we're all stories in the end @magicofthepen - Tumblr Blog

Posts

Here’s a tag directory for my blog! (Not every fandom on this list is something I’m currently into – I’ve included old fandoms if I have a lot of posts in the tag.)

main fandoms

You'll find a mix of posts on this blog, but Doctor Who and Big Finish's Gallifrey audios are the most frequently appearing fandoms. (The Gallifrey audios were my main fandom from 2019-2023 ish.)

Since fall 2023, my main fandom has been the October Daye series. I'm mostly flailing about these books in the Toby Daye Discord server, but I have a tag directory for all my Toby posts on this blog, and I now have a Toby sideblog @selkiesdownfall.

re: spoilers

If you follow me and haven’t listened to all of Gallifrey, I’m happy to tag for spoilers past the audio of your choice – just let me know! I will be tagging #gallifrey spoilers for War Room 3 posts.

my stuff

fic tag | ao3 account edits text posts answered asks fic talk

main fandoms

gallifrey audios tag directory october daye tag directory

(note: those are separate posts because I hit the link limit on this post.)

#tag directory #did a major update of the tag directory and it worked best to make a new post (plus the separate posts for fandoms with lots of tags)#this is how i learned you can only have 100 links in a post!

the-quasar-hero

Very generally speaking, when you see a black man in a piece of media, be it tv show, movie, video game, etc. there’s something you often see a lot of writers do. To go against the stereotype of black men (and black people in general) being dumb and lazy, you’ll see this black male character being smart and an achiever.

The Black Nerd. A common character type, the nerd will always be very interested in all things nerdy: science, video games, mathematics, etc. In an continued effort to combat stereotypes, the Black Nerd will be lack athleticism, probably being asthmatic (the nerdiest of conditions). The Black Nerd will dress smartly, suspenders and bow ties. They’ll always talk smart too, using proper English with complex words.

Now, I don’t have a problem with a black character being a nerd, indeed black people are a people; we aren’t all the same and we all have varying personalities. The problem I have is that too often we see a distinct disconnect between Blackness and the Black Nerd. The Black Nerd doesn’t listen to hip hop or rap, only classical music. The Black Nerd only has white friends, the only other black characters are into not nerdy stuff. The Black Nerd never ever uses AAVE at any time in any context.

And again I must say that Black people, not being a monolith, there are no hard fast rules to being Black. I’m more than sure there are Black people like what I’ve described above, I’m not saying it’s impossible; what I’m getting at is that the only Black Nerd we see. There are Black Nerds that play basketball, that bump Kendrick Lamar, and use AAVE since it’s an ever changing dialect. I’m just saying there’s no one way of being a nerd and no one way of being Black.

the-quasar-hero

Well @dumbey, seems we’re in similar boats

the-quasar-hero

This ain’t about him, this is about Black/Asian solidarity. Focus.

#general #media representation #q.

hope-for-the-planet

These pescatarian birds are directly exposed to PFAS contamination due to the island's position near the St. Lawrence Seaway.

Over fifty years of data show a peak in PFAS (also known as "forever chemicals") content in seabird eggs in the 90s, followed by a decrease as regulations went into effect. The most recent findings show a 70% decrease of most common PFAS.

While continued vigilance a regulation is needed, this data indicates that regulations are working to reduce PFAS concentrations in marine ecosystems.

sattarehi

Yes!!!! I did a review of literature on PFASs in human drinking water about half a year ago, and there is a lot of really good progress! Please celebrate this, please don't let this solution be forgotten (at least so quickly) as the ozone layer or acid rain.

We are making genuine progress! Producers are dramatically altering how much they use PFAS and how much gets released in effluent, but also there's a lot better understanding of how to remove PFAS from the environment!

Environmental problems CAN BE SOLVED.

the-no-dont-do-its

Genuine question. How do they disappear or reduce if they're meant to be persistent and forever chemicals

sattarehi

@the-no-dont-do-its very good question! firstly, it's important to point out that on their own, they don't. we have to actively apply methods to remove them from the environment. these methods are LARGELY based on adsorption, which is sort of like filtering except it involves the chemical getting stuck to something else (the adsorbing material).

you can think of this sort of like how water wicks into a paper towel. the water gets stuck to the paper because it's attracted to it via capillary forces, even though there's no chemical reaction going on.

the two main methods used are granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption and ion exchange (IX).

activated carbon is already pretty familiar to a lot of us; it's the stuff in a lot of replaceable water filters. the activated carbon has a huge internal surface area, and that allows for the fairly weak intermolecular forces to add up and allow contaminants to get "stuck" onto the surface of the activated carbon. over time, the activated carbon gets filled with junk, and you have to replace it.

GAC is essentially this, except that the activated carbon is granularized and produced in specific ways to maximize how much it attracts certain chemicals. this can be tuned because activated carbon gets its massive surface area from internal "pores", and various processes will change how large and frequent those pores are.

It's essentially a Russian nesting doll of pores, and controlling the size of the larger pores influences the permeability of the activated carbon and controlling the size of the smaller pores (micropores) influences what exactly is most attracted to the activated carbon.

