Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Patur Aval AssurParticipant
Where’s that from?
The original quote is from Berachos 3b, explaining how King David knew when chatzos was:
??? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?”? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????
October 30, 2014 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm in reply to: Totally Random Thread Title Just to Confuse PAA #1061357Patur Aval AssurParticipantWell if nothing else, you gave me a good way to end my story, without having to make myself win or lose.
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/creative-writing-cr-users-in-real-life#post-541101
Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
I wasn’t sure if anyone would get the reference. Good job.
October 30, 2014 7:56 pm at 7:56 pm in reply to: NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title #1147538Patur Aval AssurParticipantMy answer to the prefect question (I don’t think I posted it before) is that Percy couldn’t actually take away points but either he thought he could or more likely he was bluffing.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantTwo possibilities:
1) I recite “The Road Not Taken” thrice daily (or more).
2) Precisely because I recite Ashrei thrice daily, I don’t know it so well. But actually, as it would pertain to my experiment, this wouldn’t makea difference because even if I know Ashrei incorrectly, it is still something that doesn’t require active thought.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantI can’t believe that I left Sam2 out of all three of my stories. So here is a story just about him:
Sam2 was once talking to someone. He said “lulei d’mistafina, I would say that what you’re doing is an issur d’oraisa of chukas akum/darchei emori”. [Insert causal loop.]
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/what-should-a-rebbe-do#post-542748
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/proposing#post-492311
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/celebrating-a-sports-team#post-524017
etc.
October 30, 2014 6:56 pm at 6:56 pm in reply to: NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title #1147536Patur Aval AssurParticipantYekke2:
I didn’t want to post this in the middle of an intense theological discussion, so here it is: Why do you think I’m not a parselmouth?
October 30, 2014 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090186Patur Aval AssurParticipantThank you Yekke2. Finally, I think someone understands my point. Though I’m still not sure if you are agreeing.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantIgros Moshe Y.D. 4:36
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14679&st=&pgnum=265
It’s really long. The next siman is also related and also really long.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
If I recall correctly, back in the day Coffee Addict’s subtitle was “once killed a troll with his bare hands” or something like that.
October 30, 2014 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm in reply to: PAA's not-always-in-context Coffee Room Report Card Comments #1156637Patur Aval AssurParticipant“you’re missing the entire point of what it means to be a human being.”
(Avram in MD)
If you’re an animal, then I cannot answer you.
(Avram in MD)
October 30, 2014 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm in reply to: NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title #1147531Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
I read “It is simply the means to the end which is undesireable, namely murder” as referring back to the previous statement. Apparently it was its own statement. A small misunderstanding.
October 30, 2014 5:34 pm at 5:34 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090180Patur Aval AssurParticipantAvram:
The akeida was already within the context of a world with reward and punishment.
October 30, 2014 4:25 pm at 4:25 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090176Patur Aval AssurParticipantLet’s put the question a little differently. If Hashem would give you the Torah and command you to fulfill it but He tells you that whether o not you fulfill it has nothing to do with anything, i.e. there is no reward/punishment and no ramifications of any sort. Would you do it?
Patur Aval AssurParticipantNarrated by Patur Aval Assur:
I was strolling down the street, whistling a somber tune, and minding my own business when I walked right into a pole. Why, you might ask was there a pole in the middle of the street? Well there actually wasn’t. Being so absorbed in my ruminations I had lost track of where I was going and I had apparently wandered into some strange place where there was nothing to be seen other than the aforementioned pole. Once I was there anyway, I decided to take a closer look at the pole and I noticed that there was a flyer on the pole. The flyer said: The Coffee Room Convention in LA – Keynote Address to be delivered by Randomex, entitled “Perfunctory Points Pertaining to the Personality of Past and Present Posters, and Particularly the Plethora of Presumptuous, Pretentious, and Provocative Posts of Patur Aval Assur”. “Oho”, said I to myself; I should probably check this thing out. So off I went to the Coffee Room Convention in LA.
