The Batya/Bitya Conundrum
I have long been puzzled by the fact that Batya is such a common Jewish name.
As the only time that name occurs in Tanach is in Divrei HaYamim (1:4, 18), in reference to Pharaoh’s daughter, and the vowelization is Bitya, with a chirik – not a patach – under the bet, how did we arrive at Batya?
With this preface in mind, I welcomed Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein’s article on this subject (“Bitya? Batya? You Betya,” Jan. 24). Rabbi Klein proposes several solutions, some quite esoteric, but I wish to focus on one. He suggests, based on his interpretation of a midrash, that G-d Himself effectively instructs us to pronounce the name as “Batya” (meaning “daughter of G-d”) instead of “Bitya.”
Rabbi Klein then cites the Tzemach Tzedek, who rules that “one should spell the name Batya in a get as bet–tav–yud–hey, even though the way that word is pronounced in the Bible is ‘Bitya,’ as though there were an additional yud after the bet.”
After studying the Tzemach Tzedek’s words, I nowhere see an intent to suggest that the name Bitya should require a yud after the bet. If one were to add a yud after the bet, one would be asserting that the chirik under the bet is a long chirik (chirik malei). If that were the case, then the shva under the tav would be sounded out (a shva na). In truth, this is a chirik chaser (a short chirik), which is almost never followed by a yud. The correct spelling of Bitya has no yud, and the pronunciation is “Bit-ya,” with a shva nach (silent shva) under the tav. This is not in question.
It is true that the Tzemach Tzedek writes that the custom is to write the name Milka in a get with a yud after the chirik-mem. In this way, Milka is distinguished from the identically spelled Malka, which obviously has no yud after the patach-mem. However, the Tzemach Tzedek clearly states that the reason one might add a yud in Milka is not because it is grammatically correct to do so, but because “the populace has become accustomed to writing Milka with a yud.” That is to say, despite the fact that this spelling is wrong, the existence of this (erroneous) custom permits us to add the yud in a get, with the bonus that the word will readily be pronounced “Milka” rather than “Malka.” However, Bitya was not a common name at all, and thus no custom to add a yud existed.
Regarding the Bitya/Batya question, I think that sometimes the simplest answer is the best. Rather than employing intellectual somersaults to explain away the change from Bitya to Batya, let us just accept that people saw the word spelled without vowels. Knowing that “Batya” is easily understood to mean “daughter of G-d,” while “Bitya” is a more complicated rendering, and being unfamiliar with Divrei HaYamim, people began to name their children Batya.
Also note that there is a typo regarding the year of the Tzemach Tzedek’s death. It was 1866, not 1826.
Avi Goldstein
Far Rockaway, N.Y.
With Friends Like These…
There is much that can be said about the address given at the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York’s annual legislative breakfast last week by Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), almost none of it good. The central point of his presentation was his pessimism over the future of the Gaza ceasefire – a pessimism he blamed on the Israeli government rather than Hamas, a terrorist organization dedicated since its inception to the eradication of Israel.
“The Netanyahu government,” he intoned, “is opposed to a two-state solution…and does not seem enthusiastic about phase two and three [of the ceasefire], which will lean toward a two-state solution” – of which Nadler has been a longtime proponent.
The problem with the incessant one-track harping by Nadler and those of like mind on a two-state solution is that the Palestinians themselves do not want a two-state solution, having rejected offers of statehood in 1937, 1948, 2000, 2001, and 2009.
Despite the longstanding Palestinian dismissal of a two-state solution, and notwithstanding the support of most Palestinians for Hamas’s unspeakable blood fest of October 7, we have – and this is what really hurts – Jewish elected officials who never tire of pushing the two-state scenario. Worse, they have no problem publicly castigating the Israeli government, even in the aftermath of the worst atrocity perpetrated against Jews since the Holocaust and at a time of unprecedented anti-Israel hostility and a worldwide surge of antisemitic rhetoric and violence.
