ACROSTICO NATALIA CASTELLUCCIO (ITA-ENG)

Pubblicato daNatalia CastelluccioPubblicato in: Poesia

N ON
A MO
T ANTO
A MICI
L OGORROICI
I MPERTINENTI
A SSILLANTI

C OMUNQUE
A SCOLTO
S EMPRE
T RATTO
E LEGANTEMENTE
L ORO
L ASCIANDOLI
U MILMENTE
C HIACCHIERARE
C URIOSARE
I NTERROGARE
O RGANIZZANDOMI.

Natalia Castelluccio

I DON’T LOVE FRIENDS SO MUCH
LOGORROIC, IMPERTINENT AND NORSE
HOWEVER, I ALWAYS LISTEN TO THEM
TREATING THEM ELEGANTLY AND HUMBLY LETTING THEM CHAT, INQUIRE AND ASK QUESTIONS AS I ORGANIZE MYSELF.

Pubblicato da Natalia Castelluccio

BLOG PENSIERI PAROLE E POESIE https://pensieriparoleepoesie.wordpress.com CANALE YOU TUBE https://youtube.com/@Natalia.Castelluccio71 BLOG AMORE ANIMA E MENTE https://amoreanimaemente.blogspot.com

35 pensieri riguardo “ACROSTICO NATALIA CASTELLUCCIO (ITA-ENG)”

      1. Non so se gli italiani hanno il detto “Si porta anche un cuore nel posto giusto” o anche “Ci sono due cuori che battono in un petto”. Bene 😉 associo il simbolico cuore destro all’amicizia …………………….. spero che le mie parole siano tradotte in modo comprensibile❤️

        Piace a 2 people

  2. Brava Natalia!
    Io lo avevo fatto con il mio nome e il mio cognome.

    Buonissima giornata, sono tornata ieri dalle terme….
    Mi sono gonfiata tantissimo, sono piena di acqua anche nelle gambe e sono aumentata di 5 kg😱😱😔😔😔😭😔😭

    Piace a 2 people

    Rispondi
  6. Pingback: ACROSTICO NATALIA CASTELLUCCIO (ITA-ENG) — Pensieri Parole e Poesie – uwerolandgross

      1. The false ירידות הדורות translation of Aggadik “litter-ature” as “non legal”. The issue: how does a person read the stories of Aggaditah\Midrashim?

        The Rashi commentary on the Chumash, this serves, at least for myself alone, as the יסוד which assisted me tremendously, just what sh’itta development required to learn Aggaditah and Midrashim. In the system of דרדס, דרוש ופשט, they go together like two peas in a pod. This understanding, it explains how Rashi’s commentary to the Chumash made sense, at least for me. The French school on the Chumash and Talmud, grew to admire this scholarship as hands down better than any other rabbinic scholarship on these most essential Primary Sources: T’NaCH, Talmud, Halachah, Aggaditah, Midrashim, and Siddur.

        Rav Nemuraskii repeatedly emphasized that as the rabbis of the Gemarah made the study of the Mishna their chief focus, post sealing of the Sha’s Bavli scholars needed to affix, (da’aven from a “”fixed location”), a specific blessing from the middle blessings of the Shemone Esrei tefillah bound (think Yitzak “bound” upon the altar) to a specific Parshah of the Torah. The Torah has 54 Parshaot. Learning tohor middot לשמה affixes a specific middah to a specific Parshah. This “fixation” permits Yidden to assign one of the four times repeated (think the רוח הקודש Name of HaShem) Parshaot to a singular and specific tohor middah of the Oral Torah pronouns of רוח הקודש.