However, GAC has a few major downsides:

It is not specific to PFAS. This is more of a mixed blessing because it was already frequently used and well understood, and the infrastructure for producing and distributing it already existed. However,

It loses effectiveness over time and must be replaced. This is a continued cost, albeit a low one, but this has one final major issue

As time goes on, the PFAS previously adsorbed to the activated carbon is desorbed and replaced by other things that have a higher affinity for the activated carbon.

As such, ion exchange (IX) was always very compelling. The whole point of it relies on the fact that PFAS molecules are predominantly made of two parts: An acid head group (either a carboxylic or sulfonic acid group) and a perfluorinated tail.

The head groups on the right are what become ionized—or specifically, deprotonated. A hydrogen leaves and is replaced with a metal cation (usually sodium), forming a PFAS salt (chemical meaning of salt!). These are much more soluble in water because of polarity reasons, and so the mobile PFAS molecules are almost always in that salt form.

By passing through these PFAS salts through a permeable polymer matrix that has (1) numerous positively charged groups like quaternary amines and (2) highly mobile negative ions loosely attached to those stationary positive groups (most often chlorides), you can actually get the PFAS to be "stuck" inside the polymer matrix and what comes out is just good ol' sodium chloride, or salt (culinary meaning of salt!).

This shows a version with hydroxide (OH-) ions as the mobile anion, but it's the same idea. The +NR3 in yellow are stuck to the polymer matrix, but the OH- can freely move around. However, without another anion to replace the OH-, the ionic attraction prevents the hydroxides from leaving.

In comes the PFAS. Despite being slightly soluble in water, the anionic PFAS aren't really that mobile, and when they pass through, it's much easier for the hydroxide ions to leave. Another very important effect is that the long perfluorinated tail of the PFAS is attracted to the polymer matrix, whilst the counterions are ONLY attracted via the ionic force. Thus, PFAS would much rather hang out in the polymer matrix.

Of course, IX has its own downsides

These resins are much more expensive, both to manufacture and to transport.

While they can be "regenerated", it's a tricky process that currently requires the use of nearly anhydrous methanol, which is both poisonous and extremely flammable, increasing the operating costs.

As the hydrophobic tail is a key part of allowing the PFAS to stick to the matrix, short-chain PFAS are very poorly dealt with by this system. This is exacerbated by competition between different PFAS molecules, as long-chain ones will cause short-chain ones to desorb.

Overall, the best method appears to be using a series of ion exchange resins followed by an activated carbon filter. The ion exchange will capture the bulk of the PFAS molecules, and the activated carbon will grab any stragglers. Effective filtering of other contaminants prior to the PFAS removal system will also ensure minimal competition in the activated carbon.

And a SIGNIFICANT amount of this understanding has come in the last fifteen years. In particular, the idea of ion exchange is very new! Twenty years ago, it was seen as WAY too expensive, fragile, and ineffective to ever be a useful technology. Nowadays, it's widely implemented in problem areas and we've built up the infrastructure to support it.

hope-for-the-planet

Reblogging this because of the really excellent explanation!

Also a welcome reminder that just because a Big Problem doesn't seem practically solvable right now doesn't mean it won't become solvable in the future!

Twenty years ago ion exchange wasn't a feasible solution to PFAS because of cost and logistics, now there is infrastructure to support it. Twenty years ago solar panels were seen by many as too impractical and expensive for large scale energy generation, now they're the world's cheapest source of energy.

#environment #environmental health #general #q.

gaybichon

this is the full video of patti lupone breaking the sound barrier at the 1988 tony awards btw

gaybichon

it's patti lupone's birthday have you listened to her breaking the sound barrier at the 1988 tony awards?

gaybichon

@bloodanna i'm stealing your tags bc it's a good explanation of what's going on!!!

#theatre #music #q.

irrationalplanets

Gallifrey doing Inferno (Dante’s) would’ve been so sick if they had any actual position on What Is To Be Done About The Time War

irrationalplanets

Like Brax is literally the only character willing to give a straight answer to this question: he wants to end the war by erasing the daleks and no one else can really give a compelling reason why not beyond “feels bad 😔”. Narvin refuses to do anything of substance (until Dissolution), Leela took the out when it presented itself because it’s not her circus anyway, and Romana tried one (1) assassination and gave up.

Wouldn’t the cool thing to do is set up your hell as a refutation of every other character’s solution to the time war aside from the correct one? But then you’d have to decide what that is and commit to it.

The thing is, we’ve had the answer since the early 2000s: the only solution to the time war is to destroy Gallifrey, either literally or symbolically. The tv show took the literal route and Gallifrey should take the symbolic one. That should be the conclusion Romana comes to rather than just a generic ‘I’m going to fight for Gallifrey for me and my friends (whatever that means)’

