Forum Replies Created
December 17, 2013 3:04 pm at 3:04 pm in reply to: Couplets, haikus and any short poems by weird people #1209828
notasheep – It was inspired by our household-local sock shidduch crisis…December 17, 2013 11:29 am at 11:29 am in reply to: Couplets, haikus and any short poems by weird people #1209826
Where do all the lost socks go?
Whither all the pies?
Blown away and carried off
On whisper-wings of dragonflies.
They sit and wait in Over There
Beyond the Far-Away
Expecting owners there to find
And bring them home again someday.
And so they wait and sit
And wait and sit and wait some more.December 16, 2013 9:28 pm at 9:28 pm in reply to: Couplets, haikus and any short poems by weird people #1209825
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Other flowers are different colours
And other things are blue
TinyTim – Isn’t it the wrong holiday for you? Regardless: merry chanukah, one and all!
notasheep – Well I thought it was very good anyway… Was meant to cheer you up…
<bad French accent>Yuer Menurkey is burekking ze liewa</bad French accent>
A gentle breeze from Hushabye Mountain
Softly blows o’er Lullaby Bay.
It fills the sails of boats that are waiting–
Waiting to sail your worries away.
It isn’t far to Hushabye Mountain
And your boat waits down by the quay.
The winds of night so softly are sighing–
Soon they will fly your troubles to sea.
So close your eyes on Hushabye Mountain.
Wave good-bye to cares of the day.
And watch your boat from Hushabye Mountain
Sail far away from Lullaby Bay.
(Robert B. Sherman)
VM – Conveniently avoiding answering my questions…
HLM – The colour is named after the fruit, not the other way around. The fruit’s name derives from the fact that it made its way into England from the Aranjuez region of Spain.
Veltz – 1. How do I do the craw-step?
2. What is the name of The Doctor?
Because HKB’H wanted him to die.
pretzel – Lead pouring is nothing more than simple physics – you’ll get those little ‘eyes’ if you pour hot lead into cold water anywhere, over someone’s head or not. And “beamed energy”?! What, like lasers and stuff?
imamom – Ok, let’s break this down a bit. First off:
The point is that IF a person is a shomer Torah u’mitzvos, then they conduct themselves accordingly and ask shailos, so why would one say that such a person is a machasheifa and an oved avoda zora, just because their work involves something that one doesn’t understand?
Well, that wasn’t really your original point, was it? Here’s what you said originally:
Chas v’shalom that we should be saying that a Shomer Torah u’mitzvos is a machasheifah or oved avodah zorah (lashon hora on the internet! moderators, where are you?)
The response is simple, if it is ossur (and there are other potential issurim involved besides kishuf and avoda zara; nichush is one example) then to say that what she does is ossur is not loshon horah. Your starting point is “Well she’s frum, so…” which is the wrong place to start. Never look at the individual, always the actions.
I don’t understand electricity, but I know that it works! Is my electrician a machasheifa or an oved avoda zora? I don’t think so.
Now this is just silly. Come on. There is no way you can seriously be equating something which has very flimsy pseudo-scientific rationale, which has zero experimental proof, which is pretty much universally not accepted by people with the necessary knowledge to a phenomenon that we know all the scientific basis of to the last electron, that has hundreds of years of experimental data, that we can observe how, when and why it works. Seriously?! Gosh. Talk about an agenda…
The books I listed indicate that “energy” is all around us, all the time. This is a scientific fact (thank you, Albert Einstein).
Now this is one of the most egregious distortions of special relativity I’ve ever seen. All e=mc2 means is that energy and matter are equivalent, that is that one can be converted to the other proportionally. It means that conservation of mass and conservation of energy are linked. Nothing more than that. It does not mean that some kind of wishy-washy “energy” with mysterious powers is all around us waiting to be controlled by those with “the gift” if they can “balance” it correctly (whatever that’s supposed to mean).
No agendas, either. Rational science.
So, the group which uses standard scientific experimental techniques, and is basing their theories on actual scientific knowledge has “an agenda” and is not using “rational science”, but the group who does not and bases their claims on gross misinterpretation of pretty basic science apparently is using “rational science” and has “no agendas”. Seriously, you think these people have no agenda whatsoever, they are simply doing it for the good of mankind and the furthering of human knowledge and not to sell books and services. Ok…
Btw, this is a mature and adult conversation too, or at least I am trying to make it so. Putting forward views to which you are opposed does not make it not so.
imamom – If what she’s doing is over on issurim then it’s ossur, whether or not she’s a ‘shomer torah umitzvos’. These are serious issurim and just dismissing them by saying “she’s shomer torah umitzvos so it must be ok and to say otherwise is lashon horah” is just naive and wrong. Furthermore the studies being done are not “Because it works!” but to see whether or not there is actual scientific basis to any claims of it working. Many claimed cases of it ‘working’ just don’t stand up to scrutiny, for many reasons. BTW, all the people you quote also have an agenda you know… It’s not only people who are against what you believe who have agendas. And having an agenda doesn’t necessarily make you wrong…
yytz/wallflower – I know, but doesn’t it strike you as odd that a symbol known to have been used by a different religion before its first documented use in ours bears a strikingly phonetically similar name. They may mean completely different things but the fact that the names sound so similar is a little suspicious.
