelings. Specifically, the judge pretends that he will destroy the subject matter of a dispute, rather than allowing either disputing party to win at the expense of the other."

If someone can provide documentation of the phrase's use as a metaphor, or indeed of its use to describe judges who threaten to "destroy the subject matter [sic] of a dispute", then we can discuss putting it back in some form. Edgehawk (talk) 08:57, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other than jewish

They could be prostitutes; or one of them to be the mistress of the living child's mother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.117.44.240 (talk) 14:03, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it

The story doesn't make any sense. Why does the wrong mother agree to Solomon's suggestion? Is she so stupid that she doesn't know the baby would be dead? Why doesn't she notice Solomon's suggestion is a test? --2.245.177.187 (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Of course she understood that it would kill the baby, but it wasn't hers anyway and she didn't love it. It was out of spite and jealousy that she would rather see the other woman's child killed too, or at least that seems to me the most logical explanation. Apparently Solomon's acting so convincing that she didn't perceive his true purpose. Also keep in mind that, although to us it would seem inconceivable that any judge would have a baby killed, it was a very different time and culture. Such cruelties were not unheard of and monarchs could do absolutely anything they pleased. - Lindert (talk) 15:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See "Political Allegory", above --67.85.100.197 (talk) 21:49, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is more to the story than just two women each claiming the child is hers. One should not rush into conclusion the woman that supports the decision of cutting the child into two is a non-mother, as harlots might not always think and act the way we are used to. There have been numerous instances of them abandoning their very young children or even murdering them. Solomon had to make the best decision and even though he may have awarded the child to the non-mother, he definitely gave the child to the woman who was best suited for this role, whilst having the spectators believe (in amazement) that this indeed is the real mother. Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 7:3 "Sorrow is better than laughter: for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better." Could it be that the woman that lost her child had her heart purified by sorrow so she was willing to give up the stolen child, whilst the real mother in her anger did not care the child would be dead? If so, she got rewarded for giving up her claim, but the real mother got rewarded with relief from her responsibility to care for her child she did not want anyway.87.110.180.51 (talk) 09:21, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Women's History tag

Hi, I'm still relatively new to Wikipedia, so I would very much like comments on my actions. Concerning this article: I really don't think it is a justifiable member of the Wikiproject "Womens' History". According to the article importance scheme in Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's History/Assessment, this shouldn't even be ranked as "Low", because its main focus doesn't even detail women's history, instead detailing the judgement of man. I'm therefore going to remove the Women's History tag. Please revert my edit if it was done in error, but I think I'm taking the right step here. Thanks, Icebob99 (talk) 02:17, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

update: I double-checked one last time before removing and there is indeed one subsection dealing with the archetypes of the women. I'm going to keep this at "Low" importance. Icebob99 (talk) 02:19, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ōoka Tadasuke & Huang Ba

I've heard a few very similar stories about Ōoka Tadasuke (1677–1752) (one version, with a bit of a twist, here, pg 57) and Huang Ba (130–51 BC) (here).

I don't know when the earliest mentions of these stories in print were, or how their earliest versions went. For example, the Ōoka Tadasuke version available on openlibrary (1961) is not the first collection of stories about him in English. This version has the women call him out on the transparency of his tug-of-war idea, already knowing the tale of the trick (from Solomon or Huang Ba, who knows). So he improvises by exploiting their trust in superstition (the fake mother is unwilling to keep the child after he divines that the child will become crippled and require her constant care later in life). But I've also read a simplified version in Japan, where Ōoka Tadasuke's tug-of-war proposal identifies the fake mother outright.

I think these cultural parallels/derivatives would make a very interesting footnote in the Judgment of Solomon article, but can anybody source them? Ōoka Tadasuke's stories were probably invented for rakugo audiences maybe even hundreds of years later (I've definitely heard the "sound of money" story on his wikipedia article attributed to Nasreddin, too...), but beyond that I have no idea. --Zackarotto (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 November 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 04:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Judgment of Solomon → Judgement of Solomon – change spelling to match the spelling usually followed in naming art works that depict this subject, see Category:Paintings of the Judgement of Solomon. Note:

the current spelling was chosen by an anon editor in 2009 stating "Judgment" is the predominant spelling among native English speakers (300mm US speakers spell it this way, vs. 60mm UK speakers). [1]
a recent CFD discussion declined to revise the spelling of the paintings category from "Judgement" to "Judgment" per this article.

– Fayenatic London 21:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:RETAIN as the title chosen by the article's creator in 2006, apparently after some thought.[2] The article's history is very confusing but it appears that on 8 May 2009 the IP mentioned above might have tried a cut-and-paste move that may have resulted in some parallel histories until a history merge in March 2018 left us with the current title. This is, in effect, a reversal of an undiscussed move. (The title of the category, however, should have no bearing on the title of the article.) Station1 (talk) 09:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
interesting that the anon mover in 2009 noted "(300mm US speakers spell it this way, vs. 60mm UK speakers)" .. oh and people in Africa and Asia? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Solomon's dream prior to the Judgement

prior to the judgement, Solomon had a dream in which God told him "ask me one thing and it is yours". Instead of being selfish himself, he replied: "You gave my father your prople to rule over them, now it's my turn. Please give me a good heart to Judge them right and the wisdom to avoid mistakes as possible", and God replied "Because you asked me to be a better servant and didn't ask anything for yourself, not only will I give you wisdom, but I'll make it so that no one was wiser before you and no one will ever be wiser than you after you're gone". The Judgement of Solomon is reflecting how that promise came to live. Shouldn't that be part of the article? I'm from Israel so I don't edit English Articles, your roles here are a bit different than those in the Hebrew wiki, so I'll leave taht for you people to decide. 2A02:6680:1107:C1C9:5597:8614:8F66:BDC8 (talk) 00:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]