I quite enjoyed this very readable and cute primer. That said, I read it as a non-beginner, and I was regularly thinking "that's not quite true." The mistakes won't cause any fundamental misunderstandings of main concepts, but I do wish that this book had been fact-checked. Off the top of my head after reading:
- The book claims that because the Hebrew calendar is lunisolar, the Hebrew year has 365 days like a true solar calendar. This is just wrong: the Hebrew calendar is ~~11 days shorter than a solar year, and thus adds a leap month periodically within a 19 year cycle. The book does mention the need for the leap month, so I don't know how this mistake happened.
- The book claims that in the Esther story, Esther gets the king to reverse his deadly decree. This is false: not being able to reverse the decree is a core beat of the story. The characters get around that problem by making a second decree allowing the Jews to fight back (this is a famous and uncomfortable part of the story that is regularly discussed today).
- The book claims that the Talmud contains the whole Mishnah. It does not. It only includes the parts of the Mishnah that the Gemara comments on, which is ~~half the tractates.
- The book claims that if a law forces a Jew to transgress the Torah, the Jew must prefer death to transgression. This is famously not true: murder, sex crimes, and idolatry are the only three transgressions that Jews are supposed to prefer death to transgressing.
- The book repeatedly emphasizes that Yom Kippur is different from the other holidays in that it has no connection to events of history or the Torah whatsoever. This is not really true. The common midrash on Yom Kippur is that it's when Moses received the second set of tablets and came down from Sinai. It's probably fair to say that Yom Kippur is less tied to Torah events than other holidays, but the amount of emphasis on there being no connection whatsoever makes the book wrong.
- Etc etc.
The organization was pretty scattered, and the tone of the book was very odd. E.g. it was a mix of irreverent jokes and very rigid and Orthodox explanation. Caricatures make fun of any political or social stance differing from the author. However, this overall weirdness is probably what kept me interested and bemused all the way through. As a liberal, queer Jew, it's also worth noting that this book is very Zionist, very cis-heteronormative, and very focused on traditional gender roles.
EDIT: After couple weeks of investigation trying to figure out the meaning of the star on the cover, I’ve found out that it’s not Jewish at all! No wonder I had such trouble identifying it. It’s called the Pentagram of Eliphas Levi; it’s a relatively recent occult symbol. This sours the book for me even more that the cover was just wildly made up…