#‘if they had any actual position on What Is To Be Done About The Time War’#<- this is it. when time war/war room feels like it’s floundering this is why #and specifically the fact that they *can’t* let the gallifrey characters do anything of substance because it’s the doctor who ends the war #narvin deciding to destroy time travel was genuinely compelling because it *would* have been a symbolic destruction of gallifrey #but it couldn’t work because narvin doesn’t end the war #now the thing is. i don’t dislike the idea of romana failing to see that gallifrey can’t be saved #narvin choosing to break with gallifrey completely while romana doesn’t could have been interesting if it set them at odds #if they had to argue about What Is The Endgame here #but narvin & romana don’t have any meaningful interactions after unity #romana never has to have an opinion on poisoning the vortex #bc by the time she reunites with them she already knows the daleks have an alternate way of time travel so it’s a moot point #pretty much half of the gallifrey series has now been set in the time war #a war with a narratively fixed ending that has nothing to do with them!#free them from the time war i’m begging #gallifrey #romana #narvin #irving braxiatel #leela

jujusjunk

It's actually mind blowing to me that people follow religion blindly and just utterly with no questions. YOURE SUPOOSED TO WUESTION RELIGION THATS THE WHOLE POINT. KN ISLAM YOU GET HASANAT FOR WUESTIONING IT AND FOR GOING INTO DEEO THOUGHT ABOUT IT. PLEASE PICK UP A BOOK GOOD GOD.

freegazafromhamas

"Israel" or "Yisrael" as it is actually sounded, was the name given to Jacob/Yakov, grandson of Abraham/Avraham, son of Isaac/Yitzchak, and brother of Esau, when while traveling had a dream of wrestling with the angel of God. Yisrael means "to wrestle with God" with the -el suffix referring to El, a name for God.

The spirit of Jewish law written by ancient Rabbis in Jerusalem is one of rigorously questioning the Torah, our original lawbook and supposed Word of God. Our laws are based on the Talmud which is an ancient series of Rabbinical arguments with each other, collected over different periods of time, often with later Rabbis returning to earlier questions to ask more questions about them.

Everything is to be questioned. Most questions have a good answer, although some of are laws eventually boil down to "God said so! And we don't know why!" Like prohibition of mixing linen and wool in the same garments, and such laws are called ḥok (plural: ḥukim). But even then some have asked questions and come to possible answers why that law may be the way it is. Such as practical considerations like these fabrics having very different properties - wool keeps warm and linen keeps cool, etc etc, that it would be senseless to mix them in a single garment.

There is a Talmudic story called the "snake oven" about a certain Rabbi Eliezer and a bunch of other rabbis in the city of Yavneh, about 40 miles West of Jerusalem, sometime a few decades or so after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70, after which Yavneh became the spiritual and legal center of Rabbinical Judaism after the Roman sacking of Jerusalem.

The Rabbis are arguing about a particular kind of oven and whether it would be considered ritually pure or not. The discussion got so convuluted and in depth that the arguments coiled on themselves like a snake, thus the name "Snake oven" for the story. Rabbi Eliezer thinks the oven is pure, the other Rabbis disagree.

Rabbi Eliezer is so sure his interpretation is correct that he invokes the power of God and says "If I am right, let this carob tree prove it!". The carob tree outside their study hall uproots and flies 100 cubits away and roots itself back in. The other Rabbis say "you can't derive this proof of your argument from a carob tree."

Rabbi Eliezer says, "If I am right, let this stream prove it!" And the stream outside the study hall began to flow backwards, and the other Rabbis said, "You can't prove your argument from a stream of water!"

Rabbi Eliezer says, "If I am right, let the walls of the study hall prove it," and suddenly the walls begin to cave in. The other Rabbis yelled at the walls to not get involved in an argument between scholars, and the walls stop collapsing but remained in a halfway crooked state. The other Rabbis say the walls prove nothing.

Rabbi Eliezer is very sure he is correct. After all, he just invoked several miracles to happen in the name of being correct about the question! God is surely on his side here.

Finally, R. Eliezer says, "If I am correct about the oven, the Heavens will prove it!"

What do you know, a Heavenly voice is heard throughout the study hall, the voice of God.

"Why are you arguing with Rabbi Eliezer, don't you know he is correct in this matter of law?"

Rabbi Yehoshua stood up, gazed at the Heavens, and said: "Lo bashamayim hi! It is not in Heaven! (Deuteronomy 30:12)” What did this mean? Rabbi Yirmiya explains that since God gave the Torah to us at Sinai, it is now ours to interpret, and God himself said that we should rule on legal matters by majority vote (Exodus 23:2).

The passage from Deuteronomy reads:

"It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it."

It is said in the story that after this, God smiled and said, "My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me!"

These Rabbis heard the very voice of God tell them they were wrong, and they stood their ground and said, "Hey God, according to your rules, this Torah is OURS to interpret now, you said your piece, and, even if you're right, your own lawbook you gave us on Mount Sinai says that majority rules, so majority rules against Eliezer being correct on this question. Checkmate, God."

When I learned this story in Jewish high school, it blew my mind. The voice of God spoke, and a bunch of Rabbis talked back and questioned His authority to even be butting in on the conversation! God gave His Word to the Israelites on Sinai, and from that point on it became our book to ask every question about and it is up to our scholars, not God's voice, to figure out what it all means and how to best live by it.

And how do you do that? Well, you start by asking a metric shitton of questions and see what more questions come from that and ask those questions. So on and so forth until you have filled many volumes of books. And that is the Halacha, the Jewish Law that is followed by Jews to this day.

