Talk:Matzah

Photo from Ofra
Considering that "The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law. According to human rights organization B'Tselem, the state of Israel itself acknowledges that much of the Ofra civilian settlement is built on privately owned Palestinian land, which is unlawful according to Israeli law." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofra) I see it as an unnessecary political statement to subtitle the Photo with children in Ofra baking Matzo. How about just removing the "in Ofra" or chosing a different photo from an undisputed location, if the location is important to anyone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.64.144.77 (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Ingredients, Five Species of Chametz and Preparation.. and Zionism
I'm interested in the ingredients and preperation of Matzo, not in zionism. Zionistic phrases contained in the article: "...millennia of of exile...", "However as the people of Israel return to their ancient homeland...". These have no place in the article, and are clearly an attempt push an agenda that has nothing to do with Matzo whatsoever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.110.246.219 (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Religious stuff
So I go and buy a packet of matzos at the supermarket because dad likes them. Personally i think they are the most bland thing you can eat next to cardboard (at least put some salt in them FFS!). I look it up on wikipedia to see why on earth anyone would want to make these things and, importantly, what these things are as a food. THESE ARE FOOD. Yes there's a whole Jewish/Christian thing behind them, but shouldn't most of that stuff go in religious topics, not cuisine? All i need to know is the very basics of where they come from, varieties, how they are made, nutrition info and uses in cuisine. Again, this is an article about FOOD not religion! Please keep all your religious stuff (NOTE: religion is differnet to national culture!) in another article. Thankyou.

Try this: I added yeast to my nana's matzo recipe. Delish! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.115.159.54 (talk) 17:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

NO SIR THIS IS A RITUALISTIC BREAD THAT IS TAKEN WITH RESPECT AND ONLY EATEN IN THE TIME OF THE PASSOVER. SAINT THOMAS CHRISTIANS OF KERALA IN INDIA ARE VERY STRICT ABOUT THE MAKING AND CONSUMPTION...IT SHOULD BE MADE IN THE HOUSE ITSELF....IT MUST BE TREATED RESPECTFULLY AND SHOULD BE CUT BY THE HEAD OF THE FAMILY....NOT TO ODFFEND ANYONE BUT THIS IS OUR SYRIAN CHRISTIAN CULTURE AS ACCORDING TO LEGEND WE WERE DIRECTLY CONVERTED BY THOMAS THE APOSTLE... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARAVIND NAMBOOTHIRI (talk • contribs) 19:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Correct spelling?
Regardless the Sefaradi/Ashkenazi spelling, the Hagada(which is the official religious scroll for the passover, BY ALL JEW), refer to it as Matza(h). The Title should be changed.

Note: Haggada Note: Passover Seder Note: In Passover the edit used both spelling options.

Mazza is the spelling found on many boxes of various brands of machine-mazza to this day. Considering how the English word "pizza" is pronounced, it seems to me that this is still a valid spelling, and certainly one of the oldest and most venerable. It should AT LEAST be mentioned.

What the *** is Matzo? I've been an Ashkenazi Jew from a traditional family for half a century, in the diaspora and Israel, and have never heard the word, in liturgical-Ashkenazi or Sephardi-modern-Israeli Hebrew, nor seen it written like that in English (maybe Matza manufacturers in America spell it like that?). The word is Matza (or Matzah, if one wants to demonstrate that the third letter is heh, not alef, as in "found") and the plural is Matzot. As for the Google searches, they must have been searching something else. Maybe they were looking for the mountain near Larissa in Greece?). It's truly a ridiculous argument to dig one's heels in about. So, could somebody change the article's name to the correct one? The point which may have been missed is that even if a liturgical Ashkenazi were to pronounce the kamatz under the tzadi as "oh", it's still a kamatz! It's as if a Liverpudlian had spelt Sun Soohn (it was a soohny day) because that's how the word is pronounced in Merseyside. Whoever decided on Matzo must be an Diaspora Ashkenazi Jew with no knowledge of the Hebrew language (liturgical or modern) because the word מצו simply doesn't exist. But as stated, even in totally Ashkenazi English-speaking communities I have never heard the word pronounced that way, including my British Ashkenazi family, after scores of Seder nights together. And having said that, the largest number of Jews in the world live in Israel, where Sephardi Hebrew is spoken by everyone. So could this please be changed? As an editor very low on the Wiki food chain, I don't dare to do this myself (although I seem to have a phantom memory of doing so myself approximately 10-12 years ago, but I might be imagining this) Monosig (talk) 15:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Bartlby's list "Matzo" as the official spelling and "Matzoh" as the alternate spelling.
 * "Matzo" also generates almost twice as many google hits. - Hephaestos 19:03, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
 * I don't care how many google hits it generates. I'm an actual Jew, and I was outright confused and disturbed when I saw the word spelled incorrectly. It's Matzah. DanHakimi (talk) 23:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Help, I tried to rename "Matzo" to "Matza" so I could rename "Matzoh" to "Matzo", but that didn't delete "Matzo". So we now have "Matza" and "Matzo" pointing to "Matzoh".  What I want is "Matzoh" moved to "Matzo" and "Matza" and "Matzoh" pointing to "Matzo".  Does an adminstrator need to do this?Samw 02:40, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Heh. That took a steady eye, but I think it's fixed now.  :) - Hephaestos 02:48, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I won't try this again!  :-) Samw 02:51, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Hey I wouldn't sweat it. If it would help to have the ability to delete redirect pages, you might cinsider asking for admin status.  I'd support it, I've seen you do good work here. - Hephaestos 02:53, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)