        Aggaditah\Midrashim/, they make a דרוש upon a specific T’NaCH p’suk\sugiah/ — the codification of prophetic Common Law. As Gemarah Halachot make a רמז וסוד learning upon a specific Case\Rule Mishnah; the Gemarah Aggadot\Midrashim make a דרוש ופשט upon a specific Case\Rule T’NaCH sugia. The Holy Writings of the T’NaCH common law codification they learn the earlier NaCH prophetic sources – by employment of the rabbinic middot developed by Tannaim rabbinic sages. This latter system of middot logic, it contrasts with the 13 tohor middot wherein the NaCH prophets employ sugiot as middot comparisons to other sugiot precedents which contain within them the same Oral Torah middot דאורייתא of tohor logic. The comparative sugiot to sugiot sh’itta of learning NaCH, it defines just how the sealed NaCH masoret functions as the first codification of Jewish lateral common law. The 2nd codification of Jewish lateral common law (the Talmud) stands upon the יסוד of the first codification of Jewish lateral common law (the T’NaCH).

        The comparison of sugiot which share the identical set of tohor middot דאורייתא, this learning by means of precedents – it defines the פשט of prophetic mussar. Once a person has made a דרוש search of T’NaCH precedents — to attain the פשט of prophetic mussar — this learning, it defines the k’vanna of the stories contained within the language of Aggaditah\Midrashim. דרוש does not limit Aggadic\Midrashim language to a simple reading of the words employed within these stories, whose purpose exists to introduce talmidim to the T’NaCH Primary sources, to learn the prophetic mussar as the יסוד and k’vanna of the stories within all Aggadic\Midrashim later sealed Primary Sources.

        The study of Aggaditah\Midrashim weaves the prophet mussar learned from the earlier T’NaCH Primary Sources, into the much later Aggadik\Midrashim Primary Sources, sealed masoret – which by this definition includes both T’NaCH and Talmud. Aggadik\Midrashim weds the דרוש learning of these much earlier Primary Sources, designed to teach mussar by way of comparative sugia precedents,,, the T’NaCH prophetic mussar commandments. Applicable to each and every generation of bnai brit Israel who live upon the Planet Earth – specifically limited to within the lands of Israel. This sh’itta of learning, while it does not negate, for example, the idea that Aggadik\Midrashim stories often employ gender theme narratives; none the less, the sh’itta, how Rav Nemuraskii taught me to learn, this sh’itta of learning views these earlier Primary Sources – of the sealed masoret – this sh’iita of learning makes the common law precedent comparison of sugiot tohor middot contained therein, as the basis of the precedent search which most essentially defines the k’vanna of all Aggadik\Midrashim stories.

        Rav Nemuraskii always separated, so to speak, the steak and potatoes from the salt and pepper condiments. Aggadik\Midrashim scholars always strives to wed prophetic mussar unto these much later Talmudic Aggadic stories. A building of several stories height requires a solid foundation יסוד. Rav Aaron never divorced the learning of T’NaCH sugiot by means of logical middot precedent analysis from the contents\themes contained within the Aggadic\Midrashim stories; the first Common Law Torah codification always serves as the יסוד upon which stands the later Ha(Psak) – Halacha L’Maaseh rabbinic legal codifications of much later Talmudic common law.

        A key theme which prophetic mussar addresses, sexual conduct between the sexes. The story of Yechudah and Tamar or David and Bat Sheva or the behavior of the surviving daughters of Lot etc., they teach mussar applicable to all generations of bnai brit living. These stories do not exist, nor do they function, as history in by-gone days past! T’NaCH teaches mussar rather than history, just as the Talmud prioritizes Oral Torah logic above Law – Halacha L’Maaseh. As tefillah does not exist as a Torah mitzvah without k’vanna. So too and how much more so, Halacha L’Maaseh does not exist as a Torah mitzvah דאורייתא או דרבנן without k’vanna. Talmudic scholarship, therefore it seeks to make an aliyah of positive and negative commandments, commandments which do not require k’vanna … unto positive time oriented commandments, commandments which do require k’vanna.

        "Mi piace"

Lascia un commento

Progetta un sito come questo con WordPress.com
Comincia ora