Origins of Purim[edit]

I'm surprised to read of other origins of Purim and that it is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article of Purim. The reason for this must be that Wikipedia is not yet widespread enough to deal with every aspect of every topic, though I hope this entry is getting it one small step forward! Anyhow, I read some interpretations of the origin of Purim to compete with Pagan celebrations of it's time. That Hadassah's name is "Esther" to mimic the popular "Ishtar." That "Mordechai" was a name for a follower of "Marduk." That the parade of commoners in the garb of royality was common in ancient celebrations of the new year usually celebrated at the vernal equinox. Anyhow, I would like to see this issue introduced into the article text so it can be efficiently dealt with -- the benefit of the Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.218.154 (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article should cover history as recorded not crank views from 19th century and early 20th century modernists long ago abandoned by serious scholars. [[User:Kuratowski's Ghost|]] (talk) 14:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Purim plays: reference[edit]

I see that no one has really been adding references for this article. Since mine is for a single paragraph, I'm putting it here rather than in the article proper. The material I added about 18th and 19th century Purim plays as precursors to Yiddish theater comes from pages 26-28 of:

That book mentions several specific surviving published scripts of Purim plays; this is discussed in a little more detail at Yiddish theater. Jmabel | Talk 00:59, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Other Purims[edit]

The following was recently anonymously added:

In modern times, the death of Joseph Stalin, who was said to have been planning an extermination of Soviet Jewry, as well as Baruch Goldstein's killing of Arabs in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron on Purim Day are said to be Purim Katan as well.

I've never heard of the Stalin matter, and I believe I would have, and I can't believe that anyone much less murderous than Goldstein himself would hold this opinion about his actions. If there is no clear citation for this within 24 hours, I will revert, and I won't object if someone else reverts sooner. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:43, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of it either, and a quick search revealed nothing to support it. I'm reverting it now. Jayjg (talk) 19:27, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Too late, someone else already did it! Jayjg (talk) 19:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Are you guys serious? I didn't add the thing about Stalin, and don't know anything about the Goldstein incident at mearat hamachpela wrt Purim, but this is the thing about Stalin (which I thought everybody knew!): he was planning to "finish what Hitler started", since he was so pissed off about the "betrayal" in Israel (not becoming a soviet satellite) as well as a number of political intrigueries (to invent a word) w/in the CCCP. While I don't believe that any date was set for what he considered his impending magnum opus, all the Jewish communities in the CCCP knew of his plans, and were scared crapless. Before he could bring his plans to fruition, he fell into a coma, three days before Purim. He is widely rumored to have been poisoned, possibly by his personal physician, who it is rumored, was Jewish. Anyways, three days after lapsing into a coma, he expired. On Purim. Now. I told you the story. I've never heard of it being a purim qatan, rather another purim miracle. Notice that I haven't brought forth any documentation, nor made any presentation that the story is anything other than myth... All I've done is relay it the way I heard it, many long years ago in my childhood. That notwithstanding, I decided to go to Google and do a quick search with the string "+Stalin +Purim", and it turned up a number of hits (some of which indicate that the details as I've relayed them are incorrect), including:
And this article, in which "Rashin", sumdumguy, advocates celebrating a purim qatan for the event (although when exactly his proposes to schedule it isn't made clear:
Tomer TALK 01:56, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
The claim was that they were Purim katans, the links (which I don't think strongly support your point in any event) don't say that. Jayjg (talk) 14:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I don't follow. What point did you think I was trying to make? The only point I was trying to make is that people should know the story. I said nothing about including it in the article. If I made any point with respect to the article, it was specifically that some guy Rashin advocates celebrating a purim qatan, without specification, to comemmorate Stalin's demise. I never portrayed his opinion as one that should be followed, nor one that had any sway whatsoever in any circles anywhere. My only job here was to relate the story, which I did. Then, curious, I did a websearch, which I shared with y'all. Then I posted some links that lead to other peoples' telling of the story, which does not jibe with mine, which I thought I pretty clearly indicated, was likely due to error in the details as I was telling them. That said, I'm still rather mystified as to what "they" might include as purim qtanim, besides the death of Stalin, yimach shemo. I have no such axe to grind, nor can I figure out how it could be that anyone should think I might. Tomer TALK 20:04, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
I don't think you have an axe to grind; sorry if I gave you that impression. Jayjg (talk) 20:10, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Stalin died on 5 March 1953 which corresponds to 18 Adar 5713. 5713 was not a leap year. He fell ill on 1st March- 14 Adar, Purim Gadol. Cockneyite 02:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Purim and the Hanging of Ten Nazis

In Megilas Esther, there is a Large Vuv, and a Small Tuf, Shin and Zayyin. Together they point to the year 5707. The event happened Hoshana Rabba, 1946 - 5707.

Hermann Goering committed suicide the night before, leaving only 10 Nazis to be hung. Julius Stricher shouted "Purim Fest 1946."

In Esther 9:13 she asks Achashvairosh to grant "Gam Machar" on which there is a commentary saying not NOW but a FUTURE tomorrow.