By the way, not sure what happened here, but this should almost certainly be "Matza" or "Matzah", because that is the neutral Hebrew term -- "Matzoh" reflects an Ashkenazi dialect which is not neutral. Sort of like a POV article name -- what must be done to get it changed? I don't know how to do this. 132.216.227.226 01:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, Matza(h) would definitely be the appropriate form, as this corresponds to Israeli Hebrew, Sephardi Hebrew and even American pronunciation of Yiddish matse. The form Matzo(h), albeit used by some major US corporations, is an exclusively Ashkenazi form. -- Olve 17:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Why is the Ashkenazi pronunciation "not neutral", but a Sephardi or Israeli one "neutral"? The vast majority of native English Jewish speakers, are, in fact, Ashkenazi.  I note as well that the Britannica article is at "Matzo", as is that of the "The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition.  2000" and "The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition.  2002" (Encarta calls it "Matzoh"). Anyway, "Matzo" gets 808,000 Google hits, versus 711,000 for "Matzah", 420,000 for "Matza" and 376,000 for "Matzoh".  "Matzo" does seem to be the single most commonly used English spelling, and naming this article would comply with the WP:NAME policy. Jayjg (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * And how many Ashkenazim say Matzoh? Most Ashkenazim I know in the US say Matzah (with the main stress on the first syllable), and this form is the one they have from the spoken Yiddish of recent generations. Thus, the form Matzah is absolutely defensible from an Ashkenazi perspective. Let me be a bit clearer:
 * Matzah is, in its various pronunciations, Ashkenazi (Yiddish), Sephardi (Sephardi Hebrew) and Israeli.
 * Matzoh is only Ashkenazi Hebrew, and is pronounced with an -o/-aw sound only by VERY few.
 * Thus, the form Matzah is perfectly Ashkenazi as well as Sephardi and Israeli. Both Matza(h) and Matzo(h) are clearly used in English. The form Matzah would be a reasonable compromise representing both the Ashkenazi MATza, the Sephardi Ma(t(sSA and the Israeli Hebrew MaTZA. -- Olve 21:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW: I noted that you (JayJG) threw the numbers at me as "proof" for the Ashkenaziss form being the most appropriate. Let us look a bit closer at the numbers. Adding up the Google hits on Matza(h), we get a total of 1,131,000 hits for Matza(h) and 1,184,000 hits for Matzo(h) &mdash; a pretty minor difference (1.047/1.000 in "favour" of Matzo(h)) which suggests that these forms are numerically similar and that other factors, such as finding the culturally most inclusive form, are more relevant. Note that in a case like kosher vs. kasher, the Ashkenazi/Yiddish form kosher is clearly the established form. I am not asking for any sort of Sephardi hegemony here &mdash; just for a little bit of Ashkenazi sensitivity. -- Olve 22:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I didn't mean to get into a tussle here. I was just pointing out that "Matzo" is the most popular English spelling (regardless of how Israelis pronounce it in Hebrew, or even how Ashkenazis pronounce it in English), and that spelling is used by a number of encyclopedias/dictionaries.  I have personally heard many Ashkenazim saying "matzoh", but I haven't done any formal surveys.  Regarding "hegemonies", I note that almost all articles on Jewish topics use the modern Israeli/"sorta Sephardi" pronunciation.  Whether it's Shabbat (not Shabbos or Shabbes), or Sukkot (not Sukkos or Sikkes), or Simchat Torah (not Simches Toireh) or Brit Milah (not Bris Milah), or Tzeniut (not Tznius), or Daf Yomi (not Daf Yoimi), or Tallit (not Tallis) or Tzitzit (not Tzitzis) or Kippah (not Yarmulke) etc.  In fact, this is one of the few, if not the only, article which follows an Ashkenazi pronunciation.  Given that it also conforms to the naming policy, I don't see the harm in leaving it here. Jayjg (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, tallit is neither Ashkenazi (talles, tallis) nor Sephardi (tallét, taléd, taléth); brit milah is neither Ashkenazi (bris mile / bris miloh / briss) nor Sephardi (berit milá / berith milá). These forms are exellent examples of modern, widespread "compromise" forms established by modern, mainly Ashkenazi Jews. I am not suggesting that we should make sectarian Sephardi forms be the norm, just like I would prefer that we also avoid sectarian Ashkenazi forms like the one in question. Therefore, we should select the compromise forms: tallit (not tallis or tallét), brit milah (not Sephardi "berit milá" or Ashkenazi "bris(-miloh)"), tzedakah (not Ashkenazi "tzdokoh" or Sephardi "sedacá") and matzah (not Sephardi "massá" or or Ashkenazi "matzoh"). Concerning WP:NAME, it is not quite as usable as an argument for the "matzoh" form as you try to make it &mdash; as this policy page could just as easily be used to defend the other forms in question. -- Olve 20:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * All the spellings are essentially "Israeli"; I assert that fewer Sephardim use the traditional Sephardi pronunciations than Ashkenazim who use the traditional Ashkenazi pronunciations. Other than that, I don't particularly agree with changing the name, for the reasons listed, but don't feel overwhelmingly strongly about it either. Jayjg (talk) 17:46, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, I just moved Chometz to Chametz. ;-) Jayjg (talk) 21:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * i think that dictionaries still dont have one standard, with a majority probably writing Matsa or Matza, reflected the near-universal pronunciation. only religious ashkenazi yiddish-speaking jews say 'matso', and it doesnt make sense to have a fringe pronunciation. i would never have thought to type 'matso' to find this article and it is highly misleading for someone unfamiliar, since they will think to pronounce it as it looks. i suggest changing it to Matsa. dgl 02:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * My feeling: Who cares about dictionaries? The important thing, as dgl wrote, is which spelling people will tend to think of. For that, either do a survey of how it is spelled on the boxes, or just Google it. But even that isn't so important, if we would just add some redirect pages. So, just to keep dgl happy, I will now add one for matsa, and everyone else can add whatever they like too. --Keeves 11:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * This page should be moved to matzah for the reasons stated above. Epson291 21:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

