Judenkirschen in Mering

October 19, 2018

Judenkirschen in Mering. Wie bitte? Was denn sollen Judenkirschen sein?

Foto von vorgestern

Im 19. Jahrhundert kannte man sie in Deutschland auch unter diesem Namen: Judenkirschen, heute nennt man sie landläufig nur noch Hagebutten (oder Hundsrose = rosa canina, nicht Rosa Kaninchen …). Warum man sie Judenkirschen nannte? Wer weiß, man kann auch fragen was sie mit Hunden zu tun haben. Damals kannte man auch noch Judenbeeren.

Eine Idee, was das nun sein könnte? Nein? Oliven. Vielleicht so genannt, weil sie außer Juden in Deutschland damals keiner essen wollte. Heute gehören sie auf jede Pizza -auch wieder so eine Sache, steht das Rezept, einen ausgewalzten Teig mit Gemüse, Würzsauce oder Fischstücken zu, belegen ja bereits im völlig zur Recht allseits wertgeschätzten Talmud …

Wie dem auch sei, … früher nannte und verknüpfte man in der deutschen Sprache ja eine ganze Menge nach, bzw. mit “den Juden”, weshalb sich im 1877 veröffentlichten Band H-J (10) des Deutschen Wörterbuchs (DWB) der Gebrüder Grimm nicht weniger als 12 komplette Spalten (2351-2363) mit zahlreichen Stichwörter finden, die oft verblüffende Bezüge zu Juden und Jüdischem herstellen wollen und im heutigen Sprachgebrauch größtenteils nicht mehr vorkommen.

Im 19. Jahrhundert freilich waren diese Begriffe gebräuchlich und wohl auch für alle prägend, die mit diesem „objektiven“ Standardwerk der deutschen Sprache und den teilweise umfangreichen beigefügten Begriffserläuterungen vertraut gemacht wurden.

Vieles, nicht alles, ist antisemitisch, manches schlicht skurril, aber was weiß und versteht man heute, über die damalige Zeit, wenn man das alles nicht weiß ..?

Ausführlich ist alles zitiert und beschrieben im Buch:

Yehuda Shenef

Humor, Wucher, Weltverschwörung: Die geläufigsten Vorurteile gegenüber Juden und was es mit diesen auf sich hat 

ISBN: 978-374-3181-205

Taschenbuch: 260 Seiten, 13 Euro


The Secret of the Jewish World Conspiracy

April 10, 2011

If Jews control the media, why we do not bring to pass a better press?”  

This regular objection from Jews in the U.S., Europe, Israel and elsewhere is often cited and used as a kind of revealing counter-argument against the well-known conspiracy myth. In fact it is so that just in the world press Israel does not come off well. Whenever Israel’s military kills two Palestinians, hurts one, kills six, hurts five, … it very likely will be one of the headline messages in the news broadcasts in Paris, Berlin, Cairo, Washington, as well as in Moscow or Beijing – but if there are hundreds or thousands of deaths in Africa, it will be mentioned just before the sports section as a short footnote message (probably with some production photographs). The first incident you will read on the front page of the newspaper, the other will be on page 17 bottom left, next to the coupon for a pound of beef. If you read papers with less pages you will have to wait until someone believes that there might be a connection to Jews. However, as Seinfeld once put it: “It’s amazing that the amount of news that happens in the world every day, always just exactly fits the newspaper.”

So, for God’s sake, how can it be that Jews rule the world press and they get so bad appraisals and opinions? Why in the U.S., where the supposed influence of “Jewish East Coast” is supposed to have the  strongest and most effective impact, many month long efforts were “necessary” to induce retail giant “Walmart” to withdraw the so-called “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” – commonly known as anti-Jewish diatribe from czarist Russia – from its online catalog? Believe it or not, but “Walmart” only in September 2004 was receptive to the increasing and more louder protests, to do so (or they simply waited until the edition was sold, as some critics suppose). If there was something like a Jewish sovereignty, an email to my uncle ought to do.

We remember Mel Gibson, whose “Passion” film triggered off a number from fierce to ridiculous debates over anti-Semitic motifs, overtones, either subtle or blatant. Among Gibson’s pleaders also were a number of Jews, who objected the reproaches formulated and surveyed by many others. Of course some of these Jews have made the mistake of celebrating this “success” with Gibson and to spend him too many drinks – as we know today… His movie, with Italy’s  famous actor Adriano Celentano’s daughter Rosalinda starring as “Satan”, was of some success also in Muslim countries, and in 2008 inspired a film in the Islamic Republic of Iran. “The Messiah”, the largest movie production in the history of the country however differs in the punch line of the (whole) story. According to the writings of the Quran it was not Jesus who was hit at the cross, but “someone else”. The movie closes the knowledge gap and it is Judas Iscariot who was crucified, probably as a kind of scapegoat for the accursed Zionists. However, the distinction between the two storylines maybe will give some information on the effective hugeness of Jewish influence in Hollywood.   