To this day, we ask questions. Some Jewish sects are more willing than others to break old traditions when we think we have better answers to questions - for example, with more orthodox Jews holding views on the separation of sexes particuarly in ritual settings and more progressive Jews (like almost all Jews on tumblr) deciding that these questions require modern answers and so you will find men and women sitting together in a Conservative or Reform synagogue which are the two more progressive Ashkenazi sects, and Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jews will have men and women separated by a barrier in Synagogue and women do not get to participate to the degree men can in the services. In the Conservative synagogues I grew up in, women could do everything in a religious setting that men could. In the Conservative movement, gay folks can have a Jewish wedding done by a female Rabbi, who may or may not also be gay! And we got there not by ignoring the word of God, but by asking questions about it and never stopping that process. And this is how Judaism has evolved and survived over the 2000 years since the Roman destruction of the Second Temple, ending the Jerusalem-centered sacrificial cult and turning Judaism into something that is still most at home in Israel but can nonetheless effectively be practiced anywhere.

All of this is why we have the phrase, "Where you have two Jews, you have at least three opinions!"

I hope you learned something about the Jewish religion reading this! I know Islamic scholarship with hadiths etc is not too dissimilar. If you have a story from Islamic scholarship where asking questions led to an interesting result or made for a good story, I'd love to hear it!

jujusjunk

this was really interesting and honestly nice to read. I didn’t know most of that about Jewish law or the Talmud, and I really liked the story you shared about Rabbi Eliezer and the “snake oven.” The part where the rabbis even argue with God was kind of shocking to me but in a cool way. It shows how serious questioning is in judaism.

It actually made me think about Islam too. In Islam, we also have a long history of asking questions. We don’t argue with God like that of course, but we are encouraged to think deeply. In the Quran it says, “Do they not reflect?” and “Do they not use their minds?” So we’re always told to use our minds. Even questioning religion with good intention gives us hasanat (good deeds). We have big scholars who spent their lives debating fiqh (law), hadith (sayings of the Prophet), and everything else in Islam. We also have many schools of thought like Sunni, Shia, and within those, smaller ones like Hanafi, Maliki, etc., and they all debated each other about how to understand Islam.

You said Judaism has the Talmud with arguments between rabbis. We have something similar in our madhhabs (schools). The scholars didn’t always agree. Some said something is haram, others said it is makruh (disliked), and they would give reasons from the Quran or hadith. Some things don’t have a clear reason, like what you said about not mixing wool and linen. We have things like that too. For example, we don’t eat pork because God said so, and we don’t really ask why, but we still try to think about it. Some people say it’s about health, some say it’s a test.

I also liked what you said about how your religion changes depending on the questions you ask and the time you live in. We have that discussion too. Some Muslims think we should stick only to the old ways. Others think we should keep asking new questions to match modern life. Some Muslims today think women can lead prayer or that LGBTQ+ people should be accepted. Others think that’s not allowed. So I think we are kind of similar there too.

You said you grew up in a Conservative Jewish house where women could do everything men could, and there were female rabbis. I grew up Muslim in a home that wasn’t super strict, but still religious. We prayed, we didn’t drink, we didn’t get tattoos, but I wasn’t forced into things. I don’t wear hijab, and I use the internet and read a lot and talk about religion. My parents always told me to think for myself but to also respect what God said. So I had freedom but also a base in faith.

I also wanted to ask you something if that’s okay. You said questioning is really central to Judaism. Do you ever feel like there’s a limit? Like is there a point where asking too many questions feels disrespectful? Also, what happens if you start doubting everything? In Islam, we’re allowed to doubt and question, but if we stop believing completely, that’s a bigger thing. We can come back of course, but it’s serious.

And one more question. In Islam, we have the idea that the Quran is the perfect word of God. Like not just inspired but exact. Do you believe the Torah is like that too? Or is it more like guidance that you work with?

freegazafromhamas

Thanks for the response, sorry in the delay answering back your questions!

I don't really see that there is a limit, no. Not to the extent of the questions asked, but there is respect or disrespect depending on your intention behind the questions. Are you asking questions to learn? Or are you trying to tear down Judaism?

During Passover dinner, the Seder (which means "order", as in doing things in an order), we read a special book called a Haggada that includes all the things we do and the order, the "seder" that we do these things before and after the main dinner course, along with blessings, songs, and stories we tell including the Passover story of the Exodus from Egypt. Included in this is even a section called the Four Questions (which is actually either 5 questions or 1 question, "Why is tonight different from all other nights?", followed by four answers in the form of questions, depending on how you look at it), which is supposed to be sung by the youngest child, with the table joining in at parts. Also included in the Haggadah is a story, not about the Exodus from Egypt, but about a Passover Seder held by a family with four sons. Not any family in particular, and it's written in such a way that the reader is the father of these children, and we are being told what to do if you have these four children at your table.

It is not long, so I will just put an English translation of a Haggadah for this section, in italics.

Blessed is the Omnipresent One, blessed be He! Blessed is He who gave the Torah to His people Israel, blessed be He! The Torah speaks of four types of children: one is wise, one is wicked, one is simple, and one does not know how to ask.

The Wise One asks: "What is the meaning of the laws and traditions G-d has commanded?" (Deuteronomy 6:20) You should teach him all the traditions of Passover, even to the last detail.

The Wicked One asks: "What does this ritual mean to you?" (Exodus 12:26) By using the expression "to you" he excludes himself from his people and denies G-d. Shake his arrogance and say to him: "It is because of what the L-rd did for me when I came out of Egypt..." (Exodus 13:8) "For me" and not for him -- for had he been in Egypt, he would not have been freed.