OhTeeDee – Good question. Many, many rishonim didn’t believe that gilgulim is part of our mesorah. It mostly became a more mainstream belief around the time of the Ari Z’al, and mostly due to his talmidim spreading the idea and then further popularised by the rise of chassidus. Does this mean that it was one man’s idea? Not necessarily, there are references to Jewish beliefs in metempsychosis since the early geonim and, if you learn certain sugyos in certain ways, possibly in the gemoro too so it may have some claim to mesorah via torah sheba’al peh… It’s not a cut-and-dried issue…
OhTeeDee – There’s a difference between that which is mefurash in the Torah and is essentially a set of “common-sense” societal laws and abstract mystical traditions that have no obvious basis is the Torah, nor in common sense. I mean the Jainist symbol is called an ahimsa for crying out loud. Even the name is nicked and given a slight reworking to sound Jewish.October 2, 2013 8:35 pm at 8:35 pm in reply to: Looking for short and inspiring divrei torah on Parshas Noach #977493
“Noach ish tzaddik”; before you can be a tzaddik, you have to be a mentch…
If I recall correctly, it’s a Kotzker vort (I may be wrong, it’s happened before…).
All together now! And we wiiiiilll all go together when we go, every hottentot and every Eskimo, when the air becomes uranious, we will all go simultaneous and we will all go together when we go…
I think that you people have no clue what addiction looks like and how a shmutz addiction totally destroys someone’s life be it a man woman child
Actually, I have a fairly good idea what addiction looks like, in fact I’m in the middle of an assignment about it for my psychology degree. As addiction is currently defined (which is fairly loosely actually), the internet is not addictive. Addictions are defined as having the following characteristics:
1. Excessive, disruptive, compulsive behaviour caused by the activity or substance. All these terms are, however, subjective.
2. Craving the activity or substance in its absence. Again, this is fairly subjective.
3. Tolerance – the amount of substance or performance of the activity needed to achieve the same level of ‘high’ increases over time. This is objective and observable.
4. Physical withdrawal symptoms. These are actual, physical symptoms such as headaches, nausea, vomiting, ‘the shakes’ etc. upon prolonged cessation of the substance or activity. Again, objective and observable.
The internet may, at the very most, qualify for two of the above. It certainly does not qualify by either of the objective, observable criteria. It doesn’t appear in the DSM as an addiction. I know you will google up some studies but the issue really is a lot more complex than a quick internet search. It may be that, in the fullness of time, as more research is conducted internet abuse may come to be classified as an addiction but at the moment it isn’t.
Furthermore, you fall foul of the self-selection bias when you ask us to
Read some real stories and then come back and post your naarishkiet.
The problem here is that you only ever hear stories of when things go wrong because things not going wrong is not a story. Nobody ever went to their rabbi completely broken at the fact that they got the internet and then nothing bad happened. Nobody ever sent a story into a magazine or newspaper which went “I got the internet and it was fine”. “Nothing happened” doesn’t sell. Sure, completely unfiltered internet is a dangerous thing but when it gets blown out of all proportion as in these ads then all that happens is that people get skeptical about the whole issue.
20 years ago, the atom was the smallest thing known to man, now we know there are things smaller.
You are joking, right?! The first subatomic particle to be discovered was the electron in 1897. In 1900 the foundations of quantum mechanics (which deals with what happens at a subatomic level) were laid down by Planck (he of the constant fame) and the two main models that we work with nowadays were fully constructed by the late 1920s. The atom itself was split for the first time in 1917 (by Rutherford) and 28 years later the first a-bomb was detonated. In other words, people have known for a while that there was stuff smaller than an atom.August 27, 2013 10:25 am at 10:25 am in reply to: For the Jewish Metalhead (I know you're out there). #1023443
Most lead guitarists in metal bands could teach college level classes in music theory, some on the level of Stratavarius.
Who was “Stratavarius”? I think you might be referring to Stradivarius but there was more than one of them (it was a family business) and they made violins, they were not musicians nor music theorists.
nishtdayngesheft – If we’re playing psychoanalyst, I think that you’re projecting. Don’t bother trying to argue because you’re just in denial. Trust me, I’m a psychologist (well, a student one anyway)
ihear – Stop moving the goalposts; a specific claim was made – that males have a stronger yetzer horah for females than females do for males – I responded by poitning out that this is untrue logically, biologically and neurologically. You then said that it is true by “a huge margin”:
just take a look at the statistics for “illicit” behavior and men beat women by a huge margin
I, understandably, assumed that “illicit” referred to the matter in hand, i.e. sexual compulsion, thus responding with statistics relating to the proclivity of male and female fidelity.