The answers to the previous questions also allow to understand how the Jewish world conspiracy actually works: it is based on humor and one requirement of humor is the ability also laugh at yourself.

And now, let’s face it, even bad jokes are jokes – right? Do fools in this world not have the license they are envied for by others? The court jesters of the Middle Ages today are known as journalists. As the jester used to dance before the king, made faces and told funny verses, a journalist today in an interview with the politician will quote opinion polls: “Two thirds of the population oppose your policy“. The effect obviously is the very same and the ruler at the helm will laugh the way the king once did, knowing that his policies may not be refused, because the next election will be in three years and by then everything will be long forgotten. Who keeps bad jokes in mind?  

So it now has become obvious why the press has to write bad things about Israel and to sympathize with Israel’s enemies: it simply is humor, often brilliant and witty. Come on, let’s face it: everyone would be aware of the Jewish domination of the media if it was distinguishably in favor of Israel and its policy. In contrary the more Israel is doomed in the world media, the more humorous and satirical are the segments – and the more powerful is the Jewish dominance or ownage. This may appear paradoxical, but if you become attuned to the concept and method, you will take notice of other aspects as well. Jewish humor impresses with by understatements and satire and often plays with stylistic devices like self-criticism. Already in Bible and Talmud you may discover much more than just basic approaches for it, they already met all requirements, except for the protagonists of course neither were called court jester nor journalist but under their previous title as prophet or rabbi. Their role and function however was the very same and everyone knows, that prophets and fools, who are not quick-witted enough, soon can end up in prisons or worse. It is not so easy to deal with journalist the same way of course, because within the Jewish-dominated press the mother of a journalist may be buddy-buddy with the mother of the chief editor. But seriously folks, who wants to mess with a Jewish mother anyway? Better to conduct some field research in Afghanistan than to get oneself into an unwinnable conflict. 

But how does it happen that particularly American Christians apparently seem to support the Jewish world conspiracy, although Jewish mockery sometimes also is aimed at them? Think of Lenny Bruce, who calmed the question of collective Jewish guilt for the crucifixion death of Christ. He explained: “I dunno, it was one of those parties, got out of hand, you know.” He also clarified satire as “tragedy plus time”. On another occasion he admitted that now Jewish guilt has been proven beyond question, since in his basement he found a note signed “Morty”.

Well, the answer again is quite easy: Christians, especially newborn ones, love to laugh. They also love to laugh at Jews, whether they are called Woody Allen, Seinfeld, Groucho Marx, Jerry Lewis or Ehud Olmert. And of course Christians believe in biblical prophets, even if time and again they have another understanding of some of their punch lines and sometimes miss the deeper meaning. But never mind: Have you ever told jokes and all listeners get it? See??

Although the header speaks of a “secret”, to reveal the Jewish confederacy on the basis of humor, is not exactly new, even bitter enemies of the Hebrews understood early this relation. Unsurprisingly they repeatedly had tried to copy the Jews and to beat them with their own weapons. The Nazis, for instance had a weekly tabloid named “Stuermer” (“striker”), best-known for its often obscene, flat or pornographic anti-Semitic caricatures, which illustrated or propagated old and new “Jewish” stereotypes. Since the Middle Ages Jews were depicted with pigs by their haters, but who would be surprised to find out a Jewish origin of the “lucky pig” term?  

Iranian president Ahmadinejad some years ago offered a prize for a cartoon competition on the Holocaust, as a kind of retaliation for the Mohamed caricature by a Danish Christian. The intention was to provoke and insult Jews, but a parallel Israeli competition had much wittier results with a firework of wit and lots of biting sarcasm and according to international observers they were head and shoulders better than the simple Persian provocations.

How can that be? Now it is reminiscent of the scene from the Bible, when Moses and his brother Aharon, facing Pharaoh and throwing a rod to the ground, and the rod turns into a snake – if you want, you may consider that a miracle, but if you prefer to regard it as a mere joke, that of course is okay as well … The Egyptian king of course had his own executive consultants, … I mean … magicans … and as it is reported they repeated what the two leaders of the Israelites did. They also threw their rods to the floor and their rods also turned into serpents. However the snake of Moses and Aharon eats up the ones of the Egyptian advisers. It was just a pointless imitation and the very same it is here, since the ironian … I mean … the Iranian president takes no account of the fact that Jewish humor bases on the ability to laugh at oneself. This exactly is the key to it, the vicious, wicked, dirty trick. Americans figure their presidents as monkeys and had received media prizes, Israeli satirists get spokespersons. In Iran, however, as elsewhere (and not only in the Islamic) world, they cannot understand that they have to drag themselves through the mire first if they want to rule the world.