The trouble started a mere half hour into the flight. Someone had figured out that the entire membership of the Coffee Room was on this flight and he decided to hijack the plane. We were brought to an uninhabited island, and the hijacker flew off, leaving us behind. People immediately started introducing themselves to one another, and let me tell you, there were quite a few shockers. I mean, who would have thought that Vayoel Moshe would be wearing Israeli Flag cuff-links. Well actually, I wasn’t so surprised, because as R’ Rakeffet is wont to say “You can’t be a Zionist until you’ve gone through all of Vayoel Moshe”. But I digress. I was hanging around watching everyone interacting, but I couldn’t help wondering what the purpose of this hijacking was. The hijacker had summarily abandoned us and it didn’t seem like he was coming back anytime soon. My first thought was that this was a ploy by Randomex who had not yet written his speech and was stalling for time. But when I suggested this, Cozimjewish promptly said that she knows Randomex and when he doesn’t respond, it’s not because he needs more time, but because he is ignoring.
A few others threw out some theories. One of the better ones was suggested by Lamud Vov Tzadik – that we needed to all be gathered together in this auspicious place to perform an important Kabbalistic ritual. This caused a fight to erupt about whether this place was the right place, or if perhaps Uman would be better. It was resolved when Ivory pointed out that no one had thought to bring along their Rav, so we wouldn’t be able to perform the ritual anyway.
????? ???? a tremendous cacophony was heard. We all looked up and behold the Primordial Joseph was approaching from afar. Defeating him was going to require a team effort. The problem was that he had several hundred heads. Yekke2 came up with a brilliant idea. “Just play him a bit of music and he’ll fall straight to sleep.” Letakein Girl turned to Eftachbchinor and said “Quickly, get your harp!”. Eftach responded that she doesn’t play the harp (yet). “It matters not”, I responded. “???? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ?????.” So we were able to defeat Joseph. Except as it turned out, Joseph was just a projection, not really there. Meanwhile we began to hear a ticking noise but nobody was able to locate its origin. Finally, LittleFroggie shouted “I’ve found the source of the ticking! It’s a pipe bomb!”
There could be only one conclusion: This was a conspiracy by the Moderators. But their bomb didn’t work because it had no subtitle.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantPurely coincidental:
I found a sefer called ?????? ???????? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?????
Patur Aval AssurParticipant“Theory: a moderator (not this one) tried writing ????, but it came out as ????, so immediately changed it. -100”
Why would the moderator write “genai” in Hebrew but not write “baki” in Hebrew?
Because we are not as medakdek as JKR.
October 30, 2014 1:17 pm at 1:17 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090173Patur Aval AssurParticipantA nice, succinct way of putting it, Yekke2.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantTranslation of the second part:
R’ Chanina Bar Popa was his [The Angel of Death as per Rashi] comrade. When he was to die, they said to the Angel of Death “go do his will”. He went to him and showed [himself] to him. He [R’ Chanina Bar Popa] said to him “leave me 30 days until I review my learning for they say ‘fortunate is the one who comes to here and his learning is in his hand'”. He left him. After 30 days he [the Angel of Death] went [and] he showed [himself] to him. He [R’ Chanina Bar Popa] said to him “give me your knife lest you frighten me on the way”. He said to him “You want to do to me as your friend [did to me]?” He said to him “Bring me a Torah Scroll and show me if there is anything written in it which I did not fulfill”. He said to him “Did you attach yourself with the Ba’alei Raasan [the people who had the disease that was mentioned in the previous story] and engage in Torah study?” And even so, when he died, a pillar of fire separated between him and the world, and we have a tradition that a fire only separates for one or two [people] in a generation. R’ Alexandri drew close to it [and] he said “do it [i.e. remove the fire] on account of the honor of the sages”. He disregarded him. “Do it on account of the honor of your father.” He disregarded him. “Do it on account of your own honor.” It departed.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
I don’t understand the question.