In Hebrew, which is the original source for this word, many matzha are "Matzoth"(מצות) and not "Matzo"(מצו)there is no such a word as מצו in Hebrew-and that's should be the rule, its not matter how people in the diaspora use to prenounce it, as the matzoth are a customary food for the entire Jewish people, and as the word didn't came from Yiddish.--Gilisa 07:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Another vote for MATZAH (or MATZA)!! Where the "o" comes from is beyond my comprehension.--Gilabrand 18:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Matzah is used by Artscroll. Matzo is an Americanised way of spelling. I will proceed to change? Chesdovi (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC) Matzah is used by Artscroll. Matzo is an Americanised way of spelling. I will proceed to change? Chesdovi (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC) I agree that Matzah is the right way to spell it. I don't know where the heck people got the idea of spelling it "Matzo," but it's wrong. Wrong. DanHakimi (talk) 23:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't seen this discussion when I did it, but I have radically changed the article in this respect. There are 3 basic pronunciations, Israeli/Sefaradi matza, Ashkenazi matzo, and Yiddish matze. As the first two are Hebrew words there are variant English transliterations (spellings); no less than 12 are given by OED2. So I have trimmed the first sentence and added a longish section on spelling, pronunciation, and usage. I'm sure this is the subject of many strongly-held opinions, and hope that I've been even-handed enough. I hope this doesn't meet with too much disapproval. Within the article all variants seem to be used, which is fine by me, I don't see any major reason to make it consistent. Pol098 (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Really, I want to know your source. I'm President of RPI-Sage Hillel. I've known Jews from all over this country, and from a few others (Israel, Venezuela, Argentina). I've known every manner of Jew there is. I have never once heard anybody pronounce it as anything but "matzah," except maybe once or twice when referring to the soup. Seriously, guys, why is this travesty continuing? DanHakimi (talk) 03:43, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, DanHakimi, using strong words will not get you far in the way of argument. Anyway, I have lived in many countries, and have contact with Jews from many various backgrounds as well, and I have heard "matzeh" and "matzoh" frequently as well. Debresser (talk) 10:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

i hate it that it's misspelled. it's, 'matzoth!' you need to put all the various spellings IN the article. not everyone likes misspelled words when they do searches. ~ ^..^~ catlady87

Quartanzans?
I thought somebody here might know: An article on quartanzans was just created. Apparently, it's a cracker-like bread similar to matza, which is also eaten on Jewish holidays. But the term gets 0 Google hits, so I'm wondering if it's real, or a joke? Thanks. 68.81.231.127 10:35, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy deleted as blatant nonsense. Amongst many things, Yom Kippur is a fast day, so there really can't be a special cracker eaten on that day. Jayjg (talk) 15:39, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the double check. I sometimes wonder how much stealth vandalism we miss. 68.81.231.127 22:55, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

matzo meal
Can anyone tell me what matzo meal is made from? Thanks.

Matzo meal is simply matzo that has been ground up into crumbs. It is often used as a replacement for bread crumbs, such as when breading a cutlet. It can also be used for making a batter for frying pancakes and other foods. If the matzo is ground even further, to flour-like fineness, it is called "matzo cake meal" or just "cake meal", and can be used in making cakes. Because it has already been wet and baked, it no longer has many of the chemical proprties of regular flour. This is why it can be used on Passover, and for the same reason it cannot replace flour in recipes without some adjustment to the recipe; for example, cakes would have more egg to help it fluff better, but breads usually don't come out good at all. --Keeves 3 July 2005 03:13 (UTC)

Christian Child
Excuse me? Blood of a Christian child? I thought that myth was over with since the beginning of the 20th century! It should be removed! (unsigned)

No Myth F-tard!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/08/wjews08.xml (unsigned)

There are processes in Wikipedia to deal with repeated vandalism. I strongly suggest you work this out in therapy, rather than making a fool of yourself in public. FiveRings 15:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure who posted the Telegraph article, but they should know that it's complete and utter nonsense. Amongst other glaring factual inaccuracies, the claim that Pesach is the Jewish Easter is idiotic. Since Easter commemorates Jesus's resurrection and Pesach commemorates the Israelites' escape from Egypt, this akin to calling Chanukah the Jewish Christmas, since they both concern events that happened in the same month. The fact that thousands of years (in the first case) or hundreds (in the second) is obviously a minor concern.--Elmorell 14:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

There have been rumors, investigation, and intrigue into this matter for near a thousand years. Although I have seen no evidence that has refuted the blood case, which is very strange and unique. I think that it should be added in this article, perhaps as a side-note in the ingredients, that such claims were made.

206.172.193.136 02:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There's no reason to mention it in the article, since it is nothing but nonsense. All of the so-called "evidence" is based on confessions under the most extreme forms of torture. They would have confessed to being a baked potato had the inquisitors wanted them to. And considering that consuming any blood, let alone consuming human blood, is against Jewish dietary laws, there is just no reason to even give this the slightest credibility. You can't prove that I didn't go to Mars, are you going to give that serious credibility. It's amazing to think that people are so ignorant and/or vile to keep trying to push this garbage.--RLent (talk) 19:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Having no evidence by the claimants is not an argument against notability of the claim. To the contrary, around here (Poland), blood libel is nearly synonymous with using the blood of christian babies as an ingredient of matzot. While no one sane would agree with the claim, it nevertheless caused lots of prosecution and murders over the thousand years. KiloByte (talk) 21:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)


 * And this brings up an interesting point - the users of Wikipedia have changed, as the users of the Internet have changed. While documenting this as nonsense would have been a waste of time five years ago, now it may actually have value. (ensuing flame war notwithstanding). FiveRings (talk) 18:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

You don't mention adding christian baby blood myth? A pity. 78.88.117.116 (talk) 11:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Oy, that would've been kind of hard to come by in the earlier years wouldn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.149.81 (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2007

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Matzo → Matzah — Move per WP:COMMONNAME. It was controversial a few years ago to make this move, but the near-ubiquity of the spelling "Matzah" among both Jews and non-Jews preempts the traditional Ashkenazi pronunciation. Kari Hazzard ( T  |  C ) 21:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey 2007

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.