("There is a tomorrow that is now, and tomorrow which is later" - referring to history repeating itself).

This is noted in an article by Rabbi Shraga Simmons, Aish HaTorah (aish.com), which also mentions that Haman had 11 children, 10 sons and a daughter. The daughter comitted suicide after she dumped garbage on her father, whom she mistook for Mordechai.

We know what the Vishnitzer Rebbe had to say about the small letters. Does that make it suitable for Wikipedia? I doubt it.
You discredit yourself by trying to derive some positive meaning from the Goldstein incident in Hebrew. Do not reinsert this material. JFW | T@lk 19:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Stalin and Purim

The dates are clear. The matter of correlation vs. cause and effect may need clarification, but anything that had the potential to affect more Jews than lived in Shushan at the time of Purim is significant. Someone more talented in terms of writing skill is perhaps the better choice of author, but there is a notion called "Bemakom sheh-ain ish." I will gladly take a back seat to the "ish" (or isha) who does a better job. 15 Jun 07

Megillah Reading[edit]

"each mention of Mordechai is accompanied by whistling" - I've never seen nor heard of this custom, and I hear the megillah every year and go to yeshiva. A person must hear the entire reading, every single word. The noisemaking is restricted to the mention of Haman. Please cite evidence or delete it.

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 17:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've never encountered that either, though I have encountered toasting to Mordechai every time his name is mentioned. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I'm new to Wikipedia editing, so contrary to your advice, I will not be bold and I will not edit the main article. I am going to make a suggestion about the use of the word "Hashem" in the blessings. Often persons of Christian, Muslim, or atheistic upbringing will read an article about a Jewish holiday or practice as part of a project in a class on World Religions or Philosophy of Religion, etc... (I am a faculty member at a not-very-good university in a rural area of the USA.) Here, it seems as though we are implying that Hashem is the name of the deity worshiped, instead of the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. With that in mind, while I totally understand the admirable desire to avoid using one of the sacred names of The Eternal One in an encyclopedia article, I would suggest either (1) replacing the word Hashem with an underline which would signify to any reader that a word has been removed or (2) keep the word Hashem but link to some article about the Hebrew names of G-d, so that the curious can click through and learn. This isn't just about university students who are only starting their exploration of World Religions. Those who love the Hebrew Scriptures and come to Judaism from an irreligious upbringing often get really confused by the many names of The Eternal One. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.95.170.142 (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Songs of Purim[edit]

anybody know anything about purim songs, I remember something that started with the first few words of the megillah but I don;t remeber where or the tune.

I have never heard of ani purim stated in the article. I hear of the following songs:
  • Meshenicnas adar marbim besimcha "as [the month of] Adar start joy increases". based on the talmud
  • chayav einish lebesumai ad deloyah... "a person is obligated to rejoice until he does not know the difference between haman and mordechi". Also talmudic
  • shoshanat yaakov "the rose of Jacob"
  • Al HaNissim ve'al ha'porkan "for the miricles.." is added in Birkat Hamazon
I dont' know how to write the tune online Jon513 23:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi guys, great article, just wanted to say that Ani purim is a very well-known song. Omer

Never heard of it. Where is it found, Omer? JFW | T@lk 18:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Ani Purim" is a popular Israeli children's song for Purim. It is found in most Israeli collections of festival songs. The ones Jon mentions above are more adult songs sung on Purim in the orthodox Jewish world. Sam 01:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I have heard of it, although I cannot imagine it being sung at a synagogue, as it is in the class of modern nursery rhymes/songs such as perhaps 'Frosty the Snowman' or 'Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer'. But I'm leaving it there.

Hi folks, read the article and I notice a big chunk missing, the part about the drinking! Obviously, that's not what purim's all about, but it is a great excuse to get drunk and very merry and a local purim party, singing the greatest purim songs. Someone should add the custom of drinking.

Significance of Purim[edit]

This article makes it very clear that Purim is an important holiday on the Jewish calendar and is based on historical events. If you look at the article on Book of Esther, however, you will see that that Book is little more than a fairy tale which is based on Babylonian mythology. The latter article needs to be seriously cleaned up. Yoninah 23:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personal atheistic views have no place on Wiki - only what reliable sources state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.169.21.238 (talk) 06:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image[edit]

Someone must have a gragger that they can photograph and upload to commons under the appropriate license? This image is a nice one at sub-thumbnail size, but even at its natural resolution it's got some serious aliasing problems.... -Harmil 21:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Date of Purim[edit]

The actual date of Purim should be posted in both the Hebrew calendar aswell as the Gregorian calendar as can be seen in Yom Kippur. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.79.39.127 (talk • contribs) 27 May 2006.

the holiday infobox has the ability to put in gregorian dates in the infobox. This has been done in Yom Kippur and it should be done here. I do not think that it is a good idea to list the dates as has been done there and I intend to change it. Jon513 11:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Purim is celebrated annually according to the Hebrew calendar on the 14th day of the Hebrew month of Adar (Adar II in leap years)," I came to this article to find out what day it is on. One problem is I don't read Hebrew and I don't know the Hebrew calendar. I guess I'll have to look elsewhere for this simple and basic info that should be included in the first sentence.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianAlex (talk • contribs) 06:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Violence[edit]