October 30, 2014 12:34 pm at 12:34 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090171Patur Aval AssurParticipantWhy is it the best and most committed way? And why should you do it simply because it is the best and most committed way?
Patur Aval AssurParticipantPatur Aval AssurParticipantIt would depend why they are apikorsim. If they are apikorsim for being Zionists then it probably would undermine the Religious Zionists’ position. But if they are apikorsim for denying G-d then it probably would not undermine the Religious Zionists’ position.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantSo I did some further experimentation. I tried playing a song while saying something that I ostensibly know really well, namely Ashrei (although actually I’m not sure if I know Ashrei any better than “The Road Not Taken”), and was unable to do so. Then I tried reciting “Patur Aval Assur” which is presumably even simpler, also to no avail, and finally I moved on to just repeating a simple monosyllabic word and I still couldn’t do it (unless I put the word to the song). So I think my hypothesis still stands.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantWell I assumed that if you were citing it, you would know what he says. And if you don’t know what he says, how do you know that the Religious Zionists disagree?
October 30, 2014 4:21 am at 4:21 am in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090168Patur Aval AssurParticipantAnd lichora the fact that there is a statement of ?? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??? would seemingly indicate that there IS an extrinsic (to you; intrinsic to the concept) value in doing so.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantWell if you tell me what the accusation of apikorsus is then I will be able to determine if it is something which is agreed upon or not.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantReal translation:
(The context was a discussion about people with a certain disease.)
R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi would attach [himself to] them and engage in Torah study, saying “‘a beloved hind inspiring favor’, if it bestows favor upon those who learn it, will it not protect them?”
When he [R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi] was to die they said to the Angel of Death “Go and do his will”. He [the Angel of Death] went and appeared to him. He [R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi] said to him “show me my place”. He said to him “ok”. He [R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi] said to him “give me your knife lest you frighten me on the way”. He gave it to him. When they got there he lifted him and showed [his place to] him. He [R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi] leaped [and] he fell to the other side. He [the Angel of Death] grabbed him by the corner of his cloak. He [R’ Yehoshua Ben Levi] said “I swear that I will not come”. The Holy One Blessed Be He said “If he [had previously] abandoned [i.e. annulled] oath
then let him go back; if not then let him not go back”. He [the Angel of Death] said to him “give me my knife”. He would not give it to him. A Divine Voice went forth [and said] “give it to him for it is necessary for the creatures”. Eliyahu announced in front of him “vacate a place for the son of Levi, vacate a place for the son of Levi”. He went [and] he found R’ Shimon Ben Yochai who was sitting on 13 stools of gold. He [R’ Shimon Ben Yochai said to him “You are the son of Levi?”. He said “yes”. “Was a rainbow seen in your days?” He said “yes”. “If so, you are not the son of Levi”. But [in fact] it was not so – there was nothing [i.e. no rainbow], but he thought “I will not assign goodness to myself”.That’s the first half. The second half is a different story which I will hopefully translate soon.
October 30, 2014 3:30 am at 3:30 am in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090167Patur Aval AssurParticipantOk. Thank you everyone for your responses, even though I still think no one actually answered my questions. A couple of people suggested that it makes sense to serve Hashem out of love. I never denied that. In fact I mentioned that in my first post. The point is that if the only reason to serve Hashem out of love is that you feel good about it, then that means that it is completely up to you to decide how to serve Hashem, and if you don’t want to serve Him out of love (for whatever reason which you feel overrides the feeling that you will get) then there is no reason why you should do so, since there is no extrinsic value in serving Hashem out of love. Unless you use the Ratzon Haborei argument. But no one has yet explained why you should do the ratzon haborei (assuming it won’t affect reward/punishment). Because that’s why you were created? So what – why should that make you have to or even want to do the ratzon Hashem? Unless you fall onto the love/hakaras hatov argument. Which is back where we started. And this is all besides for the question of why you should love/have gratitude to Hashem. Maybe you’re a bad person if you don’t. But why shouldn’t you be a bad person?
