Lizhensk


I guess it shows just how skeptical I am.

I was never trying for 90.

Hey Machshovo Tovah, i know ur seeing this: u think once u have the machshovo then HKB"H considers it a maaseh!? U gotta WORK too!!!

Lizhensk wrote:


YES BUT: Sof maaseh bemachshovo techilla.

Anyhow - What's this Lizhensk all about? Don't forget about the tefila kodem hatefila:
שנראה כל אחד מעלת חברינו ולא חסרונם

MT

Well well well, looks like we got ourselves a little pest!!

but since you're here already would like to add a little,

If anyone has chatted to skep on gmail, you know what the tab says "Notso says..." for some reason it always reads "Nuttso says..."

but back to you, I guess the name change was because nobody was helping when you said please? or did you think that becoming a rebbe would give you more umphhh? or was the 9753 missing the 1 at the end?

Why is it that addicts to lust are called sexaholics? the name alchoholic is alchohol with "ic" at the end so shouldn't it be "drugics" and "sexics" (or would it be difficult to defrentiate between that and phycics?)

well, very often alcohol ends with 'hic'

har har

That's a good point! We are not allergic to "sexahol!" Maybe we should be called lustics?

Well first the second question (u know. that midda in pirkei avos that talmidei chachamim have of answering first things first? not in this section)

Now most of us here aren't addicted to s**, rather to lust, m******** or p** (or all three of course). And they all seem to be coming out of lust.
So at first glance you seem to be right in saying that we should be lustics.

BUT lechoirah there might be such a thing as being addicted to the sensation of m********* without even the part.So if that is true then lustics might not be the word after all.

So calling ourselves either s**ics or p***ics or m***********ics or lustics would be unfair to the persons who are not addicted to that, and to those addicted to a combination of them.

So we seem to be kind of stuck.

So since there is no simple answer, we are forced to get lomdish.

What's the mekor of p*** and m********** and even lust?

It's s**.Since without it there (presumably) would be no lust (what would u be lusting after?), possibility to m******* (why would we be created with it?) and definitely no such entity called p*** (as we know the meaning of the word to be anyway).
Im kein comes out a shtickel chiddush, that lust, p***, and m********** are all just toldos of s**.

So that's why being addicted to any of the four things is all under the umbrella term of "s** addiction".

Ok, so why is it s**aholics? as syata pointed out we aren't addicted to "s**ahol".

So i'm going to start writing an answer though i don't know what it will be.
So there seems to be two ways to go about this

A)alcoholics are called that since the suffix "oholics" is used to denote any form of addiction.Which would mean it is a sheer coincidence that alcohol has the "ohol" already there which takes away the need to add it and all that's left is the "ics". Which means that s** addicts are simply s**+oholics.

B)S** addicts really are addicted to "s**ahol".This seems silly until you remember that s** addicts are not necessarily addicted to s**.As pointed out earlier, they may be addicted to any toldah of s** which may or may not include the actual s**.So if they aren't addicted to "s**" then what are they addicted to? Therefore it is possible to say that what they are addicted to is in fact, s**ahol! In which case a s**ahol addict is obviously a s**oholic.

(According to this, s**ahol is

s**·ah·hol
/s**s/ah/hol

Noun
An umbrella term used for any action, feeling, or thought that shtams from the existence of s**.)

According to either pshat, the correct term to refer to anyone addicted to either s**, m********, lust, p***, or any combination of them is s**aholic.

Anyone who attempts to argue has to deal with the shame of everyone realizing he was bored enough to read through the whole thing.


Edit: i put stars instead of a lot of letters in an attempt to make this a little more eidel.

Just wondering...

Would a person who is allegic to candy be a Shehakolic or a Shakoholic or a Shehakololic?

For the correct answer, ayin shom in Fox in Sox, by Dr. סוס.

inna, after such a shiur klali we need to finish with:
reb chananya ben akashia omer ratza hkb"h lezakos es yisrael....
nu, a kaddish