Azurelove (talk · contribs) has repeatedly inserted the following content:

Violence Related to Purim
Baruch Goldstein went on a shooting spree at the Ibrahim Mosque killing 29 Muslims worshipping while injuring 125 others, on Purim in 1994, which coincided with the First Friday Prayer of the Holy Month of Ramadhan that year.
ISM peace activist Rachel Corrie was bulldozered on March 16, 2003 a day before Purim.
Anti-Christian activity usually takes place at Purim, during which Christians lock themselves in according to Daniel Rosing. [1]
According to the chairman of the council of settlements - head group of all settlements in occupied West Bank and formerly Gaza - Benzi Lieberman, Palestinians are Amalek. He is quoted in the New Yorker as saying “The Palestinians are Amalek!”.[2]

In my mind certain events are historically correct, but to string them together to insinuate that Israel and Jews use Purim to kill their enemies is unacceptable. I urge Azurelove to provide supportive arguments here before attempting to reinsert stated content. JFW | T@lk 07:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with JFW, but I presume that this is exactly why Azurelove included the reference to Rosling, which supports his contention. I have no way of verifying whether or not "Barket in Haaretz, October 12, 2004" actually said such a thing, so I don't know whether he can be excluded on those grounds. I suspect that the best way to deal with this is not by deleting the section, but by adding additional material to demonstrate its fallacy. The idea of Jewish Anti-Christian activity, or that they lock themselves indoors at Purim-time, sounds about as credible as the blood libels. But can I document it? No, I cannot. But I sure hope someone else can. --Keeves 09:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I read the new yorker article. It is very clear that no one the author quotes believes that the palesinians are litteraly amalek. They are pointing out a common desire of the palestinians and amalek to kill the Jews and that the Jewish responce must be to fight back. The use of the term amalek to mean evil is common (I personally have been call a reincarnation of amalek!). As for Rosing the full quote is as follows:
It may be added that Daniel Rossing, a former advisor on Christian affairs to Israel's Religious Affairs Ministry, recently told a reporter that antiChristian incidents tend to occur at "certain times of the year, such as during the Purim holiday." Rossing, in fact, knows Christians in Israel "who lock themselves indoors during the entire Purim holiday."
That is not a quote from the orginal haartz article (which I doubt the poster read) but from an article quoting the article which is the link provoided. I don't think we have to give these addition any further attension. Jon513 11:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just a thought. But if violence during Purim is occurring on a regular enough basis perhaps it should be included on the Wikipedia page. Goldstein was a religious fundementalist, and the fact that Purim and Eid were on the same day as the death of the 29 Muslims, and ultimately himself is no coincidence. garethppls 21:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
the concerned raised here is lack of sourcing, not lack of notability. As it stand now it is little more than a conspiracy theory. Jon513 23:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A conspiracy theory that Goldstein or others have killed on Purim? Hmm even if it is a conspiracy theory you could have a section on violence being related to Purim. Or how violence is thought to be related to Purim. garethppls 18:31, 9 September 2007.
More Violence Related to Purim
  1. Numbered list itemJerusalem Post March 13, 2006 Purim terrorist attack prevented
  2. YouTube - Purim Terrorist Attack in Tel Aviv Mar 3, 2009 ... On March 4, 1996, on the eve of Purim, Hamas murdered 14 Israelis, children and adults, and wounded 130 in a terrorist attack in Tel Aviv.Pedantrician (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ Barket in Haaretz, October 12, 2004 [1]

POV/ original research[edit]

On the other hand, Jewish philosophy and scriptural commentators believe that the reason for the omission of God's name is in order to emphasize the very point that God remained hidden throughout this series of events, but was nonetheless present and played a large role in the outcome of the story. Furthermore, this lesson can be taken into consideration on a much larger scale: Throughout Jewish history, and especially in exile today, God's presence has been felt more at certain times than at others. Megilat Esther (and the omission of God's name in it) serves to show us that although God may not be conspicuously present at times, he nevertheless plays (and has played) an important role in our lives and in the future of the Jewish nation.

I'm not saying it is wrong, but it seems to me to beg for citation, and these views should be attributed rather than in Wikipedia's narrative voice: presumably, for example, "serves to show us" should not be in Wikipedia's narrative voice. - Jmabel | Talk 05:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Date of Purim, 2[edit]

There should be a table of Purim dates plus-minus 10 years and the way of calculating it from Gregorian calendar and a reference to the place with this information. `'mikka 03:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this used to be part of the infobox I don't know why it was removed. Jon513 22:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

removed additon[edit]

I removed an addition by 207.69.140.35 (talk · contribs) they were:

Stalin, who whose "doctors plot" accusation was to lead to his finishing with the Soviet Union what Hitler had done, fell into a coma on Purim 5713 and died days later, 18 Adar, March 5, 1953.
An attempt to kill Jews on Purim was thwarted by Dr. Goldstein's killing of Arabs, some of whom, it later turned out, had hidden weapons under prayer carpets in Mearat Hamachpayla. Although many claimed that Dr. Goldstein had "snapped" due to the pressure of dealing with a father and son who were murdered by (admittedly other) Arabs, his actions saved lives, albeit at a cost of some who possibly were not part of the plot to murder Jews.
Analogous to the suicide of Haman's daughter, one of the 11 Nazis scheduled to be hung, Hermann Goering committed suicide the night before, leaving only 10 Nazis to be hung. Julius Stricher shouted "Purim Fest 1946." The link to Purim is that there is are clues to the actions of both Goering and Stricher in the Megila.
There is a famous biblical commentary written by a scholar who was trapped under a beam that fell on him when a local gun powder site (maintained in a Jewish area, possibly to minimize danger to non-Jews), exploded. The scholar took a vow that, if he was rescued, he would spend his days writing what he wrote. [Citation needed, saw it in the introduction of volume 1 of a set that an adult relative had received, as a teenager, as a prize in a contest]. If I recall correctly, the family of the scholar named a certain date "gun powder Purim."

As all of it was unsourced I removed it. More importantly the author confuses the idea of Local Purim - found in major books of halakha, and anything good that happened to the Jews. As far the the last reference to a gun powder Purim, it might be Avraham Danzig and the story can be found very close to the end of the Chayei Adam. Still, I don't trust my memory; someone would have to look that up to include it. Jon513 15:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree the Stalin link is completely tentative and - while interesting - is not suitable in a general purpose encyclopedia unless it can be supported with rock-hard sources.
The Goldstein link is sheer apologetics and should not be included under any circumstance.
Awaiting more evidence with regards to the Gun Powder Purim. JFW | T@lk 08:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1946 songs[edit]

Let's discuss what needs to be done, if anything, to accommodate this addition: [3] [4] by an anon. Please do not insert editorial notes in the article, discuss here at the talk page. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 20:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TALK discussion: there is Shoshanat Yaakov, which is sung right after Megilla reading. There are the songs that are based on texts (Mishna/Gemara or Tefilla). Then come the songs that come from different time periods, not all in in Hebrew, which may reflect different societies/cultures.

The SONGS section in the Purim article does not make room for "Once There Was a Wicked Wicked Man"
Ani Purim
Utsu Etsa (in the Siddur, the words before include "SHOAH" - pre Holocaust, it may not have seemed to have a link to Purim)

Omitting "Once There Was.." would be like omitting "I had a little dreidel, I made it out of clay" from the list of Chanukah songs. Admittedly someone from the Middle East might not consider it a Chanukah song, but then again someone from Syria might consider the phrase "Chaverim Kol Yisroel" to have no place in the monthly Blessing of The New Moon, which is part of the Ashkenaz Siddur.

Ve-nahfoch is also not in any of the above, and is more "Purim" than Mishenichnas.

A more honest approach would be to make a stub article named PURIM SONGS and initially populate it with some of the submitted items, reformatted to Wiki standards.

20 Jun 07


Wales (More Recent) Purim[edit]

Jimmy Wales seems to support mentioning the Purim-connected death of S-T-A-L-I-N. As quoted in http://www.destinationcrm.com/articles/default.asp?ArticleID=7395 (SIDEBAR: No One Likes a Tattletale), he criticizes those who
'delete disagreeable content without openly saying, "I am so-and-so. I believe this information is incorrect. Here's an article that shares our side of the story." Soon enough, the line gets put back in; the firm deletes it again; it gets put back in; and so on. In the end, everyone is mad at each other, and out come the lawsuits.' To put it succinctly:
the text that Jimmy Wales suggests should not be deleted reads-
S-t-a-l-i-n, fell into a coma on Purim 5713 and died days later, 18 Adar, March 5, 1953.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.236.177.224 (talk • contribs)

I removed the above from the article and put it hereJon513 (talk) 10:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per Mr. Wales, the succinct 1-liner has been restored under ===More Recent=== ([User:4.236.177.224] 10:53, 3 January 2008)

First of all, Jimbo never said anything of the sort in the source you quoted. All he said was that people should be polite and talk about changes instead of reverting back and forth. Second, Jimbo does not rule wikipedia like a king stating what should and shouldn't be in an encyclopedia. He guides wikipedia by general principles. Jimbo rarely gets involved in content disputes and when he does it is almost always because of slander or the like.
Whether Stalin falling into a coma on purim should be in the article has already been discussed. I believe that the consensus was that an event that happens to fall on purim does not in itself make it related to this article.
If there was a Jewish community that celebrated his falling into a coma as a purim katan than it can be included in the section Other "Purims" otherwise it is just trivia. Jon513 (talk) 16:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


One can find people with numbers on their hands who put on Tefilin. One is more hard pressed to find Russian Jews who are their counterparts. Their surviving relatives may be among those who are first rediscovering Judaism and may still be in need of rediscovering Purim itself. That so many Jews were saved on Purim 5713 is not Trivia. The number saved may exceed the Jewish population of Shushan. ([User:4.236.177.224] 11:16, 3 January 2008)

