• BASIC DRUG
    DISCUSSION
    Welcome to Bluelight!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Benzo Chart Opioids Chart
    Drug Terms Need Help??
    Drugs 101 Brain & Addiction
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums
  • BDD Moderators: Keif’ Richards | negrogesic

If you found an oxycodone

Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky

Frumious Bandersnatch
Joined
Nov 3, 1999
Messages
84,998
Would you tell the person that owns it? Even if you’d get charged later on for wanting it. I’m just wondering. I’m probably going end up telling the person cause I would never want that to happen to me. And I’m 3 days quit but dammit devil is real.
 
I have a feeling they aren’t going to trust that I only found just one but I know in my heart I did the right thing. Dammmmnmmmmiiiiittttt
 
According to the Talmud if you find an item and you know to whom it belongs you're only obligated to return it to a fellow jew.
 
Finders keepers unless you know they are in pain and really need it.
 
No offense taken at all, I’m glad it’s that way. People struggle in ways I cannot comprehend and here I am playing with fire to get a little buzz here and there, I’ll admit though yesterday it was hard to not keep it for myself. Even though I knew it wouldn’t put anyone out it was so hard to turn down the warm that I knew would come from that little pill can’t say I will turn one down again though but ima try not to
ghostandthedarknes said:
I'm saying this in a good way, you don't fit the typical addict profile. if i was u I'd quit now before u do fit that profile. hr
Click to expand...
 
Nagelfar said:
What if you're goyim?
Click to expand...

If a cow or goat finds your item are they gonna return it to you?

I learned the ethics of lost and found items in a Hillel Academy where they brainwashed me into believing that judaism considers ethical behavior so important that the learned rabbis argued for many days about the possible moral obligation a jew has if they find a pile of coins by the side of the road, depending on whether it's arranged in a certain way that could be identified by its owner as opposed to being strewn randomly, etc. But they left out the most important part in my schooling there up to 6th grade, which is that a jew has no moral obligations to goyim. Period.

There is never any type of direct moral obligation of a jew to a goy, only the indirect mandate to avoid bringing dishonor onto the body of israel. Thus, while it's a sin to render any charity to a goy because such charity could be given to a jew instead, it's allowable to give charity to or save the life of a goy if failing to do so would bring dishonor and harm the reputation of the body of israel.

You could spend many months reading and studying the 419 pages of this PDF and only maybe at the very end, maybe maybe, you'll find what they didn't teach me in 6th grade, but the most crucial fact will elude most readers, but it's very clearly implied in the quoted passage below, where they're equating heathen lands with heaps of dung.

pages 88-89:
Come and hear: If one finds therein19 a lost object, then if the majority are Israelites it has to be announced, but if the majority are heathens it has not to be announced.20 Now who is the authority that lays it down that we go according to the majority if not R. Simeon b. Eleazar? You must therefore conclude that R. Simeon b. Eleazar says this only where the majority are heathens, but not where the majority are Israelites! — [No.] This is the view of the Rabbis. But then you could conclude therefrom that the Rabbis accept R. Simeon b. Eleazar's view in the case where the majority are heathens! — Admittedly, therefore, this21 represents the view of R. Simeon b. Eleazar, and his ruling applies also to a case where the majority are Israelites, but here21 we deal [with a case where the money was] concealed.22 But if it was concealed, what has [the finder] to do with it? Have we not learnt: ‘if one finds a vessel in a dungheap, if covered up he may not touch it; but if uncovered he must take it and announce it’?23 — As R. papa explained:24 [The reference is] to a dungheap which is not regularly cleared away, and which [the owner] unexpectedly decided to clear away — so here also [the reference is] to a dungheap which is not regularly cleared away, and which [the owner] unexpectedly decided to clear away.25
 
Last edited:
Way too late for this I already gave it back. Hahah but I’ll keep in mind next time. ;) thanks for your time bro
Wishdoctor79 said:
If a cow or goat finds your item are they gonna return it to you?

I learned the ethics of lost and found items in a Hillel Academy where they brainwashed me into believing that judaism considers ethical behavior so important that the learned rabbis argued for days about the possible moral obligation a jew has if they find a pile of coins by the side of the road, depending on whether it's arranged in a certain way that could be identified by its owner as opposed to being strewn randomly, etc. But they left out the most important part in my schooling there up to 6th grade, which is that a jew has no moral obligations to goyim.

You could spend many months reading and studying the 419 pages of this PDF and only maybe at the very end, maybe maybe, you'll find what they didn't teach me in 6th grade, but the most crucial fact will elude most readers.

pages 88-89:
Come and hear: If one finds therein19 a lost object, then if the majority are Israelites it has to be announced, but if the majority are heathens it has not to be announced.20 Now who is the authority that lays it down that we go according to the majority if not R. Simeon b. Eleazar? You must therefore conclude that R. Simeon b. Eleazar says this only where the majority are heathens, but not where the majority are Israelites! — [No.] This is the view of the Rabbis. But then you could conclude therefrom that the Rabbis accept R. Simeon b. Eleazar's view in the case where the majority are heathens! — Admittedly, therefore, this21 represents the view of R. Simeon b. Eleazar, and his ruling applies also to a case where the majority are Israelites, but here21 we deal [with a case where the money was] concealed.22 But if it was concealed, what has [the finder] to do with it? Have we not learnt: ‘if one finds a vessel in a dungheap, if covered up he may not touch it; but if uncovered he must take it and announce it’?23 — As R. papa explained:24 [The reference is] to a dungheap which is not regularly cleared away, and which [the owner] unexpectedly decided to clear away — so here also [the reference is] to a dungheap which is not regularly cleared away, and which [the owner] unexpectedly decided to clear away.25
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top