Rather than endlessly championing the idea of a Palestinian state and looking for any reason under the sun to bludgeon Israel’s democratically elected leaders, our own elected Jewish officials here in America ought to reflect more on the reality and the implications of Oct. 7 – the rapes and murders of young Jews at a music festival, the mass torture and killing of babies and children and parents and grandparents, the burning alive of entire families in the communities and kibbutzim that fell to the invading hordes from Gaza.
Our Jewish politicos who confuse New York Times editorials with timeless Judaic teachings would do well to meditate on the unimaginable suffering of the hostages who were kidnapped and forced to endure beatings and starvation, branding with hot objects, denial of treatment for injuries and medical conditions, solitary confinement, and other deprivations and degradations best left unsaid, for over a year now and still counting. And in the name of simple decency if nothing else, Jerrold Nadler might consider putting a pause on his bleating for Palestine while we still await disclosure of the tragic final toll of those who will never be returning from the hellhole of Gaza.
Thankfully, there are non-Jewish elected officials, Democrat as well as Republican, who provide unambiguous and full-throated support for Israel. As the political journalist Seth Mandel recently wrote, “Jerry Nadler and Chuck Schumer are proof that a community’s representation in Congress can be worse for the community’s interests than having no seat at the table. I would sleep better at night if the New York nudniks weren’t constantly getting in the way of those gentiles who work tirelessly for their Jewish constituents, like Ritchie Torres and John Fetterman.”
Moshe Zakheim
Brooklyn, N.Y.
A Trump Critic Reconsiders
In response to the letter by Dory Frank criticizing The Jewish Press for its apparent extreme adulation of President Trump who in their eyes he can do no wrong (“JP Overly Obsequious To Trump,” Letters, Feb. 7): I must admit that a year ago I could have very easily written that letter myself, also being very critical of Trump’s extensive proliferation of lies pertaining to his alleged stolen election, and his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection on the Capitol making him unfit to run for president or any other elective office ever again.
However, since October 7, 2023, there has been a sea change, with the explosion of antisemitism and especially with the extreme hatred of Israel that has permeated throughout the entire world, including our own country, and the tepid (to put it mildly) response by the Democratic administration in the U.S. at that time which did very little to help mitigate its pernicious effects.
With President Trump now in the White House, I feel that Israel now has a true friend they can rely on who will not undermine the defense of their country nor prevent their aggressively attacking all their numerous surrounding enemies including Iran and all its proxies who are all trying to do them harm. It is also very refreshing that all the staff Trump has chosen to lead, especially in foreign affairs – including Rubio for Secretary of State, Stefanik for U.N. ambassador (who will hopefully bring some sanity to the U.N.), and Huckabee for Israel ambassador – are all very staunch supporters of Israel and of the Jewish people in combatting all forms of antisemitism.
This for me more than helps counteract all the negative qualities of Trump, including his obsession with taking revenge on all his perceived personal enemies, and some of his more reckless domestic policies such as greatly reducing some needed federal agencies such as Social Security. Hopefully his more sane and seasoned staff, as well as Congress. will help steer him away from these very damaging and reckless positions.
I am especially pleased that he has proposed as part of the Israel peace plan to resettle all the Palestinian civilians in Gaza to a more neutral territory outside of Israel as the best chance for them to truly achieve stability and peace away from the toxic leadership of Hamas. The Palestinian people have been severely radicalized by their terrorist leaders and need to be deprogrammed by living in a more neutral and stable environment.
I understand that most critics of this plan believes that this will greatly undermine the aspirations of the Palestinian people in having their own independent state, but the reality is this will never be achievable in this current environment (not until the arrival of Mashiach when there will be truly peace in the region), as they were given this opportunity back in 2005 when Israel chose to give Gaza to them – and look how well that went. Hopefully the rest of the world will finally come to this same realization and see the merits inherent in Trump’s proposed plan.
Josh Rosenthal
Queens, N.Y.