Support 2007

 * 1) Support - thanks for putting this up for discussion and formalization. I agree matzah is the more neutral spelling/prounciation and should be the one used. It is both common pronunciation, by both Jews and non-Jews. It makes up the standard Israeli and Sephardi pronunciation, some Ashkenazi pronunciation, and the pronunciation (in my experience) used by most Ashkenazim in the USA, regardless how it is spelled by some Matzah makers (and at the store a few weeks ago I saw at least 5 different spellings of it).  The spelling Matzah (with or without the h) is certainly just as common and again, neutral, I don't see why to keep the spelling this with exlusively Ashkenazi (by some dilects) spelling. Epson291 21:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support matzah is the more common spelling. --Shuki 20:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) STRONG SUPPORT. This spelling is a more generalised one rather than the spelling of one ethnic subset only. -- Olve 13:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose 2007

 * 1) Oppose Matzah may be a more accurate transliteration, but matzoh is the more common and intelligible form in English; can we compromise there? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Contrary to the incorrect claim (above) of a "near-ubiquity of the spelling "Matzah" among both Jews and non-Jews", dictionaries such as Random House and American Heritage give "Matzo" as the primary spelling, and "Matzo" gets 960,000 Google hits, by far the most for any single spelling; the next highest, "Matzah", gets only 660,000 Google hits. All the major Matzo manufacturers spell it "Matzo". Manischewitz spells it "Matzo". Streit's spells it "Matzo". Even the Israeli company Yehuda's spells it "Matzo". "Matzo" is clearly the most common form in English. Jayjg (talk) 05:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but regardless matzah is still very common spelling. I got 1,131,000 versus 1,327,000 for matzah (including h or no h), that is pretty close. The ditionaries you posted site Yiddish at the etamology, coming from the Hebrew matzAh.  Why is brit milah used, the Yiddish bris is far more common in the U.S.  And don't Striets, and Manishevitz sell mostly Ashkenazi food, so they're using the Yiddish form.  It's better to use the more neutral form, except for something with near unbiquity like kosher.  (Never mind, I checked it goes to kashrut).  But really, I don't think the Yiddish form shouldn't be used unless it's a landslide of difference. (Though Jayjg, if you know, I would like a explanation of why Bris isn't used then, if you know, since it's the much more popular version, espeically in the USA, I don't even think it compares to the differences between matzoh and matzah) Epson291 06:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you're talking about. "Matzah" gets 660,000 hits; "Matzo" gets 960,000, 50% more hits than "Matzah". These are hits on the English form of the word not Yiddish; as the dictionary makes clear, the Yiddish word is matse. I have no idea what your other arguments mean either. This was supposed to be a discussion about what the common English term is, now you're talking about what a "neutral" term is instead. Well, the common, neutral, English form is "Matzo", which is not the Yiddish term Matse. Jayjg (talk) 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Jayjg, I know but if you look here , they show its etymology as "Yiddish matse, from Hebrew massah." This is what I brought up. My numbers included with and without the h, which I mentioned. Epson291 08:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry if my point wasn't clear, but the point I was trying to make was that they are both fairly popular spellings and the one that is the Israeli spelling should be used. (But I might be a bit biased as that's what I speak). Cheers Epson291 12:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying, but it's still incorrect. Words in English have all sorts of different etymologies, but they're not relevant; what matters is that by far the single most common English spelling is "Matzo". As for "Israeli spelling", Israelis write in Hebrew; English spelling is what matters here. And finally, as I've already pointed out, even Israeli Matzo companies spell it "Matzo". Jayjg (talk) 20:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Jayjg you are not correct. The matzah I bought for pesach, was from אסם‎ (Osem), a large Israeli matzah company and it was spelt "OSEM ISRAELI MATZAH" on the box, and at the store in Toronto, Canada where I am living right now, מצה was spelled in English in all the different ways by the matzah making companies. You're generalizing.  Epson291 07:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Osem may spell it "Matzah", but as I pointed out Yehuda spells it "Matzo". Yehuda is an Israeli company. Aviv also spells it Matzo. It was you who generalized, claiming the "Israeli" way is "Matzah". Clearly some Israeli companies spell it "Matzo". Jayjg (talk) 21:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, now you've changed it to "some", from "all". That is the generalization I called you on. Clearly, matzah is a spelling that is used often, and the neutral one that is not to one specific sub ethnic group. And clearly matzah is the israeli spelling as it is not pronouced matzo in Modern Hebrew Epson291 00:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose As a ba'al kriyah and amateur devotee of the dikduk of lashon kodesh, I personally would prefer "Matzoh" due to the hey at the end of the word; however, I think that Jayjg has it correct in that the common spelling in English is now "Matzo" and not "Matzah". -- Avi 05:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose In the Hebrew wikipedia it should obviously be the Sephardic spelling. In the English Wikipedia the spelling should track common English usage. Google reports 939,000 hits for Matzo - vastly more than for any other spelling. Websters lists Matzo, with Matzoh as an alternate spelling. Wikipedia is for reflection of reality, not for new research, remember? FiveRings 18:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It might be worth noting that a lot of of the Google hits for "matzo" aren't in English and that consensus has followed using Israeli term/spelling in Brit milah, Tallit, Kippah, Shabbat, Shavuot, Sukkot, Simchat Torah, Hamantash, Charoset and numerous others. Is there a valid WP:IAR claim for this particular article? Kari Hazzard  ( T  |  C ) 17:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What makes those the "Israeli" spelling, and what makes you think there's a "consensus"? As far as I can tell those articles are at the most common English spelling, as is this one. Jayjg (talk) 21:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It might be more worthwhile to note that in the Hebrew wikipedia it should be spelled in Hebrew... For the record, "Unleavened bread" is probably more common in English than either "matzah" or "matzo"...if, for no other reason, than that that's how it's translated into English in, I believe, every non-Jewish English-language bible translation... Tom e rtalk  08:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * yes, in Hebrew it will be מצה no matter whether you're spelling it Sephardi or Ashkenazi or anything else. As for English, for some reason the proper spellings are Yemenite. Beth, S(h)abbath, Mitzvoth; these are all the formal English rendering of words most Jews do not pronounce that way. The plural for Matzah/Matzo will probably be Matzoth (in fact, Firefox didn't put the spelling-error redline under matzoth, nor matzot nor matzo. It did however declare matzah to be a misspelling...) --  Valley   2   city   ₪‽ 19:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't wanna go too far off subject here...first and foremost tho, Firefox obviously isn't the arbiter of proper transliterations. :-p  The "English" isn't actually Yemenite, it's Greek, which has no "sh", but does have a "th".  Mitzvoth is neither Greek, nor is it Yemenite&mdash;it's a minority Sefardic (and a few types of Mizrachi) pronunciation.  (Teimani uses "miṣwoth", Greek, if anything, would use either "misoth" or "misvoth".  English doesn't have a word for this tho, because in English it's always translated as "commandment".)  It could be worse...as odd as Ashkenazi sounds to me (mostly because of a horrid reduction of consonants and, among English speakers, replacement of // or // with // or the less alien sounding (found especially among those close to the "old country") // or // (although this sometimes confuses me, since I confuse it with ג)...and because of its many dialectal permutations of vowel sounds), there are some pronunciations of Hebrew, historically mainly, that were far more incomprehensible...the Hebrew of (especially pre-Haskala) southern France comes to mind, for example...  Anyhoo, enough ramblage from me, methinks.  Shabath shalom, Tom e r<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk  22:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Personally, I find Ashkenazi Hebrew to sound incredibly harsh, and, especially in its various American incarnations, completely incomprehensible...but to avoid wars between who spells what which way, and whom Wikipedia should pay attention to, I say leave it alone.  I wish the same respect had prevailed with poseq, but I'm not vindictive, so I can't vote "support" just to get rid of Ashkenazi misspellings and mispronunciations...  Tom e r<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk  08:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. as per what I said a few lines up (my signature is easily locatable). You're never going to make everyone happy with transliterated spellings, but Matzo wins the google-test so I think it should retain the article name with "alternatively: Matzah" in the first line of the article. --  Valley   2   city   ₪‽ 19:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Egg matzah
Since it was written as if all Ashk. don't eat egg matzah, I gathered aditional sources. Someone with some knoledge of the subject, please look at my edits. I cited Chabad. Anyways, I tried to provide some more background and reasoning into the subject. Epson291 02:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You should cite the side of the Manischewitz box... That would be an interesting halachic citation. I am actually serious about this as the company is quite reputable for their matzah-making. --  Valley   2   city   ₪‽ 19:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, if it says anything the streits does, I believe it cites because of shulchan aruch. Epson291 21:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Ashkenazim allow egg mazza (on Passover) only for the elderly or infirm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk) 21:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Should me mentioned that soft mazza includes oil in the recipe. Laws relevant to the oil used for mazza are included in the beginning of the Me'am L'ez Hagaddah. for example.