If a country's stock market crashes on passover should that be in the article Passover? No, it would be in it's own unrelated article. Is there any relationship between the holiday of Purim (not the date of purim) and stalin? do you have any sources that make this connection, or have you made it yourself? Jon513 (talk) 16:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From the page itself: "Traditional Jews believe that God is hidden behind all the events of the Megillah"Pedantrician (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Now that the first "Russian" Minyan in the United States, formerly housed in Brooklyn at a Young Israel, has its own building (Ocean Avenue, between Ave L & Ave M), perhaps we're approaching the counterpart of the 1967 Six-Day War, before which it was hard to find many people willing to talk about the Holocaust. SURELY THE HOLOCAUST IS NOT TRIVIAL. Gedolim have compared the 70 years of Communism to the 70 years between the first and second Temples, and Rav Pam ZT"L said at one of the dinners for Be'er Hagolah that if not for miracles during those years there would be fewer Torah observant Jews in America (meaning those whose present day families came from those not murdered as a result of Purim 5713). ([User:4.236.177.224] 11:37, 3 January 2008)

Still isn't this more appropriate for History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union not here? Jon513 (talk) 16:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I don't dispute that the bulk of the details could be better placed there than here, but a one line mention strongly deserves to be placed here ([User:4.236.177.224] 13:06, 3 January 2008)
Why?! It has to do with the date; it has absolutely nothing to do with the holiday. Jon513 (talk) 18:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Stalin thing is an urban legend that keeps popping up. Nobody celebrates Stalin's death on Purim. Insisting that Jimbo Wales would support its inclusion is simply incorrect; the quote is not specifically about this subject. JFW | T@lk 19:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Now we're talking HOLOCAUST DENIAL. People were killed. Jews were killed. You're denying "poised to launch a post-Holocaust holocaust of his own." IS THIS something that the person you call Jimbo would want to defend? ([User:4.236.177.224] 14:19, 3 January 2008)

I think you should reread what JFW said. Jon513 (talk) 20:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did.

People don't celebrate the death of H(Ymach Shmo). People don't celebrate the death of Pharoh/Paro.
Yom Ha-shoah was not widely recognized before the 1967 Six Day War. As there are more Rabbis who are descended from survivors of the "Worker's Paradise" this link to Purim will grow, and no longer be as weak as was the link between the Holocaust and Tisha B'Av &/or Yom Ha-shoah pre-'67.
Wiki is supposed to be inclusive. Stalin was not an Urban Legend.
Jim Wales says post "Here's an article that shares our side of the story."
Post your side if you need to, as Mr. Wales suggests is the proper thing if you want to deny deny deny, but please don't delete. ([User:4.236.177.224] 13:37, 3 January 2008)

I don't think you understand what I am saying. Purim is a holiday that celebrates a historical event in Jewish history. Not everything that happens on the 14th of adar belongs in this article. Jon513 (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I Agree. The following statement, nonetheless is true:


Although some people do (http://www.jewishmag.com/65mag/stalin/stalin.htm) and some people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Purim#Wales_.28More_Recent.29_Purim) don't see a direct connection between Purim, which celebrates The Intervention of The Hidden Hand, and Joseph Stalin's stroke on Purim 5713/1953, Stalin's death 4 days later passes the trivia test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jfdwolff/Editorial_policies#The_trivia_test of "this event made a lasting impact on the public." ([User:4.236.177.224] 16:13, 3 January 2008)

The article itself points out that it is not known when exactly Stalin died, and there is no reason to believe that it was March 1 (Purim). Also as it was not announced until march 5 the Jews could not have celebrated that year on Purim for Stalin's death (as the article implies) and there is no reason to believe that there was a celebration the next Purim by the Russian Jews especially as they were still in a very difficult situation.
I am not saying that Stalin's death is not significant - it is covered extensively in Stalin#Death and History of the Jews in Russia and the Soviet Union#After World War II, I am saying that it is not automatically connected to Purim just because he might have fallen into a coma on Purim. Jon513 (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To clarify - the statement is not that Stalin died Purim, but rather that the date of the party and the stroke from which he did not recover to carry out his documented plans happened Purim 5713/1953. This is sufficient to justify at least a ONE LINE in the article on Purim.

Somewhere there is a Commentary that we do not know how evil were the plans of a particular Biblical evil person, but he knew and we therefore must be Thankful for being saved.

Since this article, unlike (sadly) that on Book of Esther, is from a religiously Jewish point of view, this ONE LINE mention is required, to be true to all of the work that has been put in to date on it. This is the place for that ONE LINE. ([User:4.236.177.224] 20:44, 3 January 2008)

Clarification needed[edit]

Two passages in the section on "The Purim story" seem inconsistent. I hope someone more knowledgeable can explain it a little better for the benefit of readers like me who are confused.