Trump Is President of the United States, Not Israel
This is in response to Richard Kronenfeld’s letter “A Pro-Israel Administration? Not So Fast,” (Letters, Jan. 31).
Many Trump detractors, which include most Jews, bash Trump for every move he makes which they think is not good for Israel. They go by the simplistic notion that if you aren’t with me, you are against me. They don’t recognize anything in between.
What they need to remember is that Trump is President of the United States, not Israel. He is sworn, and is obligated to do, what is best for the United States, not just for Israel. He therefore has to factor in the ramifications of his actions on the total global geopolitical climate, not just the effect on Israel. That is a very heavy responsibility for the leader of the entire free world.
What these detractors choose to purposely ignore is that in the past, Trump has shown himself, by words and deeds, to be overall, the American president most friendly to Israel in history. He is still proceeding down that path today, being very supportive of Israel, but not necessarily acceding to every single request.
Trump detractors also need to be reminded that Israel itself has a cantankerous and boisterous political climate. Many Israeli Jews feel that even Netanyahu is not doing what’s best for Israel. What makes American Jews presume to think they know better what Trump or Netanyahu should be doing?
Max Wisotsky
Highland Park, N.J.
Kahane’s Wisdom Echoed In Trump’s Plan
To all the people who persistently criticized and vilified Rabbi Meir Kahane, a longtime columnist for The Jewish Press, perhaps some serious soul-searching is now in order.
In a desperate attempt to stop the bloodshed, Rabbi Kahane suggested a compensated emigration of all Arabs who refused to sign a pledge of allegiance to Israel in the 1980s. In most wars, a transfer of population ultimately occurs. After World War II, millions of people were transferred across borders to help establish peace.
Unfortunately, no such policy materialized and Rabbi Kahane was tragically assassinated in Manhattan in 1990 by an Arab.
Today, the United States is advocating a variant of his policy for Gaza, as publicly stated last week by President Trump. Transfer is not a racist policy but a life-saving one.
May Rabbi Kahane’s memory and that of all the thousands of Arabs and Jews needlessly killed during the past 40 years serve as blessings to help finally ensure peace in the Middle East.
Never Again.
Henry Moscovic
Flushing, N.Y.
If You’re Sick, Stay Home
Thank you very much for printing my letter in last week’s issue of The Jewish Press about the importance of not attending shul when one is not feeling well and potentially contagious (“If You Have A Cold, Please Stay Home!” Letters, Feb. 7). Unlike the headline my letter was given, after being exposed to someone in shul, I caught the flu, instead of simply a cold. Unfortunately, and this is what drove me to write the letter, I was pretty much incapacitated last week as a result of having the flu.
If even just one person is spared my experience, as a result of your printing my letter, it will definitely be worth it.
Best wishes.
Barry Schwartz
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Common Sense In Halachic Decisions
I read Barry Schwartz’s letter to the editor last week with great interest. His experience in getting sick from a congregant who went to synagogue despite being sick is reflective of an all-too-common pattern in our community, namely, focusing exclusively on the literal vs. practical application of halacha. Whether it pertains to attending synagogue or a variety of other day-to-day issues, many people in our community seem oblivious to the concept of the “Fifth Shulchan Aruch.” For those who don’t know, the “Fifth Shulchan Aruch” means the application of common sense to halacha. Unfortunately, common sense does not appear to be that common.
Shimon Lindenbaum
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Our Tortured Hostages
Watching a Hamas militant ask Eli Sharabi how he felt before he was freed recalled U.S. Navy Commander Jeremiah A. Denton, Jr. being asked about his treatment in a North Vietnamese prison. In 1966, the North Vietnamese broadcast Denton’s recorded message about his treatment. Unbeknownst to his captors, Denton blinked his eyes to spell T-O-R-T-U-R-E in Morse Code.
Morse Code wasn’t needed for the three Israeli men to communicate torture after spending fifteen months in captivity. Their emaciated figures conveyed that message.
Paul L. Newman
Via E-mail