Name, revisited
I've been thinking about it, and after a professor who said that anything that ends in a "hey" (ה) should be transliterated ending with an "h", I think this page should be moved to Matzah. And if you're trying the google test, note that most of the results for Matza are people's names or the name of a place in the Star Wars Expanded Universe, so that's not very reliable at all. <b style="background:blue; color:white; font-family:Comic Sans MS;">Valley</b>2 city ‽ 15:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

advertising
hallo, isn't the main picture in the article just a bit to much free advertising for the matze-company in question? --Ajnem (talk) 11:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move II
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved &mdash;innotata 16:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Matzo → Matzah — Although many brands use matzo, I feel Matzah is the proper and more common English spelling. Chesdovi (talk) 15:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


 * Comment: Matzah is used by Artscroll ("Matzah") and by Shimon Eider z"l in his Halachos of Pesach (note that both use matzos for the plural form.) Chesdovi (talk) 15:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Support

 * Support - Ashkenazi spellings and pronunciations are deprecated to Sephardic spellings and pronunciations according to Israel. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support -- The current English spelling and pronunciation seems to be strongly moving to Matzah. (Israeli official spellings is not really relevant to Wikipedia). US Ashkenazis would probably say "matzaw" and spell it "matzo". This confusion does nobody any good to perpetuate (though it should be mentioned) Mjchonoles (talk) 01:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I would point out that ArtScroll Ashkenazic translations use matzah. Chesdovi (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Oppose What is this? Double Jeopardy?  (The legal term, not the game..) Is the previous discussion/decision not enough?  The fact that there are redirects?  The fact that alternative spellings are listed and included in the article?  What you 'feel' is irrelevant, and this 'poll' pointless. 1) Most of the major manufacturers still use Matzo.  2) Google hits still rank matzo 600,000+, matzah 400,000+ 3) Do I really need to reiterate all the points previously made? Centerone (talk) 06:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Bearing in mind the last Requested move was 3 years ago, the policy at GNUM would indicate that the google test you and others relied upon in the last Requested move is flawed as many pages are no doubt duplicates of this Wikipedia page, and, as Valley2city noted earlier, “the results for Matza are people's names or the name of a place in the Star Wars Expanded Universe”. If we used a more reliable google search at google books we come up with the following results, (I included the word “Passover” to refine search results:
 * Matzo = 1,316
 * Matzoh = 1,145
 * Total for "o/oh": 2,461
 * Matza = 1,262
 * Matzah = 1,212
 * Total for "a/ah": 2,474