The article states:

Having found out that Mordechai is Jewish, Haman plans to kill not just Mordechai but the entire Jewish minority in the empire. He obtains Ahasuerus' permission, against payment of ten thousand talents of silver, to execute this plan....

That evening, Ahasuerus and Haman attend Esther's second banquet, at which she reveals that she is Jewish and that Haman is planning to exterminate her people. Ahasuerus orders Haman hanged....

The second passage gives the impression that Esther revealed to Ahasuerus that Haman planned to kill the Jews, but the first passage says that Haman had already obtained Ahasuerus's permission for the plan. If all that was revealed at the banquet was that Esther was Jewish, then perhaps the second passage should read, "...at which she reveals that she is Jewish and that it is her people that Haman is planning to exterminate." Is that what's meant? JamesMLane t c 05:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Polish language?[edit]

in Boisterousness in the synagogue there is a passage:

in Yiddish a gragger/greggar (from the Polish grzégarz)

that doesn't make much sense -- IIRC I've never met word grzégarz in my whole 24year life in Poland. It even looks awkward. Only thing that looks a little bit similar is masculine name pl:Grzegorz or Gregory in english. Can author fix this please?217.76.116.141 (talk) 12:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed it for now. Look at this etymology: [5] It seems that the word could be related to "gregarious" (Lithuanian "gurgulys") or "Gregory." --Eliyak T·C 20:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pseudo-Hecataeus[edit]

I've removed the bit about this as modern scholarship has pretty much refuted the idea that Hecataeus of Abdera wrote this, eg [6]. dougweller (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are theories that he didn't write any of it, the majority view is that its paraphrase of stuff he did write. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 21:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By majority to you mean the majority of contemporary scholars? dougweller (talk) 22:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've reworked the paragraph trying to remain neutral with respect to all theories but without going into off topic material. I leave it up to the reader to decide whether the appearance of paraphrase is due to Josephus himself paraphrasing a text, or because Josephus accurately quoted a paraphrased text, or paraphrased an existing paraphrased text and whether the earliest form was by Hecataeus or someone else and wrongly credited to him or written pseudepigraphically in his name.
By majority I mean I looked at several works within the last 20 years and noted that most offered critiques of the claim that it has been proven that Hecataeus had no contribution to it. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 22:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Purim and Politics[edit]

In spite of attempts by some editors here to downplay the political significance of Purim, I feel that comments on relevant political matters are appropriate within the scope of the article. For instance, various Palestinians officials claim that Purim is the true cause of annual military attacks on the Arab territories. [7] There are also conspiracy theories that focus on blood mixed with Purim Pastries. [8] And too, noted anti-semite Julius Streicher claimed that the hangings that followed the Nuremburg Trials were a consequence of Purim in 1946. [9] An interesting book on the topic is Reckless Rites by Elliott Horowitz. [10] ADM (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Story of Purim"[edit]

What exactly is meant by the "story of Purim?" If by that we mean a summary of the Book of Esther then the part about Vashti being ordered to dance naked should be removed. That's not in Esther 1:11. Carneadiiz (talk) 06:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Megillat Esther + Midrashim + Commentaries. The "story of Purim" is not limited to sources that the rest of the world has arrogated to itself. I understand that there is a separate article on "Book of Esther". Pedantrician (talk) 00:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relation to Nowrooz[edit]

There is no mention of Purim's relation to the Persian holiday Nowrooz in this article however a mention does exist in the Nowrooz article, I believe this should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.33.51 (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Goofy picture[edit]

Is there a more serious picture and caption to represent purim? the current photo comes with no caption and doesn't seem right. Perhaps it could be moved down to the body of the article? Wikifan12345 (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Purim Meshulash[edit]

Several inaccuracies: The three-day Purim in Jerusalem is called Purim Meshulash, not Purim Hameshulash. It never occurs after a two year interval. The minimum interval is three years (1974 to 1977; 2005 to 2008). The maximum interval is twenty years, not 13 years (1954 to 1974; and this interval will occur again 2025 to 2045). Other possible intervals are four years (1977 to 1981; 2001 to 2005). Seven years (1994 to 2001). Thirteen years (1981 to 1994; 2008 to 2021).Kepipesiom (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There having been no disagreement or further discussion I am going to edit the page to reflect the above comments.Kepipesiom (talk) 04:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hebrew word the, when part of a word, is anglized as Ha.... Hence, "The Triple Purim" is grammatically written Purim HaMeShuLash, with without the UpLo, Purim HaMeshulash. source: Aish.com, which says, Quote: "(Although grammatically it is Purim hameshulash, people usually call it 'Purim Meshulash.') This certainly merits being in the article, even if just as a RefNote. Pi314m (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Julius Streicher[edit]

Dalai lama ding dong (talk · contribs) seems to be opposed to including the anecdote that Julius Streicher exclaimed "Purim Fest 1946!" when hanged together with nine other prominent Nazi convicts of the Nuremberg Trials. This is well known and often repeated, and the fact that he said this is not disputed (it was reported in the New York Herald Tribune on 16 October 1946). There are numerous sources that could be cited, and even skeptical sources do not doubt it.[13] JFW | T@lk 11:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unsourced section[edit]

This is the unsourced section called "Rabbinic interpretations". It contains the central points of widely repeated inspirational thought related to Purim. I cannot source it currently, and it seems to have been written with a religious audience in mind:


It can be returned in a rephrased form with high-quality secondary sources. JFW | T@lk 11:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Restructured[edit]

I have restructured the article to distinguish between "Observances" (mandated either by Biblical or rabbinical commandment or [if later] codified in the Shulchan Aruch), and "Customs" (which are not kept by everyone). Now because only the city of Jerusalem now keeps Purim Shushan, and "Purim Meshulash" only occurs in Jerusalem, I have grouped all these sections under "In Jerusalem".