The vast majority of US American Jews voted for Barack Hussein Obama, the son of a Muslim. However most American Jews will foreswear and nullify his Muslim background, as most other Democrats will do, … the same people however emphasize the Jewish background of let’s say William Sebastian Cohen, US Secretary of Defense under President Bill Clinton, who had an Irish Protestant mother and became Unitarian when he was told that in order to get a Bar Mitzvah he formally needs a conversion. However, when you have a Muslim father it of course has no further meaning and it is a kind of racism if you ask questions, although in Islam ancestry is paternal.  On the other hand if someone only has a paternal Jewish grandparent, he or she will regarded as Jewish, although in Judaism descent is maternal.  Obama was raised fo(u)r  years in Indonesia, the world most populous Muslim country, which different to many other Muslim countries until today has no direct ties with Israel, but if “needed” pulls out its national tennis team of a Federation Cup match in order not to play on Zionist tennis courts. Obama revisited Indonesia last fall as US President, but the policy of the country towards Israel will not change and American Jews of course will not mind.  Liberals can understand everything but people who don’t understand them.

Was that it? Yes, basically.

If you are not Jewish but you want to be influential, get off with mocking yourself and publicly emphasizing everything about you that might be embarrassing. If however it does not work out, deny vehemently all personal responsibility and blame the Jews instead. We will appreciate.

If however you consider yourself Jewish but you have not any influence either, reconsider the option that maybe you only are half-Jewish or less with the possible after-effect, that you brain in the Gentile half or quadrant is not. Never mind, just remember how Seinsfeld puts it: “Why do they call it a “building”? It looks like they’re finished. Why isn’t it a “built“?“ Think about it and improve your situation as described above. But if however it does not work out, deny vehemently all personal responsibility and blame traditional, orthodox or zionist Jews instead. We will appreciate.

From all our other attentive readers we can expect they will comprehend that the original title of the infamous “Protocols” actually is a meaningless and content-free playing down of the original (insider) book which had the telltale, revealing title “The recorded gags of Zion”. 

So maybe it only has been an instance of a rather harmless mishearing. An anecdote may shed a little light on this:

A Jewish businessman has to wait three hours in a Swabian village for his connecting train. Since his pocket watch needs a repair he decides to use the time to look for a watchmaker who possibly even will fix his watch. In fact in the middle of the main street he finds a shop with a number of different watches in the window. As he enters, the store is empty. There are neither good nor shelves, just a decent old Jew sitting, with long beard, side curls and a yarmulke on his head, is slightly whipping on a chair while he reads mumbling from a huge folio sized Talmud at a small table.

The business man says to him: “Is it possible to get my watch repaired within one or two hours ..?” The old man is not responding.

The visitor now assumes that the old man probably is somewhat hard of hearing and repeats his question a little louder, again no response, a little more louder, and once again no response. Finally he almost shouts his head of: “Is it possible to get an answer?”   

The old man now lifts his head and looks to the guest and answers forcefully:  “Well, is it possible for you, not to roar around like a donkey? I am not a watchmaker, I am the local circumciser, the mohel..!”

But why you have put the watches in the window? ”

Well, actually you can tell me what else should I put in the window? ”

  • * * *

(Rewritten English translation of a German version “Das Geheimnis der jüdischen Weltverschwörung” from Summer 2006, see: http://yehuda.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/das-gehemnis-der-judischen-weltverschworung/)

Warum legt man kleine Steine auf jüdische Grabsteine?

November 16, 2010

März 2017: Ausführlicher beschrieben im Buch:

Yehuda Shenef

Humor, Wucher, Weltverschwörung: Die geläufigsten Vorurteile gegenüber Juden und was es mit diesen auf sich hat 

ISBN: 978-374-3181-205

Taschenbuch: 260 Seiten

13 Euro


Oft werden wir nach der Bedeutung und Herkunft der überall anzutreffenden Sitte gefragt, auf jüdischen Grabsteinen und Denkmälern Steinchen, meist Kieselsteine abzulegen. Allgemein wird dies auch von sog. Fachleuten mit einer für  „Nomaden“- oder „Wüstenvölker“ angeblich typische Bestattungspraxis erklärt.  Demnach legte man auf die Grabstätte Steinhaufen, um den Leichnam vor wilden aasfressenden Tieren zu schützen. Der Vorstellung nach hatten Angehörige bei jedem Besuch ab und an weitere Steine dazugelegt, um diesen Schutz zu erneuern, woraus sich sodann der entsprechende Brauch entwickelt habe. Sollte es ein solches Brauchtum tatsächlich jemals gegeben haben, so hatten die (… wann eigentlich?) „nomadisierenden“ Juden ihn wohl bereits vergessen, als sie in Israel sesshaft wurden, zumindest kennen weder Bibel noch der Talmud eine entsprechende Praxis.  Sie wäre auch gänzlich unnötig, wenn man den Leichnam tief genug begräbt …

