“Every time I see his face, hear his voice, or read about yet another asinine thing he’s done, it makes me want to scream,” Larry yelled at the TV screen.
“You need to keep your wits about you,” Sandy said. “Sometimes you’re too obdurate when it comes to you politics. You need to try to see things through a different prism.”
Larry sighed. “If you weren’t such a sexy, sultry broad, I’d dump you.”
Written for Sammi Cox’s Weekend Writing Prompt, where the word is “asinine” and we must use exactly 74 words.
Also for these daily prompts: Fandango’s One-Word Challenge (scream), Your Daily Word Prompt (obdurate), Ragtag Daily Prompt (prism), and Word of the Day (sultry).
This, That, and The Other 
Yep. Tell it like it is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Politics have broken up quite a few relationships
LikeLiked by 1 person
DISMANTLING Sicko Charlie Kirk’s [Asinine] Lies About Breonna Taylor
LikeLike
Ode of Deterioration Unto Detritus
Charlie Kirk of Turning Points,
an embarrassment for the USA
…is but one example…
of fools today.
Decades of conservatism
have led us all to this
where there used to be
a pretense that principles exist.
Were there ever leaders,
never mind the following masses,
who cared about our country
and weren’t self-absorbed asses?
They used to have to argue
for some good here and there.
Now they’re confident you’ll
propagate their crap everywhere.
You’re sick enough of soul
so devotedly asinine
you love mammon over many
and tousle others to get yourself in line.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t know you were I to writing poetry. Very good!
LikeLike
Thank you! It’s been a while.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, that word prompt definitely fits him!
LikeLiked by 1 person
A Response to The Hierarchy of Halachah by R. Gidon Rothstein
“The top of the pyramid, certainly, are Biblical commandments,… R. Elazar in Gittin 60b, anything the Rabbis derived based on the Thirteen Middot, the thirteen principles of proper inference, counts as Written Law.”
No. To cherry pick the logical middot of Rabbi Yishmael and ignore the logical middot developed by Rabbis Akiva and Yossi Haglili totally distorts the k’vanna and correct intent of R. Elazar – as mentioned above. The 13 middot דאורייתא refers directly to the middot of Oral Torah logic, known as Torah Sh’Baal Peh. The Midrashim tell the story of Am Yisroel approaching Aaron, just prior to the sin of the Golden Calf. They declared, Moshe has died. Who will reveal to us the rest of the Torah?
Dof ג of tractate Avoda Zara explicitly teaches that the Goyim did not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Xtianity in all its theologies, Creeds, and Dogmas preaches the belief system, commonly known as “the 10 Commandments”. But a simple examination of any Xtian biblical translation of the Hebrew T’NaCH, reveals that every Xtian biblical translation commits the identical error made by Aaron who translated the Name of HaShem, revealed in the 1st Commandment of Sinai, with the word אלהים. The Xtian biblical translations, one and all – together with the koran, both translate the Name of HaShem into other words. The avoda zara of this error, the Name of HaShem lives as the Spirit of Life – the Name its not a word. The opening Gospel of John explicitly falls upon the sword of this grievous error. The Spirit of HaShem breathed the Name into clay, and transformed this clay unto Adam HaReshon.
R. Elazar therefore refers to the 13 middot which Moshe the prophet heard on Yom Kippor, 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf. At Sinai Israel accepted the opening first 2 Commandments. They stopped, and thereafter demanded from Moshe that he ascend Sinai and receive the rest of the Torah. Hence at the time of the avoda zara of the Golden Calf, Israel had accepted only the opening first TWO COMMANDMENTS. Logic stands upon the יסוד of Order: the 13 middot ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון וכו establish an order of logic, unique and completely different than the logic systems which Plato and Aristotle developed. This Oral Torah logic system, from it and this Oral Torah alone did Moshe the prophet derive 611 commandments as this prophet’s primary commentary to the Torah which Israel accepted at Sinai. After Moshe descended from Mt. Horev (to distinguish the revelation of the Oral Torah from the revelation of the opening first 2 commandments at Mt. “Sinai” – the same identical physical mountain), Moshe, our teacher, over the span of his life, taught the 611 commandments he derived – based upon the logic of the 13 middot – to the nation of Israel.
“We follow R. Yohanan who disagreed, but R. Eli’ezer’s idea has a bit of life in the case of a gezerah shavah, where tradition understands the laws of one area [that they can] apply to another [area of the Torah] as well, based on the Torah using the same word in the two places. Because the Gemara rules out coming up with a gezerah shavah on one’s own, [the sages] say [that all the 13 middot of rabbi Yishmael, that] they are all received tradition, Peri Megadim thinks they count as explicitly written in the Torah.”
No. This error distorts the intent of the Sha’s Bavli completely. Rashi declared that we can only employ of Rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot the last one – known as the כל שכן. The Baali Tosafot challenge this ruling. The problem with this טיפש reading of Rashi … Rashi himself on his commentary to the T’NaCH made his own gezerah shavah! To understand the Rashi comment requires learning his p’shat within the context of how it explains the Gemara itself. Rav Ashi sealed the Sha’s Bavli, based upon the precedents of Rabbi Yechuda who sealed the Mishna and the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah who sealed the T’NaCH. Why did the Sages of Israel seal these Primary Sources of Torah faith?
This action of sealing the Primary Sources of Torah faith, established the masoretic texts, as the eternal inheritance of the Cohen nation of Israel. No one generation possesses a better masoret than possess later generations of כלל ישראל. This seems to clash with Rashi’s p’shat of ‘the descending generations’! No – not at all if a person does not fall and accept a טיפש פשט. The Gemara of ברכות teaches the Aggaditah of a man, after having an argument with his wife, he leaves his house and sleeps in a cemetery. This Aggaditah concludes with a Great Rav being informed that he will soon die, but that the Yeshiva in the world to come anxiously awaits his arrival.
As a woven garment has both weft threads together with the opposing woof threads, the entire Sha’s Bavli has halacha opposed and contrasted by aggadita. Rabbi Akiva taught the Kabbala known as פרדס. All the rabbis within the Sha’s Bavli exist as talmidim of Rabbi Akiva on the kabbala of פרדס. (The term kabbala has become confused as a result of the mysticism developed during the Middle Ages, following the War Crime where barbaric Goyim burned all the Talmud manuscripts found in France in the year 1242). The פרדס system explains the 13 middot logic revelation which Moshe the Prophet orally heard at Mt. Horev on Yom Kippur – 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf. The “4 rivers” (a reference to the opening story of Creation) of the Oral Torah ‘Horev revelation’, the פרדס kabbalah of Rabbi Akiva, branch off into pairs, comparable to Adam and Chava. Drosh & P’shat affix themselves to the Aggadita. While Remiz & Sod do the exact same with halacha.
This פרדס kabbala teaches how to correctly learn the whole of the Sha’s Bavli. Just as a garment gets destroyed if the woof and weft get disentangled, their weave ceases to exist, so too and כל שכן the halacha and aggadita. Rav Ashi & Rav Ravina sealed the Sha’s Bavli, the masoret of כלל ישראל for all eternity. And herein explains the Rashi commentary upon having only permission to employ the middah of ‘how much more so’, of Rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot. This explanation removes the dispute between Rashi and the Baali Tosafot on this score. Since Rav Ashi & Rav Ravina sealed the Sha’s, making the Bavli one of the Primary Sources primary masoret of Israel. Therefore employment of the כל שכן middah of logic – a person learns from one source in the sealed masoret and through the כל שכן school of rabbinic logic, later generations can make a depth comparison and contrast to other Gemaras within the sealed masoret. The Talmud, stands as the Common Law legal system of Judea. And Common Law stands on the יסוד of precedents! The clash with Rashi’s ‘diminishing/descending generations’ comment, in O’lam Ha’zeh the bnai brit Cohen nation keeps mitzvot. Visit a cemetery and we conceal our tzitzit so as not shame the dead, who cannot observe mitzvot in O’lam Ha’ba. What thrives in O’lam Ha’ba that has no mitzvot observance? Wisdom.
The תרי”ג commandments (Commandments from the Torah, mitzvot from the Prophets, and halachot from the rabbis. Something akin to the steps required to turn wheat or barely from a raw grain into bread.),have 3 basic divisions – stand and do, sit and do not do, and stand and do time oriented Commandments. Similar to the blowing of the Shofar, (as metal sharpens metal, the k’vanna of commandments learns from other commandments) by which the Sha’s teaches how to pronounce the Spirit of the Name of HaShem which lives within our hearts! The Gemara of ברכות teaches the כלל, a man should da’aven from a fixed מקום. The language of מקום confused the Reshonim and Auchronim scholars. מקום by the sh’itta of how my Rav taught me to learn, exists as a רמז (words within words) of the Name of HaShem. Tefilla, not da’avened in an external physical location, not in a bet knesset – nor in a person’s private home. But rather within our hearts – this k’vanna learns from the oath brit which Avram Avinu swore at the brit cut between the pieces; Goyim pray to their Gods who dwell in the Heavens; Yidden da’aven tefilla – a dedication of tohor middot unto HaShem – within our hearts. Within our hearts, HaShem judges the disputes between the Yatzir tohor HaTov from the Yatzir tuma HaRah). For this reason the Torah places the primary pre-condition upon doing avodat HaShem, this pre-condition fundamentally requires tohora. All generations of bnai brit have an obligation to learn and differentiate between tohor middot from other tohor middot. Failure to “understand (distinguish between like and like) tohor middot from one another means that the tuma Yatzir HaRah can easily deceive the tohor Yatzir YaTov.
Therefore the explanation of Rashi’s comment on the descending generations … positive and negative commandments do not require k’vanna. Not so stand and do time oriented commandments – which require k’vanna. What k’vanna does this 3rd type of commandment require? To descend the wisdom learned in O’lam Ha’Bah unto the commandment observant Yidden living today in O’lam Ha’Zeh. The basic k’vanna of tefilla for example: a person dedicates a “defined” tohor middah or middot unto HaShem – comparable to the dedication of a korban. Hence tefillah stands in the place of korbanot!
To dedicate a tohor middah unto HaShem, who resides not in the Heavens above, but rather within our hearts, most essentially requires the Cohen make the most basic הבדלה of separating the Name of HaShem – a Spirit and not a word – from all the other spoken words within the Shemone Esri tefilla! Pronouncing the Spirit of the Name from within our hearts, (tefilla a matter of the heart), learns from blowing the Shofar on Yom HaDin upon the Brit. The 3 note types required to accomplish the mitzva of shofar learn from the 3 most basic divisions of the תרי”ג commandments. Herein explains the k’vanna of da’avening from a “fixed מקום”, as taught in the Gemara of ברכות. A person with k’vanna affixes positive, negative, and positive time oriented commandments to how he blows his breath when he pronounces the Spirit of the Name from within his heart.
Learning Sha’s based upon the פרדס kabbala taught by Rabbi Akiva and all his talmidim as found in the Sha’s Yerushalmi and Bavli and Midrashim requires דרך ארץ. Just as a man does not divorce his wife without giving back to her O’lam HaBah soul through the metzva of ‘get’, (a man does the mitzva of קידושין when he dedicates the future born children conceived and born into this world due to קידושין, like as Avram likewise did at the brit cut between the pieces), so too and in similar fashion, its forbidden to divorce Halacha from its Aggadita ‘married couple’, like as did the Rambam code of halacha which perverted the definition of halacha. His Code of Law destroyed the intimate marital relationship between aggadic mussar – as derived through דרוש ופשט – with halachic ritual observance – as derived through רמז וסוד.
The Rambam code of law extinguished the lights of Hanukkah, where our fore fathers fought a Civil War, and thereafter dedicated to only employ the Oral Torah logic system by which to interpret the Written Torah. We observe halachot NOT because the Shulkan Aruch organized his halacha into his famous code of law. RATHER we observe and keep halachot, based upon the mussar יסודי of experiencing the ‘finger of HaShem’ within our lives, as commanded by prophetic mussar, by affixing this prophetic mussar unto halachot ritual observances. Herein explain how to correctly learn and understand the whole of the masoret of Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur.
LikeLike
I recently heard (was reminded) that Aristotle didn’t like the idea of recording conversation, principles, or philosophy; he preferred that interaction continue rather than being fossilized. His student Plato, however, very much did.
Jefferson may have been a little like Aristotle; he said that something even as basic as a Constitution (of the United States) would become tyranny if carried on too long (beyond something like nineteen years) without change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I meant Socrates where I said Aristotle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Plato “knew” Aristotle. The ancient Greeks very much into pedophilia. Socrates teacher of Plato and Plato the teacher of Aristotle.
LikeLike
My point [one point] was that Plato learned from Socrates (and, yes, Aristotle from Plato), but not what Socrates wanted “learned.”
Good thing I wanted to post something else, or I would’ve missed what you had posted for a response… later yesterday.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Aristotle didn’t like the idea of recording conversation, principles, or philosophy; he preferred that interaction continue rather than being fossilized.” What your 2nd post indicates to me that Aristotle favored the Socratic method; a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presuppositions.
I do not know. Studied while in college classic Greek logic. The professor never brought up the point you raised. Aristotle’s logic has a mathematics base. Based upon the 3 part syllogism; a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on exactly two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true. In a form, defined by Aristotle, from the combination of a general statement and a specific statement, a conclusion is deduced.
The jump from Aristotle to Jefferson – perhaps, again I do not know. The Church in the early middle ages with the rediscovery of Ancient Greece philosophy, made by the Muslim armies conquering Xtian Spain, these armies discovered stashed away in Xtian monasteries the scholastic summa codifications. These codes based themselves on something akin to Forensic science. Forensic science, the application of science to criminal and civil laws, mainly—on the criminal side—during criminal investigation, as governed by the legal standards of admissible evidence and criminal procedure. Jefferson oppose the vertical court system which defines all European courts to this day. No European court ever forced the church to stand trail for war crimes committed against humanity.
Jefferson instituted the Bill of Rights, 1st ten Amendments to the Constitution. The Constitutional Amendments addressed the way to change the Written Constitution.
LikeLike
I don’t normally check in with these two people, but [I wondered why they were talking with each other] the differentiation on rational and empirical (in their views) was somewhat fascinating to observe; especially Fry’s efforts here.
An Atheist in the Realm of Myth | Stephen Fry – Jordan B Peterson Podcast …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry got lost, who exactly does: “I don’t normally check in with these two people”?
LikeLike
Yeah, well…
… since they’re somewhat famous and influential, I see what’s up in that playground (or whatever I shall call it) once in a while. I went through a little “moment” when I was checking Jordan out somewhat recently (when I haven’t at all before) when he came back on the scene after hiding out for a while (a couple years or so); was finding out what is apparently influencing a lot of young men (somewhat sadly). Anyway, Frye is not going to just be on board (even though I know hardly anything of him except that Christians have, not infrequently, complained about him for being atheist).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry I lost track of this conversation, You obviously switched back to your narrative: by rights its your blog. Thank You.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s funny, I suppose; that you would say I “switched back” to my “narrative.” You could’ve taken a shot at listening and seeing how it may relate to some ideas you brought up. I was trying to engage you in conversation.
For what it’s worth (and for the record), no — I wasn’t saying Aristotle wanted to be like Socrates. (He may have thought he wanted to be, as he was studying under a purported student of his.) I didn’t mean to name Aristotle at all; tried to clear that mistake with the follow-up correction.
Fandango is a patient man.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank You for your patience. If you write something where I fail to make the required logical jump. I try to immediately report back to you so we can sit on the same page with mutual clarity. 🙂
LikeLike
No, actually, it’s MY blog. But I, too, lost track of this conversation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alturnatives to the 2 State “Solution”.
Simply oppose the two state political theory. All Arabs countries, (1 and all) opposed the UN proposed 2 state solution of 1947. The Arabs lost their ensuing wars to throw the Jews into the Sea. But the UN made another proposition: this the 2nd GA & Security Council UN suggestion: A Federation of States within a single Republic. A single Arab state within the Union of the Israeli Republic of states. Obviously the Jewish state has a majority of Jewish States, but permits a minority of one Arab state within the boundaries of this Middle East Republic.
LikeLike