I am at a bit of a loss about what to do with "Purim and the Nazis". This seems relevant, but I cannot believe that there have not been other historical occurrences that should be mentioned in this context. If that is the case, perhaps the title should be changed.

As with regards to sourcing, a lot of the current content is referenced to primary sources (especially the Talmud quotes), and it would be good if we backed these up with secondary sources also. JFW | T@lk 12:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Xerxes" is the Greek way of saying "Ahasuerus"[edit]

The way Iranians pronounce it is closer to "Ahasuerus" than "Xerxes". The Article makes it seem as if Xerxes is the proper name and Ahasuerus might be him; but there is not Aryan king ever named "Xerxes" phonetically in Parsi. Just like Iranian almost never called themselves Persian in their own language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.41.108.172 (talk) 07:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another case of the WP:Systemic bias that the Graeco-roman and now anglo-american account is the only verifiable and reliable one. Jaredscribe (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first paragraph must clarify Iranians assisted Jews[edit]

Purim is not about senseless killing of some fictitious tyrannical Iranian kingdom. That is utterly racist. I have seen bizarre spin on Wikipedia that have the undertones of Anti-Iranian sentiment. It is story whereby Iranians assisted Jews from a conspiracy to destroy them; and in this process the attackers who were given false orders by way of corruption where defeated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.41.108.172 (talk) 07:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Purim Costumes in the news[edit]

Just as in the Halloween costume's wikipedia page, there should be a section about this. People need to explain why they are removing it. BenjaminHold (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello BenjaminHold. I was quite clear in my edit summaries. However strong anyone's opinion on a particular event, these are isolated incidents that you wouldn't find in an encyclopedia unless they had made a lasting impact. This would be demonstrated by a good secondary source but certainly not by news coverage at the time of some minor scandal. WP:NOTNEWS applies here. JFW | T@lk 20:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This should then be put it up for vote. There was extensive media coverage of these two events--NotNews applies to wikipedia not including routine coverage. There have been many many articles and pieces written now about Israeli teens dressed as KKK members. Dov's incident is included on his page, so it's clearly wikipedia worthy. BenjaminHold (talk) 08:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't vote, but seek consensus. Feel free to escalate the discussion as per the dispute resolution process. JFW | T@lk 22:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do you believe we have reached a standstill? I think we should discuss this more before getting another editor involved. I think more and more is being written with reference to this happening, and therefore it should be included due to its prominence. For example, http://forward.com/articles/196719/israel-s-uncomfortable-history-of-racist-enginee/? BenjaminHold (talk) 20:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added a secondary source. Please feel free to edit. But please keep in mind: Wikipedia:Don't revert due solely to "no consensus" BenjaminHold (talk) 09:20, 25 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be honest, seeing that no other regular editor to this article seems to be prepared to weigh in, I am in no mood to continue this. I am still of the view that you are trying to demonstrate a trend that doesn't exist. JFW | T@lk 14:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Purim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Checked. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:39, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Who is the king?[edit]

This article, in at least a couple of places, indicates that the king is Artaxerxes I. This is in conflict with the Wikipedia article "Book of Esther," which claims that "Ahasuerus is usually identified in modern sources as Xerxes I, who ruled between 486 and 465 BCE," allowing for the possibility that it could also be "either Artaxerxes I (reigned 465 to 424 BCE) or Artaxerxes II (reigned 404 to 358 BCE)." Someone should reconcile these two articles. (I don't feel qualified to do so, having no knowledge beyond what's in the articles themselves.) 2604:2000:EFC0:2:28C9:9497:C68B:2C0B (talk) 05:32, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fair point. One of us will dig into this in the coming days/weeks. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:14, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Obfuscation.[edit]

It is a travesty that the only mention of the real background to this story has to be a quote by Hitler. After their delivery from Babylon, Cyrus permitted the Jews to return to Jerusalem and it's environs and rebuild their temple. They were still part of the empire and a garrison was posted to defend the empire AND to defend those Jews against their mortal enemies, the idol worshipping Semites of Mesopotamia, who viewed them as deniers of their gods. This garrison was slaughtered and the news prompted the king to order the destruction of the ungrateful tribe. It's quite natural that a version of this perfidy offered by it's perpetrators whitewashes the events. However Purim is the celebration of the massacre of Persian soldiers and getting away with it.SBader (talk) 17:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Era: Use BC/AD; Stop BCE/CE Intellectual Dishonesty[edit]

