Re: Roseanne not Roseanneadanna

[wiener <wiener...>]

I really haven't been following this thread, so please correct me if
I'm wrong (and possibly totally off base).

If the issue is whether someone presented as a teacher of a subject is
qualified to teach (in this case, the Zohar, which traditionally has
special requirements even for its study), shouldn't those who present
them as qualified be the ones to establish their qualifications?  If
so, isn't the question something like, "What are X's qualifications to
teach ...?"

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Trudi Goodman <goobietheg (at) hotmail(dot)com>
To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: Roseanne not Roseanneadanna


>So Nu?
>As I've already stated, I'm more than happy to try and contact
her...now can
>we all agree at least somewhat on how we would like to/and what we
would
>like to formulate as a question to her?
>   Trudi the G
>
>
>>From: Velaires (at) aol(dot)com
>>Reply-To: jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org
>>To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
>>Subject: Re: Roseanne--Footnote
>>Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 12:56:15 EDT
>>
>>Appropriate demeanor? Showbiz presentation of an image is an issue
aside
>>from
>>whether somebody posesses -- offstage -- the appropriate demeanor to
do
>>anything of serious personal personal gravity, whether it is to run
a day
>>care center or to teach scripture.  The two are unrelated.
>>
>>In Roeanne's favor, anybody who was married to Tom Arnold probably
has a
>>need
>>to take spiritual matters very seriously as they have already known
hell.
>>
>>skip heller
>>
>>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
___
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com
>
>----------------------
jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+
>