The Simple One asks: "What is all this?" You should tell him: "It was with a mighty hand that the L-rd took us out of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."

As for the One Who Does Not Know How To Ask, you should open the discussion for him, as it is written: "And you shall explain to your child on that day, 'It is because of what the L-rd did for me when I came out of Egypt." (Exodus 13:8)

This is a great story because there is a lot to discuss about it and a lot of layers of symbolism here (one of the more hidden ones that you would only see by looking at the Hebrew I will reveal shortly). But I want to focus in on the difference between the Wise Child and the Wicked Child. All the three children who know how to ask are essentially asking the same question, "what is all this Seder stuff and what is the meaning of it?". The youngest who cannot yet ask is presumed to be wondering the same. But the intentions and tone are different between the three. The wisest wants to learn everything. He wants to know the fine details, and he will be provided with those details.

The simple Child isn't one the wavelength of the Wise child, he is curious but more generally so, and would not appreciate the details. You are instructed to tells him the broad meaning of what is going on and what it is we are celebrating, which is God taking US out of Egypt and liberating US from bondage.

The Wicked child is using a tone and language that sets him apart from the rest of the table, and the broader Jewish people. He is asking the meaning of what is going on, but not what might be the meaning for himself. He wants to know why his parents give a shit, "what is this to YOU?". He's not interested in being included in that meaning, and the question is a challenge to the legitimacy of the Passover ritual. He is being a bit of a troll, for lack of a better word. And so the reader, the parent, is instructed to exclude him for the answer. This is about what God did for the Israelite people, of which the Wicked Son does not seem interested in being a part of. He gets a Torah quote about what God did for "Me". Interestingly, the child too young to ask gets the same quote as an answer to his nonexistent question, and it's not really explained why that is, although the tone of the answer is certainly different...that it is talking about "Me" and not "Us" is not emphasized like it is for the Wicked child, and it is not explained, but we are not shaking the arrogance of the child who does not yet know how to ask here. Perhaps what really makes the child part of the Jewish people is the ability to ask questions, for now he is an observer soaking everything in, brand new. The Seder is foreign to this child as it is for the Wicked child, but for very different reasons. The Wicked child makes the Passover story foreign to him by choice. The one too who does not know how to ask also doesn't know his family are liberated slaves. The Wicked child excludes himself from the liberation by choice.

But between the Wise and Wicked child we see the widest difference in intention. The Wise Child wishes to learn every detail because he loves what is going on, he loves his Judaism, and he wants to expand his knowledge. The Wicked child is trying to troll his parents, he doesn't even see himself in what is going on or his Judaism. So he gets the same energy back as an answer.

That is, perhaps, where the line is of "respect". The intention behind the question. Why you are asking.

Interestingly, I told you there was a layer of symbolism only found in the Hebrew of this section of the Haggadah. It is in the word used for "Wicked" - "Rasha" - רָשָׁע

This is from the root "Ra" - רַע - which by itself means "Bad". But there is an extra letter in the middle, the "Shin" "ש" that gives the "sh" sound. This letter is sometimes used as an abbreviation for one of the more mystical names for God which is "Shaddai" (I will not recreate it in Hebrew here).

In fact this letter including what loosely resembles the rest of the name is "written" on the left hand with leather straps of the "Tefillin", which are ritual items worn during morning weekday prayer. The Shin is also seen on one of the two black boxes present on the Tefilin, which each contain a parchment with the Torah section which includes the Shemah, which is the most important prayer in Judaism and said when you rise and when you go to bed, it is also said on the deathbed. "Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One..." followed by a passage stating to teach this message to our children, to say it when we get up and when we lie down, to bind it on our arms and let it serve as a symbol on our foreheads. And so we do just that with Tefillin.

And so, pardon my going off topic here, but back to the point, the Shin is symbolic for God and here it appears in the middle of the word used for "Wicked". What does this mean?

God is in the Wicked Child, as well. Even though he asks his question in a way that excludes himself from his people and their liberation from slavery, even though he asks it in a trolling and disrespectful manner, God is still part of him.

So even if you go over the line into what might be disrespect, God will not leave you.

Questions that may be seen as straight-up heretical in other religions are allowed in Judaism. "Does God Exist?" "Did God dictate the Torah to Moses on Sinai or is this a book written by men who transcribed orally-passed-down traditions and stories?"

You will probably not find many atheist or agnostic Orthodox Jews, at least not that will openly admit to it, but this is not uncommon to see in Conservative and Reform Judaism. Judaism is an ethnoreligion that is mainly about what you do and how you live, more than it is about holding any particular dogmatic beliefs. Belief in God is therefore not a requirement to be Jewish. If your mother was Jewish when you were born or if you ever converted, you too are considered Jewish, always. Even if you are atheist. Even if you are the Wicked Child. Even if you convert or are forced to convert to another religion. Judaism will always consider you to be Jewish.

Belief in God is not a prerequisite to living Jewishly, either. Because Judaism is about what you do, not about what you think.