I had a quick look for your statistics. Well it turns out that it is 57% to 54% which is hardly a “large margin”
(source: statisticsbrain.com from Journal of Marital and Family Therapy)
Now you say that you were, in fact, referring to “various self-control issues”. Do you mean addictions? What kind of addictions specifically? Do you mean that 87% of ALL addicts are male? Well this is clearly untrue. Let’s break down by type: Drugs: Predominance varies by drug type, country and age range. Females between 15 and 18 in Finland are 1.6% more likely to be addicted to amphetamines than males but 1.8% less likely in the UK. (Source: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, study 2006). However stimulant abuse is fairly even between genders across most countries and ages, and adult women are more likely to be addicted to opiates, but less likely to be addicted to cannabis (Source: Harvard Medical School Study 2010).
Alcohol: Male dominance, 20% to 12-15%, but gap narrowing all the time (Sources: Harvard Medical School study 2010, EMCDDA study 2006).
Nicotine: Males higher, 35% to 23% but females find quitting harder (Source: Harvard Medical School study 2010).
Shopping: Almost even but females ever so slightly higher at 6% to 5.5% (Source: American Journal of Psychiatry, 2013).
Sex (sorry for being blunt mods): Statistics notoriously unreliable as they are based on clinical studies that mostly focus on males (so fewer data available for females) and admittance to treatment centres which is mostly driven by media coverage – more males attend treatment centres but only because the media portrays it as a purely male problem, thus females feel that it is less socially acceptable to admit to having the problem. Twice as many females than males are active on online chat rooms dedicated to sex addiction, suggesting that males are more likely to admit publicly but females more likely to admit privately. (Sources: academia.edu, psychologytoday.com, livescience.com, VaLue, K. “Women and Sexual Addiction: Characteristics, Causes and Cure”, 2010)
Food: Statistics not really available, but generally females outnumber males with most eating disorders by about 10 to 1 in the US (Source: eatingdisorderfoundation.org)
So, tell me, where do you find 87% to 13%?
Secondly, in regards to mir, it was you that brought up the subject by claiming that it could be used as an example showing how all kollel guys are serious, your words:
have you ever even stepped foot into a yeshiva? into the mir? into bmg? into brisk? where are you getting this absolutley wrong information?
I responded that I had been in the mir:
Yup. Learned in the mir for 3 years.
You questioned my having witnessed what I did, further casting aspersions on my integrity and seriousness in learning :
i was also in the mir and i cannot imagine which building you were in that MOST people were doing what you described,unless, and i mean this with no bad conotations at all, you were amongst them and it seemed as if “everyone” was like that
I answered that I had learned in most of the batei medrashim, specifying two:
I spent time learning in most batei midrashim in the mir, but most of the time I was in Beis Yeshaya (both downstairs and Wallmark).
You then decided that I had only learned in two:
you mentioned 2 PLACES in the mir that you have learned in
You then went on to suggest that, contrary to your original claim, mir is NOT indicative of the general:
surely even you who knows just so much about the yeshiva and seemingly all other yeshivas wouldn’t dare say that you can attest for most peoples either learning or not learning in that specific institution
So which is it? Can you say that most people in the mir are learning seriously or can you not?
Finally, your point about monetary incentives is moot. If you can’t motivate yourself to learn without a cash bonus, well you aren’t suited to full-time learning. Kardom lachpor boh, anybody? And, I hate to break it to you, but most working guys don’t have luxury “housing, cars and other assorted items”. Really, we don’t.
(sorry for the long post mods…)
dveykus613 – 1) Who says those who don’t think everyone should be in full-time learning aren’t mindful of how they can improve their own learning? Plus giving criticism where it is deserved is not just the realm of the personally perfect.
2) And what of all the time that he wasn’t learning? Why is that excused because he now is more serious?
3) Except the Gemoro disagrees with you. We pasken like R’ Yehuda. The Gemoro says “harbeh asu k’R’ Shimon v’lo alsa b’yadam”, which the rishonim explain to mean that neither the parnassa nor the learning was alsa b’yadam. The Maharal in his pirush to the Mishna in Avos that says “kol Torah she’ein imoh melacha sofah lihyos beteila” asks about those in full-time learning and gives two answers: a) presumably they have businesses (i.e. melacha is any form of parnassa not just manual or professional labour) and b) those who we know do not have businesses may perhaps have reached such a madrega as you describe where HKB”H provides for them, but qualifies this statement by saying that there are very few such people. Now do you really think that more people in our dor are on that nmadrega than in the Maharal’s dor?
And I’m not even going to dignify your statement about people in learning having a better chance of staying “spiritually intact” with a response.
interjection – I guess I haven’t made myself clear. I’m not against people taking breaks, it’s the frequency of the breaks and the little disruptions here and there that indicate the seriousness of a guy’s commitment to his learning. Having seen that most guys display behaviours that don’t reflect a full-time commitment to learning it seems to me that they aren’t. Sure, if you need a break by all means take one (they have breaks in the workplace too) but if every time you get a text you “need to quickly reply, just one sec” or if you break off in the middle of your learning and have a shmooze with your chavrusa at the shtender or with a guy who’s walking past that you just need to say hi to, well that says something about how you feel about learning.
jbaldy22 – That’s very true.
apashutayid – Well thanks for your vote of confidence in my intelligence and emotional stability. It’s easy to disagree with someone if they can be dismissed as simply being dumb and bitter. I have presented first-hand eyewitness testimony and you just sit their at your computer and write about how I must obviously be filled with jealousy and hatred (which, due to my supreme idiocy, I have plenty of room in my tiny brain for…). For your information, and if you’d have bothered reading any of my posts properly you’d have seen for yourself, I am in no way against the idea of people being in full-time learning. Those who are serious and do learn full-time (by which I mean actually full-time) I am more than happy for them to do it and to them I say kol hakavod. What I am against is the idea of everyone being assumed to be ra’ui for it which, clearly, they are not.
Harotzehbilumshmo – I think you misunderstand me. I do not claim that every hour a whole load of kollel guys get up of their seats and have a break. I am simply saying that there are all the little bits of not learning here and not learning there that goes on in every beis hamedrash and that they add up. Every guy does it, they have a quick shmooze (still at the shtender) or they get a text and just need to reply quickly or whatever, and they add up. This is undeniably true of most people in almost every kollel. Not sure what your second point is.
ihear – Firstly, I am not your dear. I also am grateful for your condescension. Now, I spent time learning in most batei midrashim in the mir, but most of the time I was in Beis Yeshaya (both downstairs and Wallmark). Do you really think that I would be so against people not learning seriously if I didn’t take learning seriously?! Do you think if I spent most of my time in yeshiva shmoozing and smoking (FYI I have never had a cigarette in my life) that I would get so upset at people in yeshiva doing as such?! Seriously?!
Secondly, I had a quick look for your statistics. Well it turns out that it is 57% to 54% which is hardly a “large margin”. Coupled with the fact that I have produced sound biological and neurological facts and the fact that, al pi halacha, yichud with one man and two women is assur while visa versa is muttar and the reason given is that women are more easily swayed to get involved even if another is there I feel quite safe in saying that men can control themselves just as easily as females (if not easier).
Furthermore, your comparing to people playing minesweeper at work is ridiculously disingenuous. You know what happens to people who regularly play minesweeper at work? They get sacked. They get told “this is not for you”. There may not be a “set amount” of learning to do but that’s the whole point – you learn as much as you can in the time possible, you use every second to get some more done. If you feel that learning should be done by quota then you should not be in kollel. And to say learning is not as interesting as going out to work?! Then you really aren’t cut out for full-time learning… And yes, working can be as intellectually challenging as learning.
Finally, a quick definition for you (as it seems to be your favourite word):
Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
Lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular: “ignorant of astronomy”.
I have clearly demonstrated knowledge of the learning world, the working world and of hard science and statistics. Tell me then, at what point have I been ignorant?
Harotzehbilumshmo – If in my job I was to regularly put my head down for a quick rest or play on my phone for a few minutes or go out every hour or so for a coffee/cigarette I think I could rightly be accused of not taking the job seriously. Your definition of toroscho keva (which, by the way, is not a mitzva nor a chiyuv nor even a halocho – merely a piece of advice, granted it is advice from a tannah and should be taken seriously but nevertheless nothing more than advice; providing a parnassah for your family is a mitzvas aseh d’oraisah according to R’ Yehuda [who we pasken like]) would not seem to apply to those who behave the same way in the beis hamedrash. Like it or not, this is the vast majority. Sure when they learn, they learn shtark. Sure they may be ‘involved’ but what they are involved in is the system, not the torah per se that they are learning. Sure there are some very special kollel guys but they are by no means at all anywhere near the majority. Most are just jobniks and that’s the honest truth of it. They turn up, they put in the hours (more or less), they go home. Learning is just what they happen to do.
As for your last gripe, I believe the reason for that is that working people are so looked down upon in yeshivish circles that it wouldn’t matter one jot if the working people learned harder, they’d still get flak for simply being working guys. If the argument against you is that you left yeshiva and shut your gemoro forever then it is enough to defend yourself by saying that you do learn at all. Of course everyone has room for improvement and many people both learning and working could put more into their learning but the current false dichotomy of you either sit in kollel and are pure and holy or go to work and are second-class is what the OP and the rest of us are trying to show up for its wrongness.
ihear – Well thank you for your classic reductio ad absurdum. First of all, halevai it was 9:30 – more like any time between 9:30 and 10:30; it kind of fills up slowly, y’know as people come when they come. And most guys open their gemoros and have a quick “how are you today?” shmooze before they get into the actual learning. A great deal do come in and go straight for the coffee, have a drink for a few minutes, before going back to the beis (often still with the coffee that they proceed to take occasional drinks from over the course of the next 15-20 minutes). You try getting away with that in a workplace.
And to answer your question:
have you ever even stepped foot into a yeshiva? into the mir?
Yup. Learned in the mir for 3 years. After learning in another very well-known yeshiva for a number of years. So all my information comes direct from the source, not (as your baseless accusation suggests) from ignorance.
Men are so much more adversely affected by this culture due to their raging yetzer horas.
Oh dear. This again. Ok, so lets start from the beginning. In terms of subjective feelings there is no way to compare male and female yetzer horahs – no guy has ever experienced a girl’s and no girl a guy’s. In terms of looking at the mechanisms through which male and female desires work biologically and neurologically speaking they are identical. Both are based on the release of testosterone and dopamine, both are mediated by limbic system (which is the system in the brain primarily concerned with emotional processing) and the medial preoptic area (concerned with satisfaction of desire). In other words, both males and females find people attractive based on both physical and emotional conditions. The strength of activation in these brain areas is absolutely equal, i.e. when a male or female is confronted with someone that they find attractive and who induces desires in them the amount of brain activity is exactly the same in exactly the same areas and controlled by exactly the same hormones and neurotransmitters. In fact, some researchers suggest that in addition female desire can also be regulated by estrogen implying that at certain times of the month female desires may be stronger than male ones, though this has not been universally accepted. So please stop with the male yetzer horah vs female yetzer horah business, it’s simply untrue.
Harotzehbilumshmo – No-one is denying that there are hundreds of committed kollel chevra, what the point that the OP and others including myself have been trying to get across is that there are a vast, vast number who aren’t. And your ridiculous accusation that people who are against everyone being full-time learners are simply bitter drop-outs is wrong in every conceivable way. Furthermore I would like to stand up for all the hundreds of thousands of working guys who are mekayem aseh toroscho keva, who are koveia ittim and are really serious about learning. There is no kanous against them because there is nothing to be mekane about. All the working guys I know (and I know a fair few) from all stripes of what is loosely termed Orthodox Judaism, from the Chassidish to the modern, are very serious about their learning. They are several chaburas where I live just for working guys, and I have noticed something very interesting (at least in the one I go to) – there’s no shmoozing, no “just have to send a quick text”s, no coffee/cigarette breaks, just solid learning. Now compare that to your average kollel and tell me that working guys aren’t mekayem aseh toroscho keva…
wallflower – Nobody is saying that most kollel guys do nothing all day, just that they don’t learn all day either. There is middle-ground you know, it’s not all or nothing. Most kollel guys spend a fair bit of the time when they should be learning not learning. They may be in the beis hamedrash with a sefer in front of them but they might not be learning. There’s a lot of shmoozing, coffee-drinking, smoking, stam spacing out, putting heads down for a quick snooze, checking phones, texting, making phone calls, playing games on phones under shtenders and a whole lot more besides. Sure each of these might only be fore five minutes at a time, but they add up. One of the largest yeshivas in the world runs a bus service for its kollel guys so that they can get home for lunch; it leaves half-an hour before the end of seder. That’s the official yeshiva buses. So yes, these guys learn seriously but they don’t do it all of the time that their wives think they do, or that their wives are told by their school/sem teachers that they will be doing anyway.
ilovetorah – I’m sorry, I really am, but the facts of the case are that you’re wrong. I dearly wish that it wasn’t so but it is. Believe me, I learned in one of the largest yeshivas in the world and the vast majority of bochurim and yungeleit, though they are machshiv the time they spend learning, do not do nearly as much much as is made out. Plenty of sedarim are spent half-learning, half-shmoozing. A fair number of yungeleit don’t even make it to the beis hamedrash. And don’t get me started on how many times a seder some guys need to have half-hour long coffee/cigarette breaks. The fact is that most guys will admit that they probably aren’t cut out for full-time learning but are scared to go and work, or find that being supported by parents/parents-in-law is just far more convenient – they may not have much money but at least what they do have they got given and frankly many working guys have just as little money that they slogged their guts out for, so why bother if you can just have it given to you?
It is not motze shem ra, and definitely not bizui talmidei chachomim (seriously, you believe every guy in kollel is a talmid chochom?!), to tell it as it is. The vast majority, yes vast majority, of guys in kollel are simply not full-time learners. Sorry.
the-art – Actually there is no single scientific definition of addiction. Excessive use despite the consequences is one criterion used to determine if a substance or behaviour is addictive but there are others, including craving the substance or behaviour in its absence, whether tolerance levels increase over time (i.e. increasingly greater amounts of the substance/behaviour are needed to get the same level of ‘high’ as previously experienced) and whether physical withdrawal symptoms are displayed after sudden, prolonged cessation of the performance of the activity (this is different to craving which is purely an extreme, overwhelming desire to re-experience the ‘high’; withdrawal symptoms are physical, including nausea, excessive sweating, cramps, loss of concentration etc.).
lakewood001 – Addictions are always physical. Some things which are often described as addictive (such as the internet, video games etc.) are not physical and, as such, are not classed as addictions by the DSM. Behaviours which are addictive include overeating, gambling etc. and do have actual neurobiological facets.
JustARegularJew – Interesting point. There is much discussion in the world of addiction research as to whether or not this is the case. The evidence is inconclusive but the DSM does currently go with this distinction between addictive behaviours and addictive substances.
He’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!July 22, 2013 10:33 am at 10:33 am in reply to: 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 – 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 x 0 = ? #1125399
oomis – See above. Always do multiplications and divisions BEFORE additions and subtractions. So the only thing being multiplied by 0 here is the very last 1. You can add and subtract all the rest afterwards. Incidentally, 0 is also a real number.July 22, 2013 10:00 am at 10:00 am in reply to: 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 – 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 x 0 = ? #1125398
gotbeer and notoriouspre – BODMAS (or, as you seem to call it in America, PEDMAS) is a list of 4 operations, not 6: 1. Brackets, 2. Other (indices, surds etc), 3. Division AND Multiplication 4. Addition AND Subtraction. When faced with a problem like the one above, do ALL the multiplications and divisions first, from left to right (unless the division is expressed as a fraction in which case deal with the numerator and denominator separately), then ALL of the additions and subtractions from left to right, not all the additions first then all subtractions. So in this case, first do the 1×0 as you said but then you do not add all the 1’s to the left of the subtraction sign and subtract all the 1’s to the right of it from them but rather you add all the 1’s to the left then subtract the 1 immediately to the right of the subtraction sign and then carry on adding all the 1’s.
rebdoniel – Loius Jacobs was no “R'”, he actively tried to destroy British Orthodoxy (of all stripes) and it took all the efforts of Rav Jakobovits to stop him. He was an actual, real apikores (and I do not use that word lightly) being someone “sheshino v’kofar”; he denied Torah Sh’baal Peh, Olam Haba, Mashiach, and Torah Mi’Sinai (he believed that the ‘ideas’ behind the Torah were revealed to Moshe Divinely but the actual construction of the Torah and the institution of the mitzvos were Moshe’s, not HKB”H’s). I admire your desire to be dan l’kaf zechus but in this case it is misplaced. I’m sorry, but that’s just the way it is.
frum girl 101 –
a boy is very rarely able to look past appearances whereas girls are
We’ve been through this one before…
Example #1: I have never heard of a boy writing a shidduch resume.
I did, my wife still keeps it in a drawer somewhere. All the shadchanim I dealt with assumed I had one, indicating that as far as they’re concerned all guys do.
Example #2: A boy can reject a girl without the girl ever even knowing that the match was suggested in the first place.
And saying yes to a girl only to be rejected is in what way better? Mima nafshach, if he says yes and she says no then she is the deciding factor. If he says yes and she also does, then they date and, again, she is the deciding factor. Only if he says no first does the question of the shidduch going ahead or not rest on his decision. In other words, looks to me like it’s decidedly in her favour.
Example #3: The girl’s family has to come up with the money to pay for most of the wedding expenses.
Depends on the families and how they agree to split it, something that in my family’s experience only takes place after the couple are already engaged. So how does that affect the actual dating process?July 10, 2013 12:18 pm at 12:18 pm in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964828
Curiosity – And there it is again, sarcasm masking the fact that you’re avoiding answering my questions. It’s not fooling anyone you know…
I will take up your offer of biscuits (as they’re properly called) though.July 10, 2013 9:42 am at 9:42 am in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964826
Curiosity – 1. Forgive me but if it is the bending that’s undignified then the dimyon to horses doesn’t work. Horses can’t bend down as they don’t stand upright. They drink by lowering their head, by partially kneeling so that the front of their bodies is lower than the back or by kneeling fully to bring their head to the water level. I therefore assumed that the dimyon to horses was to the manner in which they drink, i.e. lapping. This is also the way one drinks from a water fountain, and the manner of drinking of the soldiers who were kept (regardless of whether they were sitting, standing, bending, lying down or jumping around no-one disputes the lapping). This also answers your fourth point.
2. Don’t tell me what I am and aren’t expecting to do. What I was doing was pointing out the difficulties, which, unless you believe it’s assur to ask kashas on a shitta you don’t understand, is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Given the difficulties, and given that it’s a da’as yochid that all the other mefarshim disagree with, forgive me for learning like the other mefarshim. Furthermore, if you have answers, please provide them. Don’t just sit there like a 4-year-old saying “I do know, but I’m not telling…”
3. The only reason that the Mahari Kara talks about those standing is because he has to create a 3rd group given as he can’t have the 1st group being chosen as he believes that they too knelt. He is therefore forced to create a 3rd group which he says “could have drunk standing”. None of the other mefarshim have his problem, none have any more than 2 groups – those that knelt and those that lapped – and therefore none learn like the Mahari Kara. Nowhere are any of them mashma, like you claim, farkert. The Ralbag, as pointed out, says b’feirush that they were chosen as lapping from the river showed their fearlessness. The Minchas Shai has 2 groups, those that knelt and drank from the river directly and those that drank from their hands (he is medayek “min hamayim” as opposed to “al hamayim”), which seems to indicate that this was the only difference between the two groups, mashmaus is that those that drank from their hands also knelt (in other words the kneeling was not indicative of avodah zorah, the manner of their lapping showed whether they had discipline, though both still lapped).July 9, 2013 7:52 pm at 7:52 pm in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964818
Curiosity – So I had a look at the Mahari Kara and, guess what? It’s not quite as you make it out to be. He starts off with the assumption that it is impossible to lap like a dog without kneeling, he therefore says that there were actually three groups – 1. those that knelt and somehow drunk (not explained how), 2. those that knelt, put their face to the water and lapped directly from the river, 3. those that somehow gathered water in their hands, stood up and then lapped from their hands. This is difficult for a number of reasons:
1. The pasuk is not mashma that there were any more than 2 groups – those that knelt and those that lapped. All the other mefarshim you quoted learn this way (Radak, Metzudos, Rashi, R’ Yeshaya).
2. It is entirely possible to lap without kneeling, one can bend over or lie flat, as I described above.
3. The difference between the first 2 groups is not explained. How did the first group drink, and why would the pasuk split them into two groups if they were both disqualified for the same reasons? It should simply have been enough to say that anyone who knelt, for whatever reason, was disqualified. Why split them?
4. The mechanism he proposes is not really possible. Try it for yourself – put a bucket of water on the floor, bend over or crouch down, cup some water in your hand and try standing up straight without spilling almost all of it. Then try drinking. You ain’t gonna get much.
Even if you wish to hold on to your Mahari Kara, the other mefarshim clearly do not learn like that (as it would require 3 groups where they have just 2) and if you want someone who be’feirush disagrees then the Ralbag says that those that lapped like a dog were chosen as it showed that they were fearless and not afraid to put their faces in the water so clearly they were not standing up…
Anyway, as I said before, even according to the Mahari Kara they were lapping from something – an action you described as being unfit for a ben torah. I’ve said it before and I’ll saying again – it’s not about the kneeling, no-one kneels to a water fountain.July 9, 2013 2:29 pm at 2:29 pm in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964812
Curiosity – First, it’s still lamentable that you can joke about it. Second, I have not seen the Mahari Kara, but based on your misrepresentation of the other mefarshim involved I shall reserve judgement on it until I do. Third, comparing ubiquitin’s opinion to that of the Karaites is essentially calling him an apikores. Fourth, your sarcasm is noted as is your lack of knowledge of fluid dynamics. Fifth, none of that has a single bearing on the licking/lapping issue that I was talking about and which is the only issue which is really shayach to water fountains as kneeling/not kneeling is irrelevant; if we’re quoting ourselves then let me repeat what I said before: “Nobody kneels to water fountains…”
notasheep – I will gladly join the National Society for the Prevention of Misused Apostrophe’s… ;-p
jewishfeminist02 – Sorry, but there’s no evidence for a neurological or developmental basis either. They may well have known from an early age that they have certain ta’aivahs, I knew from an early age that I had a ta’aivah for chocolate, doesn’t mean it’s not a ta’avaih. Unfortunately many people know from an early age that they have a very strong ta’avaih for physically abusing people or a ta’avaih for money that is so strong they will do literally anything to get it. Yet we label these people criminals because ta’avaihs are not excuses (I’m not saying that homosexual ta’aivahs should be criminal, just using an extreme example). I agree with you that a frum Jew with homosexual ta’avaihs who controls them is extremely admirable, but that doesn’t mean that what they are controlling is not a ta’aivah.July 9, 2013 10:00 am at 10:00 am in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964809
Curiosity – I never called you an am ha’aretz, what I did say was that it is a little curious that you should be so proud of not having learned Tanach, and proud because you did not learn it because you were in yeshiva. I mean, these are HKB”H’s messages from Him Himself through his prophets to all humanity for all time and you’re proud not to have learned them?! You’re proud that your yeshiva education means you haven’t bothered learning what H’ said to us?! HKB”H says “Here, these are the things I am making sure you know. This is how I am telling you how the world works and how you should live your life. These are messages from Me to you that are so important I have created a mechanism called prophecy were I communicate to human beings so that they may tell people what I want and write it down so that all future generations may learn from it and know.” Curiosity says “Nah, not me – I learned in yeshiva…”
I mean, what are you going to do when you get upstairs after 120? Tell H’ “Well I didn’t bother with the bits You said, but I can kler 7 tzedadim in the issur of hezek which have no real nafka mina l’halacha…”?!
As far as your quick looking up of a piece of Tanach (that you never knew existed just a few hours ago and are now apparently an expert in…). You’re wrong. First of all, my comment was about the licking/lapping (not the kneeling) – you compared drinking from a water fountain to a horse lapping from a trough and said it wasn’t for bnei torah, the pasuk says that those that “lapped like dogs” davka were the bnei torah. Anyway, as you yourself said, those that knelt were disqualified as it showed that they were used to kneeling (and davka at the edge of the water, as kneeling to one’s own reflection was a way of avodah for one of the avodah zarahs of the time – see medrash) to avodah zarah. Nobody kneels to water fountains…
Furthermore, those that lapped from their hands were lav davka standing up – nowhere do the pesukim or mefarshim mention this, and as ubiquitin points out it is physically impossible. They had to get the water from the river, therefore they either bent over, cupped the water in their hands and licked it off (much, I may say, like someone drinking from a water fountain) or lay on their front, put their lips to the water and pushed it in with their hands (which would make the dimyon to a dog licking water extremely understandable if you’ve ever seen a dog drink from a river…). I double-checked the mefarshim you quoted and not one mentioned a word about standing, so which “meforshim … clearly state the soldiers who were accepted were standing up to drink”? The mefarshim explain why those that knelt were unacceptable, the kneeling is mefurash in the pasuk and not something that ubiquitin ever argued about. Calling him an apikores for disagreeing with something you decide to shtip into a pirush is a bit out of line…
jewishfeminist02 – There is very little evidence for any kind of biological basis for same-sex attraction. Foster and non-foster twin studies have shown virtually no difference in probability (as compared to general population) of homosexuality in one twin if the other is gay, ruling out genetic and epigenetic causes. The problem for gay rights activists is that, when searching for a biological basis, the only ‘acceptable’ options are genetic or epigenetic as neurological or developmental origins would then catagorise homosexuality as either a condition or a disorder (note that these do not necessarily imply disease or illness, just deviation from ‘standard set-up’) whereas the activists need to portray homosexuality as simply another variant of the standard human set-up. Simply speaking, a neurological condition would mean that the brain functions differently to the basic programmed settings for all humanity. If we admit such, it means also admitting that heterosexuality is the default mode of human orientation and that homosexuality is, in some way, an aberration. This is something no self-respecting activist is willing to do. The same holds true with a developmental origin, as that would imply that somehow the cognitive functions of gay people developed along different lines to straight people, again requiring the ‘default mode’ being heterosexuality.
Apart from the lack of evidence, there is also the logical problem with a genetic (or epigenetic) basis for homosexuality. If, as pretty much every gay rights activist does, you believe in Darwinian (or even neo-Darwinian) evolution then how does a ‘gay gene’ propagate? In a world in which mating is purely based on attraction and there are no ‘social taboos’ on engaging in homosexual acts (as would be the case with early man) then the gene cannot be passed on as such acts cannot produce conception. No-one can be born from the mating of two males or two females, and those who would have had same-sex desires would have had no need to involve themselves in sham marriages (as many over the course of history did in fact do) as there was no pressure for them to act as if they were straight so no homosexual male would have mated with a heterosexual female (or visa-versa) to propagate said gene.
At the end of the day it is a ta’aivah. Yes, it may be a very strong one but you cannot excuse people simply on the basis of having a very strong ta’aivah. There are prisons full of murderers, rapists, pedophiles, con artists, muggers, bank robbers and burglars to prove that.
Oh Shreck! – On your number 3: a money-belt was only assur to wear openly, if it was hidden then it was muttar.July 8, 2013 9:35 am at 9:35 am in reply to: Is it proper for an adult to drink from a water fountain? #964788
I’m not sure what’s in Shoftim perek 7 because I was in yeshiva
Well isn’t that a sad indictment of the yeshiva system (or at the very least, your yeshiva)…
So, just so you know, Shoftim 7 starts with Gidon having just been chosen to lead Bnei Yisrael against the Midianim. He recruits an army but H’ tells him that it is too large and will not showcase the miracle suitably, plus many of the soldiers are idol-worshippers. So Gidon performs a test. He takes the soldiers to the river-bank and tells them to drink; those that kneel down are discarded as idol-worshippers, those that “lapped like a dog” were kept. So, ironically, the action you say is “undignified for a ben Torah” is exactly how Gidon determined who was a Ben Torah.
Toi – Err, y’what?!
Toi – The DB9 is an Aston Martin, not a Bentley. Still, awesome car.
Mr Slant, though Boggis is a close second.
Curiosity – Easy for you to say, you kill cats…