October 29, 2014 8:02 pm at 8:02 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090161Patur Aval AssurParticipantYekke2:
It’s interesting, because I opened this thread by saying that this was inspired by a discussion I was having with someone and it happens to be that that discussion was itself a tangent of the original discussion in which I argued that there is no mechayev for morality. You seem to agree with me on that; you just feel that once G-d made his ratzon known to us, there is an inherent value in adhering to it. To which I ask “why?”
Catch Yourself:
You’re not explaining why that should be so.
October 29, 2014 7:55 pm at 7:55 pm in reply to: NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title #1147520Patur Aval AssurParticipantI actually shlugged myself up miney ubey in my last post.
October 29, 2014 7:53 pm at 7:53 pm in reply to: Im Going to Uman.I will pray for you there. #1038481Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
I was under the impression that you didn’t like that logic.
October 29, 2014 7:15 pm at 7:15 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090157Patur Aval AssurParticipantThe first “higher” in my immediately preceding post was a mistake.
October 29, 2014 7:12 pm at 7:12 pm in reply to: NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title #1147518Patur Aval AssurParticipantYekke2:
Fair question. (By the way I assume that when you wrote “the means to the end” you meant the opposite.)
If I may venture into what may very well be ??????? ?? ???:
Perhaps the quest for immortality is not inherently good or bad. It depends why you want to conquer death. Someone who wants to conquer death for the proper reasons (whatever they might be) would not so via horcruxes since it involves murder. Perforce, one who makes horcruxes is attempting to conquer death for the wrong reasons which is indeed something which should not be spoken of. Dumbledore, though he didn’t use horcruxes, knew himself that he was doing it for the wrong reasons, hence he was no better than Voldemort.
I realize this is a tremendously dochek answer and it doesn’t even really explain why a horcrux would be the “wickedest of magical inventions”. However, despite the fact that creating a horcrux would not be inherently any worse than any other ways of conquering death, it could still make sense that “we shall not speak nor give direction”, in that the assumption is that generally speaking, the creation of a horcrux is the only practical way to conquer death (i.e. anyone can do it), so by censoring he instruction manual, you can effectively prevent almost everyone from conquering death.
October 29, 2014 6:56 pm at 6:56 pm in reply to: Why Can't Women Get Modern Smicha and Become Rabbis? #1071737Patur Aval AssurParticipantari-free:
Interesting point which can be a discussion in its own right. But for the purposes of this thread let’s assume that a woman has a father/husband who can be her Rebbe.
October 29, 2014 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm in reply to: For PAA and Randomex to Jokingly Argue about Reading All CR Threads and Post (or something like that #1038605Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex, did you see the retraction I issued?
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/good-jokes/page/34#post-542147
October 29, 2014 6:46 pm at 6:46 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090152Patur Aval AssurParticipantI posted my previous response before some of the other posts were up.
Haleivi:
That doesn’t explain why you shouldn’t make the reward your focus.
Gavra:
We might finally be getting somewhere. But why should you care about a higher G-d’s higher purpose?
Patur Aval AssurParticipantToi:
I was actually thinking of bringing that up, so now that you did, allow me to disagree with you. I don’t think the person’s response has to do with the person’s gender; it has to do with whether the person has experience learning gemara. Those who have experience have already been programmed to ask not those types of questions. Those who don’t have experience haven’t been programmed. In fact if you would teach that gemara to fifth grade boys (or in whichever grade they start learning gemara) I would be surprised if nobody asked that question. Actually, I would think that they are not thinking if they didn’t ask that question.
(For those who are wondering what in the world this is about, see:
October 29, 2014 5:53 pm at 5:53 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090149Patur Aval AssurParticipantOk, maybe I’m not being clear because I still think no one is getting my point. So far it seems that there have been three reasons mentioned for why you should serve Hashem ??? ?? ??? ???? ???:
1) You will get more schar.
2) You will feel good.
3) It is simply the right thing to do.
My response to number one is that it is ipso facto ?? ??? ???? ???.