 * Also note that it would seem that the majority of results for "Matzo" are for cookbooks, while "Matzah" is used more widely in more academic genres. Other editors also previously noted that it would be more grammatically correct to have the word ending with an “h”. Chesdovi (talk) 09:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Except that this is flawed logic. First, your reasoning was that matzah is a more common spelling; if this was the case, then one should be able to prove it in sources which point this out.  Your own books.google search shows Matzo as the most popular form.  You simply cannot logically combine forms and conclude that use of the a in one form is the same as use of the ah in another; as has previously been pointed out, some people sometimes use one form for singular, and another for plural sometimes with different vowels, not to mention there are a whole host of other reasons that dictates this is a logically fallacy.  In addition, your requesting a move to matzah NOT matza. Also, the idea that the google search is inaccurate due to 'many pages are duplicates of wikipedia' then that also means that many pages replicate the numerous uses of alternative spellings in the page.  I could understand this logic if Matzo was the only spelling on the page, with only one sentence of alternative spellings, however, different spellings are used throughout the article many times and so, would also be equally reflected in search results.  As far as why you would include passover to refine the search, I would disagree with the logic, but I do see that in some cases it is necessary to partially or fully remove uses where the word is a name.  Matzo is not just used for passover; Matzo is matzo. For my google.books.com search: matzo - 1499, matzah - 1104  For a scholar.google.com search it is necessary to use passover to remove a lot of names which come up first (matzo by itself produces 6060 results, the first of which are names -- if you search matzo passover however you still get 3590.  A scholar.google search for matzah produces only 1680 results.. the strange thing is, a search for matzah passover increases hits to 3240.  A search for matzos passover reveals that this increase may be due to the artificial inclusion of alternative spellings, because this search clearly includes matzah spellings in a similar result.  BTW, shouldn't we move your response and my response to your response to under discussion?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Centerone (talk • contribs) 11:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * We should sideline google in this case, not only due to the considerations you raised, but also because, although being spelt "Matzah", its plural form is spelt "Matzos" even by those who employ the singular "Matzah". (I would add that the reason manufacturers may use "Matzo" in the singular form, rather than "Matzah", may be for consumer considerations, so as not to be over confusing.) מצה is not spelt with a "וֹ" but a "ה" which would be represented by a "h", see IPA for Hebrew. Chesdovi (talk) 12:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose; per Jayjg in the previous move discussion and my own experience, matzo is far more commonly used in English and should be used per WP:AT. Knepflerle (talk) 19:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Matzo is far more common; and whether matzah is "more correct" depends on whether one views the word as Hebrew or Yiddish, and - more importantly - how one spells Yiddish in the Roman alphabet, something on which there is no consistency at all. (I repeat my proposal of matzoh, above.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

Changeing the name of the article
It's called Matza in hebrew, not Matzo wich is in the ashkenazic dialects.

the israelites also called it "Matza" - flat, unleavend whole-grain bread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.181.173 (talk) 02:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Definition
I notice that the word is spelled מַצָּה. In my Hebrew book it says that the word מָצָה means "he/it found (out), reached, obtained", in the Qal form, and in the Niphal, "he/it was found sufficient". I note that the first vowel is different. Can anyone comment about whether the two words are forms of the same thing, and if so, whether some relevant information should go into the article? Thanks,

-- TimNelson (talk) 08:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No connection. The third letter of the food is a heh (similar to H) and the third letter of "found" is an alef (silent a/e/i/o/u). Different root. The plural of matza with an alef would be matza'im (m) or matza'ot (f), not matzot. However, there is no such word. [There is another word, matz'a with an 'ayin, meaning bedding, used mainly in horticulture and construction, and its plural is matza'im where the i is a theoretically-guttural 'ayin, though rarely pronounced that way in modern Hebrew). Sorry that you received this reply after 7.5 years! Monosig (talk) 16:06, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Blood Libels
Blood libels, although false in premise, were a significant part of the persecution of the Jews in many countries, rooted in a Christain myth about Matzah. Due to its significance within the scope of Matzah, there should be at least some mention of Blood libels rather than no mention at all. Colt .55 (talk) 21:50, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move III
As there seems to be such debate about the name of the article, maybe the title should reflect the two main pronunciations (pronunciation is, I think, more of an issue than spelling). So maybe the article should be called something like "Matzah/matzo" (matzah first purely alphabetically, or "matzo/matzah", or any other desired spellings). Or maybe "mozza", one of the OED spellings, which goes well with "pizza"... Pol098 (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

"Mazza" is the spelling on some of the boxes of machine mazza. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.208.244 (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * "mozza" is a joke, of course. Titles on Wikipedia are singular, that is, follow only one spelling (the one preferred by the Wikipedia naming conventions). That said and done, I'd prefer "matzA" (with or without the "h"). Debresser (talk) 18:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * BTW, perhaps we'd use one consistent spelling in the article? Debresser (talk) 18:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * consistent spelling ... which would have to be matzo, the article title. I don't have any strong opinion which to use. Inconsistent spelling emphasises that there's disagreement, which is true and relevant, more so perhaps than enforced conformity. Pol098 (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * All this discussion assumes that we're speaking of a spelling; I think people are far more concerned about pronunciation. E.g., I think somebody who prefers matzah would be more comfortable with matza than matzo. Pol098 (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Still 2 separate entries that need to be combined --matzo should be subsumed into Matza  because most Hebrew speakers in the world use that modern Israeli (so called Sephardic, but simply Israeli fusion) pronunciation. With note and disambiguation that matzo is Ashkenazic pronunciation. no such problem in https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%94 Yohananw (talk) 11:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please move to matza. It is a Hebrew word and that is how it is pronounced.--Geewhiz (talk) 11:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

"matzo" is also correct as transliteration of spoken Ashkenazi Hebrew (which dialect was the in majority before the Holocaust. Same as in Yiddish). As there are many duplicate matza/matzo recipes like matza ball / matzo ball... best to start with a disambiguation before move to under matza. I'll look up wiki help Yohananw (talk) 11:50, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Position of "Forms of the word" section
I would suggest that the"Forms of the word" section is best placed at the beginning of the article; most articles with an "etymology" or similar section do this. It is particularly important for this article as the use of different pronunciations by different groups of people (and throughout he article) is otherwise puzzling (the article should make sense to someone who knows nothing about the subject). I had originally placed it at the beginning, but it has been moved near the bottom. I don't think I should make this change; if there is consensus that it should be near the beginning I suggest that it be moved there. Pol098 (talk) 23:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ingredients § — "Biblically" and Five Species
In the Ingredients section, the third paragraph begins with "Biblically, five specific species of grain become chametz after wetting." Instead of "Biblically" would not "Halakhally" be more accurate as this assertion is based mostly on halakha, not directly from the biblical text? — al-Shimoni  (talk) 01:53, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree. What is meant is that according to halakha this is de'oraita not miderabanan. 07:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)Debresser (talk)

Five grains and genus idenfitication
The section on the five grains that can become chametz includes the claim that all Triticum grains are forbidden, but three of the five listed (einkorn, emmer, and durum) are Triticum species. Can someone resolve this discrepancy? chrylis (talk) 10:34, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

All of those grains will be forbidden UNLESS they are baked into mazza. Mazza may be made only from these grains. Only these grains can become true chometz. Once they are baked into mazza, they can no longer become chometz.