Please stop these foolish, intellectually dishonest "CE/BCE" euphemisms and return to AD/BC nomenclature: It's obvious that "CE/BCE" uses Dionysius's dating from the time of Christ. If you want to reject this dating system, then actually do so by picking a different dating point. To use CE/BCE, i.e. to date from the time of Christ yet refuse to mention Him, is dishonest, and dishonesty has no place in any serious encyclopedia. Not only is this "Common Era"/"Before Common Era" nomenclature dishonest, it is obviously false (at least without eschatological reference to the Incarnation): The world did not share a 'common era' until the world-wide web. Thus, the CE/BCE nomenclature degrades the quality of Wikipedia through its foolishness, dishonesty, falseness, and absurdity. Please stop using it. -- Newagelink (talk) 01:56, 10 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Take it up at the talk page of MOS:ERA, not here. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Purim. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A couple of links were changed, but still valid at original locations. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Purim. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:48, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Checked. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:39, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Purim. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:29, 21 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Checked. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Historical views[edit]

the Phrase, the editors used original research, such as Berossus and Josephus and Josippon which is absolutely Primary source and can't be used in historical assays. for more information, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history) --Dandamayev (talk) 08:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dandamayev: User:Tigraan was absolutely correct in rolling back your edit. The section discusses primary sources using secondary sources, and those primary sources are an important factor in understanding current attitudes toward the holiday.
Additionally, if you are related to (or a friend of) the Dandamayev mentioned in the subsequent paragraph about "Biblical minimalist view", then you actually have a conflict of interest here, and need to be especially careful not to delete differing views to yours. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Story[edit]

Does that story about the Lubavitcher Rebbe really belong here? Ifyes, dies every similar story merit a place here? If we are going to put in every Purim mofes story from every Rebbe, this will become the longest page on Wikipedia. High Leader (talk) 04:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's not just a "story of a rebbe". It's about Stalin planning another genocide and dying at the last minute during Purim. It's well sourced and properly attributed.--יניב הורון (talk) 07:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hamentashen[edit]

The translation given here is Hamen’s Pockets, but over at the linked page for hamentashen the translation given is Haman's Ears. Someone knowledgeable needs to resolve this (or maybe not provide a translation and leave it up to the hamentashen page to provide the possible translations). 73.60.152.125 (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Haman tashen" are "haman pockets". "oznei Haman" are "Haman's eyes." That's what Hamantash says. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 14:46, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pur Akkadian, Goral is Hebrew?[edit]

The article currently reads

Purim is the plural of Hebrew pur,[dubious – discuss] meaning casting lots in the sense of making a random selection.

And cites an English dictionary to this effect, that I suspect is not WP:Reliable source in this case.

I'm pretty sure that "pur" is actually a Farsi Akkadian word, the Hebrew is "goral". Because the word "pur" is unfamiliar, it is defined as such goral - lot, in the Hebrew text. The word "goral" is used everywhere else in Tanak, at least among the dozens of occurences I've encountered (psalm 16, deuteronomy, Joshua, etc.) never seen "pur" or "purim" outside of megillat Esther. I'm only 80% sure on this, so I will refrain from WP:Boldly changing it. Jaredscribe (talk) 21:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a Semitic word paralleled in Akkadian puru. GordonGlottal (talk) 22:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for clarifying .. maybe include this in article

pronounciation - stress[edit]

The information we give in the article is inconsistent. If there are indeed several pronunciations in use, this could (should?) be mentioned.

--176.12.227.62 (talk) 13:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Noori Sadat Shahangian opinion[edit]

Noori Sadat Shahangian is a professor of al-zahra university in judaism and she is published her issue in Encyclopædia of Iran (Daneshnameye iran), which is edited by Kazem Mousavi-Bojnourdi and published by Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia. what's the matter ? Jentilir (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We don't list everyone's opinion just because they have one, even if they are a professor. Do you have any secondary sources that have written about Shahangian's views? If others tend to cover them that would be an argument that Wikipedia should as well. Also, are you associated with this person or Al-Zahra university in some way? MrOllie (talk) 16:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
first at all, i have not any relationship with her, because i was graduated in Engineering field, not Humanities and Al-Zahra University is for feminine students and professors, but i am a male person. second, she published her issue in an encyclopedia with is published by academic center, in on case, see Encyclopaedia Islamica, which is written in persian, but translated in english by two chief editor Wilferd Madelung and Farhad Daftary and published by E.J.Brill . Third , i don't have peer review on Shahangian's view, but What does it matter? she is a scholar like shaked and netser and dandamaev and kuhrt ... all of them are orientalist. and if you can read her article, you will see she used all academic sources as she could. Jentilir (talk) 16:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No secondary sourcing means that we should not include this, Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate list of opinions. You need to stop edit warring about this - if you cannot convince others to support your edits and form a consensus for inclusion on this talk page it will have to remain out of the article. MrOllie (talk) 00:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories