User talk:PuckSmith/Archive 2005-12

'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 2005-12-17 and 2005-12-31.

Post replies to talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sycthos 04:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hello
Yes, I've decided to become a Userbox thief. Thanks for making that one! --Hermgirl 11:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Poem
Thanks, Puck! I wish I could take full credit for that poem, but alas, I could not. It was "borrowed" (with permission) from a friend of mine. However, I'll still gladly accept the title of uber-geek. :)  Take care.   -- Shinmawa 22:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Gematria
I know you probably put a bit of work into the table on Gematria so I thought I talk to you first. I'd like add the values for the finals. To be consistent the Hebrew characters that have finals should also be reversed so that there is no confusion by having something like |50,700|Nun|נ,ן| which could mistakenly interpreted to give the final a value of 50 rather than 700. I might also add a bit of text to explain that the finals have a different value and perhaps even mention that a when they are larger than the adjacent letter it is expressing thousands. Basically I'd just like to jazz the thing up a bit. I am currently unemployed so I have nothing but time to do things like this. What say you? < Puck 08:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Final Hebrew letters having a different Gematria value is a relatively late, and not a universally accepted system. Therefore, you should only add it as a separate table, and mention the fact that this use is limited to specific sources. Traditional Talmudic Gematria does not distinguish between כ, ך; מ, ם; etc. Owen&times; &#9742;  13:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to have a single table and an explanation. If the caveats you mentioned are covered I think it could clear enough how it is applied.  I'm trying to deal with similar issues on the Tree of life (Kabbalah) page.  I think it is important to distinguish the different usages, but they all need to be covered.  I'll try and sandbox something on my user page and let you take a look at it before I start changing things willy-nilly. < Puck 14:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds fair, I'll take a look at it as soon as you're ready. As long as we can clearly distinguish between the Kabbalistic gematria and the original Talmudic one, we should be fine. By the way, you may also want to take a look at Tikkun olam, which has been rewritten from scratch in the last few days; some of the older material was lost in the rewrite, and perhaps should be restored. It's a pleasure working with editors like you! Owen&times; &#9742;  15:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I took a quick look at the draft on your user page; looks very good! !חזק ואמץ Owen&times;  &#9742;  02:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Which one did you see? The single table or as it exists now?  I wasn't really satisfied with the single table because it was too wide at high resolutions.  As it stands now I'm thinking of changing the term non-Talmudic to Kabbalistic or possibly non-Talmudic Kabbalistic.  Do you have a preference?  Also, I'm glad you pointed out the difference.  I was aware that some Talmudists dismiss Kabbalah as syncretism if not outright Gnosticism, but I didn't know this facit of gematria was one of the distinctions.  Do you have a source for more information on this?  I like to squash my own ignorance as soon as it rears its head.  My own studies of Kabbalah are from a decidedly non-Jewish perspective, but I feel understanding the traditional form is requisit for understanding how it has developed since it escaped from it's original jelously guarded obscurity.  I'm posting this on you page and mine since I don't know if you have a watch set on mine.  I'm a newbie and I'm wondering what the convention for talk pages are.  It seems to me if we only posted our responses to each others page some else could be totally baffled by only seeing half the conversation.  On the other hand posting the entire thread in both places seems a rediculous waste of resources.  How is this normally done?  Only on the talk page of the article in question perhaps?  If I was mistaken to take this conversation to our pages rather keeping on Gematria I think it might be a good idea to move it back there because this conversation might be of interest to others who read that page. < Puck 02:42, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The latest one looks best. And I think Kabbalistic is more accurate than non-Talmudic in this case. I don't have any good reference material I can recommend. I left all of what I had behind when I moved to Canada, and it was all in Hebrew anyway, which may be a stretch for you, I guess... There is no WP standard as to where to keep these conversation threads. Many people just post their reply on the listener's talk page, and not worry about continuity. I usually copy and repost it back to my own talk page, especially if it's something worth keeping. I wouldn't worry about wasting space; these conversations don't add up to that much, as far as database storage is concerned. Owen&times;  &#9742;  03:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * "I don't have any good reference material I can recommend. I left all of what I had behind when I moved to Canada, and it was all in Hebrew anyway, which may be a stretch for you, I guess..."


 * Yes it could be. I recently tried for a literal translation of Leviticus 16:8. I came up with this "Give Aaron of two hairies lots, lot one for YHVH, lot one for Azazel." It only took me about 6 hours. :)  Except for a copy of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, all my translation resources are on line.  Most of them are mentioned in the External Links section on the Gematria page, though I had already discovered them myself.  I don't know if you're aware of this one or not, but it has been very helpful for me. Westminster Leningrad Codex It has the entire Tanach in Unicode Hebrew, pointed or unpointed, and can show which of the J,E, P and R texts apply to a given passage.  In conjunction with some of the other translation tools on line it is a very good resource.  If I weren't so impious and didn't love bacon it would be very tempting to convert to Judaism and spend the rest of my life studying the Torah and Kabbalah.  Well, it's at least nice to think about it and I think I'd look really good in one of those big flat brimmed cowboy hats.  I've really enjoyed working with you and I appreciate the feedback. < Puck 04:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Good job! The best Bible translation I found is http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm; I checked some of the trickier passages for translation, such as Song of Solomon, and this group of scholars has done an amazing job. Their translation of Leviticus 16:8 is, and Aaron is to cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and one lot for Azazel., so you weren't too far off... Let me know if you need any other Hebrew or Judaism related help. Owen&times;  &#9742;  14:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Is there a book?
First I want to thank you for your help. Also I've been glancing at some of the posts here and randomly trying to follow so of the disputes across various talk pages. Geeze, how do you put up with it? You have the patience of a saint and I'm pretty sure I would never want to be an admin here. I probably either get an ulcer or start contemplating suicide or mass murder. Hats off to you.

Now, my new question: does there exist a gematria of the Tanach or the Torah? By this I mean has anyone ever compiled a numerical index of either? Something where you could look  up the value of a given word and see all the other words in the text that equal that value? I have seen a few partial ones online and there are books like Liber 777, Israel Regardie's 777 and Other Qabalistic Writings of Aleister Crowely, but they are limited and obviously go beyond the scope of a strictly scriptural reference. I am working on one of my own, but I just recently turned 50. Somehow I doubt I'll ever get it finished. :) So, is there such a thing? < Puck 14:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Funny coincidence... 15 years ago I actually wrote a Pascal program to do exactly that. You'd give it a gematria value, and it would scan the Tanach and display all the words, verses, or verse fragments that add up to that value. It probably sits somewhere in my 5.25" floppy archive... I doubt it would work on a Windows machine. It was designed purely for DOS. Shouldn't be too difficult to write a new one, though. For the verse fragments you have to be careful to use an O(N) algorithm rather than an O(N^2), so the search takes seconds rather than days. One tricky part I had to watch was to avoid summing up gematria for text containing God's name, since the spelling of His name is essentially an alias for His real name. At the time, running on a 16MHz 286, a search would take a second or two. It shouldn't be too hard to find a book or online source for Tanach gematria. Bar-Ilan University has a whole department dedicated to studies of this sort, I'm sure they've published some tools. Let me know what you find. Owen&times; &#9742;  15:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 15 years ago I actually wrote a Pascal program to do exactly that... Shouldn't be too difficult to write a new one, though.


 * Easy for you to say. I'd love to get ahold of the data set.  I've tried to find a Tanach or Torah in the form of a flat file or other raw format so I could do just what you describe.  I think the Westminster Leningrad Codex I downloaded might work, but my XML skill are limited at best.  Despite what I say here, I think my best choice would be  Bar-Ilan's Responsa, but at $599.00 it's a might pricey, at least in my current unemployed state.  Maybe to celebrate getting a new job, but till then I think I might get Torah Gematrias, it's only $19.00 and may do just what I want at this point.  It is limited to the Torah, but it's not like that's not enough to keep a fellow busy for several lifetimes.  In the mean time it's back to my spreadsheet.  Thanks for the tip on Bar-Ilan. <Puck 17:53, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Gematria of final values
Hey! You moved it. :)

Anyway, I found a bit of information about the question I had about sources for the distinction between the Talmudic uses (or lack of them) for the different values of the final forms. I stumbled across a web site called askmoses.com (that's gotta be at least a little blasphemous) and posed the question to them. It took a couple of e-mails before they finally understood what I was asking, but here is what I got:


 * This additional kind of values of the final letters can be found in Rashi's explanation of the Talmud in tractate Sukah 52b. Therefore it would seem to date back to at least Rashi's time, if not the period of the Talmud. See the Aruch on the Hebrew letters ATBaCh.


 * On the other hand there is an opinion that interprets Rashi differently than the printed Rashi in our Talmud. See the Maharshal on this Rashi, and see also the emendation of the BaCh on this Rashi.

It's about as clear as mud to me, but I though you might be interested in it. I'm going to be adding this to my notes for a possible History of Kabbalah article and I'm off to see what I can find out about Rashi.

Translation request
''Perhaps you could help me translate a couple of sentences. How would one say:''

1) I will enter and leave.

2) Love is the law. (I'm looking for a word that would be the equivalent of the Greek Agape.)

BTW, I just picked up a copy of Kabbalah,'' by Gershom Scholem. It looks to be a good general overview of the history and development of Kabbalah. I have glanced at portions of some of his other books, but they were sort of overwhelming in their scope. This one is only 450 pages so it looks to be more digestible for a single volume survey.''


 * Not sure what Agape means, but here is what I got:
 * 1) אכנס ואצא
 * 2) אהבה היא החוק
 * I'll need more context for a proper translation. Hope this helps. Owen&times; &#9742;  01:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Not sure what Agape means...
 * Agape. I'm using it in the sense of the self-sacrificing love... all should have for each other.


 * I'll need more context for a proper translation.


 * I'll do my best without making myself seem like too much of a crazy man.


 * Love is the Law is a phrase from The Book of the Law. It is part of a formal greeting Thelemites use when they meet each other and also functions as the principle credo of Thelema.  In its entirety it is in the form of a call and response:


 * Call: Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law
 * Response: Love is the law, love under will.


 * In Greek gematria the words will and love--θέλημα and Αγάπη--both have the value of 93. Hence the userbox on my user page here.  Thelemites often just greet each other by saying "93."  It takes a lot less time and makes us seem mysterious to outsiders. I mean what's the point of being part of a secret occult religious order if you can't be a little mysterious?


 * At any rate, I have a tattoo that looks something like this:

θέλημα

--

Αγάπη


 * It expresses the idea of Love under Will. I am considering getting another that says Love is the Law, but I want to get it in Hebrew because while many Thelemites profess to be Qabalists few actually bother to learn even the rudiments of the Hebrew alphabet, a concept stressed in one of the key expositions on Thelemic Hermetic Qabalah, QBL or The Bride's Reception, especially in Chapter II, where the author stresses the value of memorization in internalizing the Tree of Life. I want to do a bit of good natured rubbing-it-in-the-face of my fellow Thelemites when they have to ask what the tattoo means.  I mean I spent several weeks learning the Hebrew alphabet to the extent that I can draw from memory a Kircher style tree with the names of the Sephiroth and the paths in Hebrew and I am but a novice.  Many supposed advanced degree Thelemites will make a show of expounding on the deep Qabalistic meaning of the Thoth Tarot, but if they see the expression  אין סוף אור a look comes over their face as if they were trying to read Arabic transliterated in Chinese.  It is perhaps small-minded of me, but I am only human and I enjoy puncturing smugness, even in people whom I otherwise respect.


 * Wow! You asked for context and got a rant instead.


 * As to the phrase I will enter and leave, In the first chapter of Kabbalah, Gershom Scholem says one of the terms used for Kabbalists was "inon de-allu u-nefaku ('those who have entered and left, i.e., unharmed') after Hagigah 14b." It is typical for Thelemites to take on a magickal motto when they are intitiated into groups like the O.T.O.--this link is a bit more entertaining--or the A∴A∴  When Aleister Crowley was intiated into The Golden Dawn he took on the name Perdurabo, which means I will endure (to the end).  I am pursuing a Minerval degree with a local O.T.O. body and I have been pondering what motto I would choose for myself.  At this point I am thinking I will enter and leave, in the sense Scholem was describing, is an accurate representation of my aspirations.


 * Now that I have bent your ear and probably demonstrated the fragility of my grasp on reality, I hope I have conveyed the context of my request. < Puck 06:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering whether "מסירות", meaning devotion or dedication may be a better word than "אהבה". An older alternative is קדושה which today means holiness, but in Leviticus also meant dedication. The verb קדש, which is the root of that word, originally meant allocate or assign (and still has that meaning in Arabic). So in the original sense of Leviticus, to be holy means to be allocated or assign oneself to the Work of God. Owen&times; &#9742;  15:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments solicited
If you get a chance I'd appreciate your comments and critique of this draft of my modest first attempt at writing an article from scratch. I'd be happy to hear whatever you might have to say about the content and format. Please respond here or on the talk page of the article. Thanks. <Puck 12:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I fixed some minor typos/cut-and-paste mistakes you had in the table. Hope I caught them all... otherwise, looks good! Owen&times; &#9742;  14:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * When the page is ready, you should probably move it (along with its Talk page) rather than cut-and-paste, to preserve the full history. I think the final page should be named with a lowercase "table", for consistency with other articles. Owen&times; &#9742;  16:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the sharp eyes. I originally had Alpeh in every row as well as other cut and pastes to fill cells while working on the format of the table.  By the time I was done I couldn't actually read what as there, just what I was expecting to see.  There are still some funny wrapping issues in when I look at it with Opera or at lower screen resolutions with Firefox and IE.  Once I tweak it for that it should be ready to go.  I'm hoping to do a Kabbalah timeline article, but that will take some time.  I'm collecting references as I work my way through Scholem's book.  I think seperate non-Judiac Kabbalah articles will help prevent some of the confusion and rancor that seems to accompany the topic in several places on Wkipedia.  Hope you don't mind if I use your proofing services in the future. <Puck 19:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

This thread will probably make more sense if you also refer to Talk:Mathers table <Puck 01:37, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Yet another translation request
''This is from Talk:Latin

I would appreciate a Latin rendering of "I will enter and leave" in the sense of a person stating an intention such as "I will go into that room and then I will exit it." TIA. < Puck 10:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Inibo et exibo would work. -Silence 11:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you. < Puck 11:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)