Nontraditional ideas about God's nature are likewise compatible, and this is where I fall, largely agreeing with the Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza who lived in the Netherlands in the 1600's. Well, he was something of a Wicked Child who renounced his Judaism and felt all organized religion was obsolete, and was likewise excommunicated from his Jewish community (unclear if over ideology or tax issues) and I disagree with Spinoza here. But he was also known as the "God-drunk man", and had this wild idea that God and the material universe are not separate entities at all, rather the material Universe is simply God manifesting into physical reality, and God is All, and God is not supernatural, rather the opposite, God is Nature Itself. This is called "panenetheism", with the closely related "pantheism" being the idea that God and the material Universe are exactly the same thing (and unlike panENtheism, God has no nature outside the physical universe...panENtheism is more like the Universe is the physical part of God).

Today, Spinoza has been reclaimed by the many Jews who agree with his idea of God, but we apply it to Judaism instead of separating from Judaism. A small American sect of Judaism called Reconstructionist Judaism was founded by Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan (1881-1983) who also largely agreed with Spinoza's panentheism and viewed God as a "process". If I had Reconstructionist synagogues in my area I would probably gravitate there. But nonetheless I have learned about Spinoza both from Conservative Rabbis in Jewish high school as well as an ultraorthodox Chabad Rabbi in a college class on Jewish Theology.

I will give two answers here, the traditional Jewish answer, and my answer (which is held by many liberal Jews).

The traditional Jewish answer is the Torah (the first 5 books of our Bible which encompass the stories of Creation, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac/Ishmael, Jacob (who was renamed "Yisrael" - Israel, after he wrestles with God's angel in a dream), Joseph and how the children of Israel end up migrating to Egypt, the enslavement, the Exodus and the 40 years of wandering in the desert until the Israelites re-enter the Land of Israel as Moses watches and dies from the top of a mountain) was dictated by God to Moses on Mt Sinai letter by letter exactly - including events which happen after the Israelites leave Mt. Sinai - including Moses's own death scene...which is a little silly and a major plot hole as it were. Ancient Rabbis attempt to fill the plot hole in various ways. Some play it straight and say Moses cried while writing his death scene as dictated by God. Other, more fantastical interpretations involve all the future events being transcribed without the spaces between words and thus were illegible until those events happened and the spaces between words appeared. Some say yes future events were transcribed but that Moses's death scene was written by Joshua, who took charge of the Israelites after Moses.

The rest of our Bible (The Tanakh is split into 3 sections, the Torah, the Prophets/Nevi'im, and Writings/Ketuvim) are considered written by men but divinely inspired, with Prophets being considered more directly divinely inspired than Ketuvim (with much of Prophets being supposedly written by the Prophets in question), with some of Ketuvim considered purely allegorical by some ancient Rabbis.

Many particularly more liberally-minded Jewish scholars of today consider the truth of the Torah to be the result roughly of what is termed "Source theory" or "Documentary hypothesis", and this is what I believe.

Documentary hypothesis - Wikipedia

As alluded to earlier, Source Theory posits that 4 distinct sources of orally-passed-down traditions were compiled and edited down into one book in ancient Israel several hundred years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth (much later than the events of the Torah would have taken place). This can explain differing linguistic styles and names for God used, certain sons of Jacob being cast in better light depending on if the source came from the tribe of Judah in southern Israel or from the rest of Israel in the north descended from Jacob's other sons. This idea has been more recently re-evaluated and found to not line up so cleanly with what the theory initially thought, there may have been editing periods later on, etc etc, but that the general idea of the Torah being a compilation record of oral traditions passed down over time still holds.

Events of the Torah including Jews leaving Israel and being slaves in Egypt, the exile, the supposed wars of conquest of Cannanites on the return to Israel...there isn't archeological evidence for any of this. As @homochadensistm might attest to, the Hebrew people that would become the Jewish people were always in the Levant and split off from Cannanites and their polytheistic religion at some point to become a monotheistic animal sacrifice cult centered around the Temple of Jerusalem.

And if so, is Torah meaningless? Written by men and not even historically accurate?

Of course not. We have made it Sacred. We tell its story over and over and over in yearly cycles. We live by its laws (or rather, our best interpretation of those laws according to questions we ask). It is the story of our people. If the Passover Exodus from slavery did not happen in Egypt, we know liberation from oppressors is something that has happened over and over and over in our history. It remains the story of our people. As written in the Haggadah:

...as it is said: "And He said to Abraham, `You shall know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and make them suffer, for four hundred years. But I shall also judge the nation whom they shall serve, and after that they will come out with great wealth.'"

This is what has stood by our fathers and us! For not just one alone has risen against us to destroy us, but in every generation they rise against us to destroy us; and the Holy One, blessed be He, saves us from their hand!

If nothing in the Torah is historically true, this passage in the roughly 1200-1500 year old Haggada is true. In every generation, somebody comes along to destroy the Jewish people and every time this happens, God liberates us. That is the story of the Jewish people. Whether or not it happened in Egypt is irrelevant. My grandparents survived the actual Holocaust, they were slaves, and they were liberated, to the British Mandate of Palestine which became Israel. Later on they immigrated to the US where I live. The Haggadah tells us to tell the Passover story as if we ourselves were liberated from slavery in Egypt...well, my grandparents told the story having literally been liberated from slavery camps in a foreign land and having returned to Israel.