Tatsächlich geht die Praxis aber wohl doch auf die im antiken Israel übliche Bestattung zurück, die jedoch in vielen Einzelteilen von der heutigen abweicht. In aller Regel wurden Tote selten auf Äckern oder eigenen Grabfeldern bestattet, sondern in Grabhöhlen, die meist einzelnen (Groß-)Familien gehörten und oft -etwa wie im antiken Ägypten- eigens für den Zweck der Bestattung künstlich geschaffen wurden und nicht selten über einen Zugang mehr oder minder tief unter die Erde, bzw. in den Felsen reichten.

Die Bestattung vollzog sich anders als heute in zwei Schritten. Zuerst wurde der Leichnam auf einer Art Steinbett zur raschen Verwesung aufgebahrt, später wurden die Knochenreste eingesammelt und gesäubert, um sie endgültig in einem kleinen, platzsparenden, meist in etwa quadratischen Steinbehälter, lat. Ossarium („Knochenhaus“) zu legen, welches sodann in einer Nische כוך (kùch) in einer Seitenwand der Familiengruft beigesetzt wurde. Sehr häufig wurden diese Behälter beschriftet mit dem Namen des Verstorbenen. Die Grabhöhle oder der Teilbereich einer Grabhöhle, etwa der der einer einzelnen Familie gehörte, wurde mit einem beweglichen, גולל (golèl) genannten Stein verschlossen, der seinem Namen nach meist rundlich war, aber auch in quadratischer Form belegt ist. Zur Festigung oder Sicherung dieses Golel-Steines nun benutzte man kleine Steine, den sogenannten דופק (dofèk), der nach jedem Besuch der Grabhöhle neu gelegt wurde, wörtlich etwa „der (An)Klopfer“ (vom Verb דפק dafak = (klopfen) und im heutigen Sprachgebrauch der (medizinische) Puls. Schon bei der Bestattung heißt es deshalb entsprechend דופק סתימת הגולל – der Dofèk verschließt den Golèl (Ket. 4b, Sanh. 47b, u.a.).

Als Dofèk nun durfte man nichts verwenden, was selbst gelebt hat, also nichts was von einem Tier oder einer Pflanze stammte, weshalb der Einfachheit halber der Brauch entstand, keilförmige oder andere kleine Steinchen als Abschluss zu nehmen. Im sprichwörtlichen Sinne führte dies auch zu Redensarten wie  לא דופק לסוכה … ולא גולל לקבר – (wörtlich: kein dofek für die Sucka [da zu groß] und kein golel fürs Grab [da zu klein]), sinngemäß etwa: weder das eine, noch das andere (nichts Halbes und nichts Ganzes, weder Fisch, noch Fleisch, etc.).

Der Brauch, einen Stein ans Grab zu legen stammt demnach aus der antiken Bestattungskultur der nahöstlichen Grabhöhlen, für deren Existenz uns schon die Tora das Beispiel der Machpela – Höhle bei Hebron gibt, die Abraham für seine Familie erwirbt. Sie ist keineswegs auf das Judentum beschränkt, so wie sich der Brauch kleine Steine auf das Grab zu legen auch in manchen katholischen Gebieten Italiens erhalten hat. Auch das Christentum überliefert z.B. im Evangelium Markus 16 den Golel.

Es ist zunächst die praktische Funktion des Dofèk, der als eine Art Riegel oder Sperre das unbeabsichtigte Wegrollen oder Verrutschen des meist runden Golèl verhindern soll, zugleich ist es aber im Wortsinn auch ein „Anklopfen“ (des Steinchens an den Grabstein) und deshalb auch ohne die frühere praktische Funktion als „Gruß“ an den Toten zu verstehen.

Why are pebbles laid on Jewish grave markers?

The common custom to leave little stones or pebbles on Jewish head stones goes back to the ancient Jewish funeral practice, when the corps was lay to rest in burial caves. The particular section of the burial cave then in the majority of the cases was locked with a round roll able stone (the golèl). In return to avoid the rolling away of the round golel, the stone was fixed with a smaller stone, called the dofèk (to knock) a word in modern Hebrew also means the pulse. To leave the stone today at a visit means to knock on the grave.


März 2017: Ausführlicher beschrieben im Buch:

Yehuda Shenef

Humor, Wucher, Weltverschwörung: Die geläufigsten Vorurteile gegenüber Juden und was es mit diesen auf sich hat 

ISBN: 978-374-3181-205

Taschenbuch: 260 Seiten

13 Euro