Consistency of spelling
I don't care what the spelling is, and certainly don't care to get into that battle with anyone1 (which is why I'm not inclined to make the necessary changes myself), but it would be really nice if consistent spelling could be used throughout the article. As it stands right now, the title is "Matzo", the introductory paragraph lists "matza" as the primary spelling and "matzah" as the secondary, and throughout the article, "matza" and "matzah" are in free variation, ignoring "matzo" despite it being the title of the article. Also, though "matzot" is (correctly) listed as the plural, within that same paragraph, "matzos" (I'm not sure whether that's English plural -s or the Ashkenazi t > s sound change) is used as the plural. Meanwhile, the article on balls made of it is titled "Matzah balls", so even the titles aren't consistent with each other, making finding related articles confusing.

1 Though if anyone cares: I'm an Ashkenazi/Sephardi Jew and native speaker of American English with a bit of Yiddish; I usually spell it but occasionally fall back on (how I spelled it when I was little); and pronounce it [ˈmɑ.ʦə]. I have never seen it spelled without a final <-h> by anyone I know (which includes Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Mizrahim, and Goyim), only on packaging or the internet; and have only heard it pronounced [ˈmɑ.ʦə] or [ˈmɑ.ʦi], the latter only by Lubavitchers. -- AudiblySilenced (talk) 05:15, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Etymology
Matza. This website has the possible etymology of matzoh. Komitsuki (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ingredients: Spelt vs. Emmer
Through a roundabout way, I read the article on spelt, then followed it here. The spelt article mentions that the usage of spelt in Ezekiel 4:9 is presumably a mistranslation, and should actually be emmer, as spelt wasn't grown in the area. For that matter, after reading the article on Chametz, rye and oats aren't native to Israel either.

I see nothing about this in this article, and I think there should be mention of the disagreement or uncertainty over the five grains.68.12.195.143 (talk) 16:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matzo. 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:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20070811083827/http://www.ajhs.org/hai/entry.cfm?id=27 to http://www.ajhs.org/hai/entry.cfm?id=27

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

"Matzo Ball" links in "Cooking with matzo" section incorrect
Hi -- the "matzo ball" links in the "Cooking with matzo" section don't link to the food article but instead link to the page "Matzo Ball" which is a Christmas Eve social event. I am new and don't make wikipedia edits; could someone with more experience correct these? This occurs both in the body of the section and in the image caption. I believe it is due to the spelling of "matzo" vs "matzah" that the links go to the incorrect page. 98.172.28.240 (talk) 16:51, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out. I've changed the redirection on "Matzo ball" (with a lowercase "b") to "Matzah ball", which does seem like the more likely target. Nitpicking polish (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 12 June 2022
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * 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: Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc . talk  08:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Matzo → Matzah – This was last discussed 12 years ago, when "Matzo" was apparently the most common name. Google search now turns up more results for "Matzah", and Ngram shows a significant gap. The "Matzah" spelling is also closer to prevailing English models for Hebrew transliteration, including WP:HE. GordonGlottal (talk) 04:03, 12 June 2022 (UTC) <div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support. Ngrams shows that the "matzah" spelling is almost 40% more common than "matzo", suggesting that it's the definite WP:COMMONNAME. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:49, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Transliteration
@Pookerella: it would seem that the issue is deeper than simply an "incorrect" spelling of "matzah", wouldn't you think? Elizium23 (talk) 21:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I refer editors to the immediately preceding section. It's a little soon for another move request, though unfortunately there weren't many editors involved. Arguments should be based on WP:TITLE guidelines. GordonGlottal (talk) 00:31, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The article can have only one title, but the topic can be spelled in myriad ways throughout the article, with varying justifications. There is no justification for Pookerella to excise "matzah" from it. Elizium23 (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Soft matzah
Soft matzah is produced commercially, and is sold frozen because of the short shelf life. 2A06:C701:440B:6B00:ECCC:749D:5A5:D5AF (talk) 07:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

"See also: Blood libel" absolutely belongs here
hi.

I can see absolutely no reason for you removing "See also: Blood libel, antisemitic claim that matzah is baked with Christian children's blood".

The topic is directly connected.

Having an item with a horribly negative connotation, but directly related to the topic at hand, linked to it in an encyclopedia, does in no way "defile" the topic. It is very basic encyclopedic work. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello. Can you point to another similar page that has a similar "see also"? It still seems so out of place. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * hi again. Have your pick. Any page that rationally connects to a related one, whatever the connotation. This is a topic completely connected to matzah, what do you see as "out of place"? The Stadtkirche Wittenberg is a beatiful church where Luther has preached. Dachau is a lovely little town. Kfar Aza an idyllic village. Yet the first one has a famous Judensau statue, the second sports a death camp, and the third was the site of a massacre. The wonderful Charles Bridge in my favourite city, Prague, has a statue with an antisemitic Hebrew inscription on it. If you're waiting specifically for another major Judaism-related example with a link to a horrible antisemitic distortion: well, sorry, but THIS HERE IS THE TOP EXAMPLE, nothing compares. The poisoning of wells, usury, world domination - none of the other fix ideas of the "rumour about Jews" believers are Judaism-connected (not for a sane mind, that is). The blood libel isn't sane either, but it's closely focused on matzah. Why? I have no idea. Maybe a sick connection to "this is my body"? I don't know, kiddush wine would have served the purpose better ("this is my blood"). I probably wouldn't make a good conspiracy theorist. But these are the facts: the blood libel goes after matzah-eaters. And on Wiki we're cataloguing, explaining, - and indicating connections between facts.
 * PS: I see the wine issue did cross people's minds, be it rather late, see here. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Matzo: own DAB page, not redirect to here
The edit by our colleague (w/o summary), who has removed the tag at the top of the page sending users looking for the actress called Emma Matzo at birth to her own page, has driven my attention to the illogical redirect from "matzo" to "matzah". Illogical because there are 3 items called matzo or Matzo: the actress, the Matzo Ball and Matzo lasagna, plus 3 items starting with matzo-. I have therefore started a DAB page with these items, with matzah linked in the lead, the 3 exact matches listed underneath the lead, and a "See also" with the matzo- items. The invisible technical details will have to be added, if thought necessary, by those who know how.