So. Long story short, my relationship to the Torah is a complex one but ultimately this text is as sacred to us as it is because we have made it so. And if it didn't tell our past liberation as written, it told the future cycles of oppression and liberation after it was written. And in all of those senses, it is God's word. Who are we to say if God wanted to hand His Word to the Jewish people that he would do it all at once to Moses on Sinai including events that hadn't yet transpired? Maybe God's Word comes about from the orally-passed down traditions that get compiled into one book. Maybe that's exactly how God does it?

I refer you to my last reblog in this thread, and the Deuteronomy verse about God's word not being in Heaven, nor across the sea, but in our hearts and on our lips. It's unimportant if our modern-day Torah is the same document as the first time it was ever written down. And it probably wasn't. And the first time was probably different than the first time all of those orally passed down stories and traditions were told. But that's ok. At some point it was a work in progress. And after it was finalized, its interpretations continue to be a work in progress. Judaism is an evolving religion and at some point in our history, our sacred texts evolved with us.

This is different than Islam which, as you said, believes itself to hold a true, unaltered and uncorrupted version of the Word of God and really prides itself on that.

I hope this answers your questions. Got a lot longer than I thought it would be lol.

#judaism #islam #q.

paperistasty

School magazine#2

OPPY

NASA Mars opportunity rover

#art #space #q.

gotyouanyway

wait backing up a second. romana watching leela die. that entire scene. the implication that leela's death made her so angry and guilty and sad that she killed billions of people. desperately wanting to apologize to her. LEELA HEARING HER AND SPEAKING TO HER THROUGH THE TIME BARRIER OR WHATEVER AND WARNING HER TO GET AWAY??????????????????? and is that the first time we've heard romana actually CRY????????

#in the last sunset scene she sounds like she’s choking up. but this scene is the most she’s sounded like she’s actually crying yeah 🥺🥺🥺#she was already shattered on unity and she can’t keep holding the pieces together #it was supposed to get better when she found leela. but it only got worse #and now leela’s somewhere where romana isn’t. again #and romana wasn’t supposed to survive! she wasn’t planning on feeling this feeling ever again—missing leela with all her hearts #and god the heartbreak in her voice is devastating #beyond is a mess of an episode but this scene is sooo !!!!#romana x leela #romana #leela #gallifrey audios

gotyouanyway

“because it was what romana needed me to do” ROMANA’S! MAN!

#there will probably be a ‘my thoughts on narvin leaving romana: six years later version’ post forthcoming #because i am still chewing on it #and my current take is that i can argue both that narvin understood that romana planned to die there #*and* that narvin didn’t understand that romana planned to die there #and i think the text supporting both readings/neither reading lessens the impact of either #and it maybe could have worked for me if the contradiction/cognitive dissonance was explored more. but.#i don’t think his decision was out of character. i just think it was underexplored #‘it was what romana needed me to do.’ he left her because she asked. and oof oof my heart #but did he understand why she was asking?#was he choosing to trust that she would find a way out?#or was he choosing to accept that the end of her story was her decision to make?#narvin x romana #narvin #romana #gallifrey audios

gotyouanyway

chewing on him. he can accept when a power structure no longer exists but he can't or won't operate outside of it. you are still my president, my lady

#!!!!!#narvin #and even when he does finally leave the structure of the cia behind re: eris #he cannot help but recreate another familiar power structure around them both #‘you are the resistance’ etc etc #it’s ‘romana is gallifrey’ all over again #gallifrey audios

sircarolyn

interesting to me how narvin is so desperate to keep rayo out of the war in dissolution for leela’s sake, when it was always veega who wanted to keep him away from it…. thinking about the weird, begrudging respect slash friendship narvin and veega could have had….

sircarolyn

like it’s the way narvin saves rayo for leela but then goes on to do everything veega would have wanted… like it’s obvious that narvin only feels responsible for rayo because he adores leela but all the conversations he and rayo have are about veega - would she have been proud of me? mum would have liked it here. it’s what your mother would have wanted

like he’s a disaster of a parent figure but he’s got the right idea: keep rayo safe at all costs. it’s what leela would have wanted. it’s what veega would have wanted

sircarolyn

i mean obviously veega and narvin are not friends at all in unity because she sees him as a threat and he’s on edge the whole time (‘this is delicious!’ / 'it’s only stew…’) but had she lived…. i just think their mutual adoration of leela and interestingly similar views about doing the right thing and protecting people even at cost to oneself would have just led them to have been on such fascinating terms with each other. like once they got over the distaste for one another stage, i reckon they could have been friends

#my ‘everyone leaves unity’ au from years ago that i never fully developed #has been on my mind lately #specifically a dissolution au where leela still goes looking for narvin (& romana in this case) at the resistance base #and still ends up on eris’s tardis by mistake #meanwhile narvin & romana make it back to their tardis & all four of them end up on micallon #and it’s awkward and tense in totally different ways #i think it would be fun to shove the four of them together without leela as a buffer and see what happens #throw veega & narvin together & have them surprisingly get each other once they get past the defense mechanisms #throw romana & rayo together and have it be weird and awkward #gallifrey audios #veega #narvin

whifferdills

GALLIFREY: TIME WAR: DISSOLUTION: You can’t go home again but if you want to make sure you can blow up the road that leads to it;

That creature has followed you halfway across the galaxy. The Apothecary insisting on calling him Cousin Narvin and the Dalek calling him Time Lord Narvin. “I’m nobody. Well, not anymore, anyway.” Narvin, who needs to feel useful, who has always needed to be useful and who had that mistaken for ambition, now sublimating that into his promise to Romana, and to Rayo (although he does care, and I think there’s a part of him that genuinely would take him and fuck off somewhere outside the War) and having it mistaken for the untrustworthy cowardice he hasn’t worn as armor in years. It’s familiar, and it’s that….it’s “I might not be able to do this for myself but I can do this for you, but only if you don’t look at me” thing.