My response to number two is that then there is no inherent ideal of serving Hashem ??? ?? ??? ???? ???; it is simply a way for you to get a good feeling. Thus, if you don’t have that feeling, or you don’t care about it, you shouldn’t bother to serve Hashem in this way.
My response to number three is to question what inherent value there is in doing the “right thing”. If the response to that will be “because G-d said so” then I will question what the inherent value of listening to G-d is.
October 29, 2014 4:50 pm at 4:50 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090144Patur Aval AssurParticipantAnd why should you want to fulfill the purpose for which this earth was created?
Patur Aval AssurParticipantSome sources which I’ve quoted previously:
Piskei Riaz SotahPerek 1 Halacha 2:
??”? ???? ???? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??’ ?????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ??????? ??????? ?????’ ?
Piskei Riaz SotahPerek 1 Halacha 2:
????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ??
Maharil Teshuvos Chadashos siman 45:
??? ???? ?? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????”? ????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ????’ ????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????
Perisha Y.D. 246:
??? ?? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?? ?????
Patur Aval AssurParticipantLior:
However you want.
October 29, 2014 4:04 pm at 4:04 pm in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090141Patur Aval AssurParticipantI still don’t see how anyone answered the question. What inherent value is there in doing Hashem’s will? If it’s just for you to feel good about yourself, then it is purely the choice of the worshiper to decide whether he wants to get that feeling, and there would be nothing wrong if he decides not to. And if he doesn’t feel good about loving Hashem then again there would be no reason to serve ??? ?? ??? ???? ???. If the answer is as DaasYochid said (which I included in my original question), that you get more schar for doing it ??? ?? ??? ???? ???, then the only reason to do so is to get more schar in which case it is actually ?? ??? ???? ???.
October 29, 2014 5:22 am at 5:22 am in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090136Patur Aval AssurParticipantSo now you are saying that it has nothing to do with the fact that Hashem wants it; it’s simply that you’ll get a good feeling by serving Hashem from ahavah. So if someone decides that he doesn’t want to serve Hashem out of ahavah, it’s no issue whatsoever – he just won’t get that feeling.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantMaybe the term apikorsim is being used by different people to mean different things. The Rambam in the third perek of hilchos teshuva lists the different categories of apikorsim. I assume that if a secular zionists fall under any of those categories then religious zionists will agree that the secular zionists are apikorsim. If they don’t fall under any of those categories then in what sense are they apikorsim? Now once we agree on whether or not they are apikorsim, it simply becomes a shailah as to whether the benefit of davening at the kotel is valued more or less than ??? ????? ?? ?????????? which is a very general question with ostensibly no relevance to zionism.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantOk, so there is a machlokes how to learn a gemara in Kesubos. And it can have halachic ramifications. How is that different than any other gemara where there is a machlokes?
As to the kotel issue, I assume you are referring to the secular zionists. Now if they in fact did things which made them apikorsim, I don’t think a religious zionist would disagree that the secular zionist was an apikorus. So the issue is obviously whether one should avoid gong to the Kotel since it will ???? ?? ??????????. Which is another individual machlokes which has nothing to do with Zionism.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantMy question is why there is such an ideological rift over an issue that has no current relevancy.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantRandomex:
So our whole interaction started when you made this joke:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/good-jokes/page/32#post-535269 and I pointed out that it was at odds with a different version of the joke that had previously been posted:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/mixed-gym#post-455405
Well I have to retract my objection because it turns out that there was another version of the joke already posted:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/worst-joke-contest/page/3#post-334455 , by the same person, which accords with neither of the two other versions, and thus that poster’s versions lose their credibility.
October 29, 2014 1:12 am at 1:12 am in reply to: Theological Conundrum (read at your own risk) #1090134Patur Aval AssurParticipantSo to answer my question you would have to explain what the inherent value in listening to ???”? is and why that value would not make it ?? ??? ???? ???.
Patur Aval AssurParticipantAnd the relevance of that to my question is…
-
AuthorPosts