My only issue is: the resulting talk page is still connecting to this one. Who can please fix that? Thanks, Arminden (talk) 23:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Get the advertisement out of here
What is the Manischewitz company homepage doing at External links?! Arminden (talk) 08:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Origin
As far as I can tell, unleavened bread is the oldest type ever to be baked, the oldest sample was found at a Natufian site in Jordan's Black Desert and is 14,500 year old. But it could have been anywhere in the region, I guess, as that culture and previous ones spread across the Southern Levant and possibly a wider area of the Fertile Crescent. So the fellow editor who replaced Egypt with Canaan, but w/o a source, was onto something geographically speaking, but the term suggests a later civilization than the Epipalaeolithic (see Natufian), so not that accurate either. I've removed Ancient Egypt as place of origin, because that's unsupported in every way you look at it - both archaeologically (possible theoretically, but Jordan ain't Egypt not) and biblically (leavened bread was typically and symbolically the Egyptian "thing" to be left behind). Arminden (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * See History of bread and History of bread. Arminden (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

What is "Matzah meal"?
Hi David, this might be something for you. It doesn't seem to be related to the English word 'meal'. Is it maybe Yiddish? In German, Mehl means 'flour', so maybe that's what it's derived from. If so, it shouldn't be used here w/o being introduced, as it's not English and the word meal already exists and has another meaning. That both words have to do with eating only makes it more, not less confusing.

Use Italics? A suggestion. Or at least single or full quotation marks. Arminden (talk) 12:42, 31 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, I see you know your way around the topic. Maybe you can explain? Arminden (talk) 16:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, the use of the word "meal" in "matzah meal" is not directly related to the common English meaning of a meal as an eating occasion. In this context, "meal" is likely referring to the finely ground, flour-like substance produced by grinding up matzah. As a culturally-specific Jewish cooking term, I think it would be better to set it apart using italics, single quotes, or some other stylistic cue.TheRabbi613 (talk) 19:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I went ahead, looked it up and it was as I thought: it's Yidd. mel, related to Ger. Mehl, but Eng. has meal also for more coarsely ground flour. Linked, done. Arminden (talk) 19:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not derived from Yiddish. The usage of the word meal as a finely ground food like flour likely goes to before Yiddish even existed. You can also note that these uses were in earlier languages such as old english and German.. and Yiddish is derived from German. So the origin is older. According to dictionary dot com, "Origin of meal (definition 2) First recorded before 900; Middle English mele, Old English melu;  cognate with German Mehl, Dutch meel, Old Norse mjǫl, Gothic malan;  akin to Latin molere  “to grind” (see mill1)"  clear examples of similar uses in language are things like "corn meal". Centerone (talk) 05:46, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , hi. Thanks, but I believe you misunderstood the very etymology you're quoting: it's an old Germanic word for flour, which made it through Mittelhochdeutsch (Middle High German) into Yiddish. The word for meal as an "eating session" has a different etymology, but homophones often have the habit to be conflated with each other, to "borrow meanings" one from the other. Unless you can prove with sources that that wasn't the case here, I don't see your point. Arminden (talk) 05:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Please check out the etymology at this entry (if you find a more authoritative one, I'd be very happy to read it), and compare with the one for Matzah brei. Yiddish isn't just derived from German, it is to a large degree Middle High German. Arminden (talk) 06:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Meal, second definition. Meal, second etymology for that second meaning. Definition: meal 2[ meel ] noun  a coarse, unsifted powder ground from the edible seeds of any grain: wheat meal;cornmeal.  any ground or powdery substance, as of nuts or seeds, resembling this.  That definition.  The etymology I quote above is *completely different* than the etymology for the meaning eating session. BOTH meanings and BOTH etymologies predate yiddish.  The use in modern English of meal in the meaning of "matzah meal" is not derived from Yiddish.  It's not me that misunderstood. Centerone (talk) 06:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * and BTW, jewish-languages dot org isn't a reliable source. It's not "authoritative". It's by it's own definition, a combination of wiki and urban dictionary -- From their about: "Welcome to the Jewish English Lexicon (JEL), a collaborative database of distinctive words that are used in the speech or writing of English-speaking Jews. Think of it as the Wiktionary or Urban Dictionary of Jewish language." Centerone (talk) 06:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to understand how it works and are becoming militant.
 * The etymology of a Germanic word cannot precede Yiddish, as Yiddish is based on Mittelhochdeutsch, is a secondary branch on the Indogermanic tree, on the same major common branch with all the Germanic languages, on par with, say, Dutch. This applies fully to all the German-based Yiddish words, like mel for flour.
 * But I can read between the lines, so drop it, you FEEL this way for whatever personal reasons you might have and no amount of logical reasoning will get through. Have a nice weekend. Arminden (talk) 10:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Relatedly I'm curious about the word "crispy" in "Matzah meal is crispy matzah that has been ground". Certainly true these days but historically early modern sources like David HaLevi Segal define it as מצה טחונה or מצה כתושה = "ground matzah." I found this detailed description of the manufacturing process in an expanded Yiddish translation of Isaac Tyrnau's Minhagim but it's a little beyond my skill: https://books.google.com/books?id=vwdiAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP29. If someone with better Yiddish can translate I think it'd provide a good data point for the history, because it predates the introduction of crispy matzah according to the timeline on this page: "Prior to the late 18th century, all matzah was soft and relatively thick". GordonGlottal (talk) 00:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)