Narvin, who has now left both Romana and Leela behind, facing the very real and suddenly extremely actionable prospect of leaving Gallifrey permanently, not just walking away but destroying his ability to go back. If there is a Gallifrey to be saved here, a true Gallifrey, it is not the Gallifrey of the Time Lords. He’s not a coward, he’s not afraid of dying, he’s spent too much time fantasizing about vanishing into a chameleon arch for it to even be fear of being erased. His petulant little bitchbaby shit here isn’t about that….like this is kind of it, right? He has been systematically stripped of everything that makes him a Time Lord, all the titles and trappings and privileges, and now here he is being offered the choice to, you know, take the harness off entirely, to take that last step of his own free will. Hold up where’s the seal video

Narvin and Rayo’s tearful goodbye…..They are both exhausted and traumatized and grieving and it’s been like….a week lmao but they really did kind of bond? It’s heartwarming and also heartbreaking

“Gallifrey can burn for all I care” ok you know when you’re a grownup and you put yourself back in a childhood situation and suddenly you’re 13 again and you can FEEL how that teenager never got unstuck all the way from who you are as a person

“I used to think there was no place for sentimentality in all this. I truly believed it. And now, it seems to be all I have left” “I think I understood her better than anyone in my own chapter, and I think she understood me too” “Romana is…..Romana, and Leela has certainly always been Leela”

whifferdills

still thinking about my guy. this little man. Mr Details, Mr Spreadsheets, Mr cog in search of a clock, shoving his body into the psychic circuits and winding up where he has to go, which is also the very last place he wants to go, using ‘but what if they oubliette me’ as the final reason to run from what’s been coming all his life (what if they do to me what i did to others in their service), even as he keeps insisting that he never did any of it for recognition. Mr Gallifrey realizing it’s probably going to be him pulling the trigger. his constipated but genuine love for Romana and Leela pulling him kicking and bitching through the refusal of the call. King Minos breaking out of the labyrinth he built with sentimentality as the pickaxe. like. babygirl ~

#this is the post that reframed dissolution for me 3-4 years ago #i was always fond of it. but i did spend my first listens going ‘what’s all this about him being a coward??’#but i do like the idea of narvin reaching for any argument he can throw at the idea of breaking the concept of the time lords themselves #before giving in. ‘this is it’ indeed #where war room goes with narvin from here is…well. i feel i have to reserve judgement until i see where war room 4 lands #given *gestures at the end of war room 3*#narvin #gallifrey audios #rayo

from-thorns

Mermay day 4: Axolotl

#art #q.

luminouslumity

bloggerspam

THE CHOCOLATE GUY IS DOING SOMETHING PERTINENT TO MY FANDOM!

#food #art #q.

may12324

2015 vs 2025 mermaid redraw!

#art #q.

takataapui

a game about transitions, journeys, and potential

Whakawhitinga is a worldbuilding game for 2-5 players, which uses the framework of an indigenous Te Ao Māori (Māori culture) creation history.

Players will create a new world over 5 rounds, through asking and answering questions.

Whakawhitinga is designed to be able to be played by those both familiar and unfamiliar with Māori culture, so give it a go even if it's all new to you!

The 36 pages of content include illustrations, a custom written karakia (plus an audio link), prompts for whakawhanaungatanga (connection building), guidance for playing the game, and the game content itself.

Gather some friends, and create a world using an indigenous lense -- starting from Te Kore, the void; moving to Te Pō, the eternal night; then finally, into Te Ao Marama, the world of light and life.

Grab your very own copy of whakawhitinga here, for only $5 USD:

A Te Ao Māori informed world-building game through questions.

#games #for later #general #q.

hunxi-after-hours

...might've discovered a new genre to lose my mind about, hold please

hunxi-after-hours

ok so I did some further diving and this isn't so much a new genre as it's just a fairly niche one — 规则怪谈 rules horror, i.e. a horror story told through increasingly bizarre and disturbing rules

I initially came across the online short story 《动物园规则怪谈》, which comes out to something like "Strange Tales of the Zoo Rules." it opens with 15 rules for visitors to follow while visiting the city zoo, beginning innocuously but swiftly veering into inexplicable strangeness:

Rule #1: There are absolutely no problems with the security measures in this zoo. There is no possibility of animals escaping, particularly small herbivores, most of which are kept in closed environments. If you see a rabbit escaping on the roadside, please take your children away and report it to the staff immediately. Do not approach the rabbit or touch it, particularly if the rabbit notices you and begins to approach at high speeds. [...] Rule #6: There is no aquarium in this zoo. If a staff member sells you a ticket to the aquarium, refuse them. Rule #7: If you have already seen the aquarium, please leave immediately and call the phone number marked on the map.

#fiction #general #short stories #q.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

we're all stories in the end