I have always been a do it yourself kind of guy and thus I recommend to others. If you want a place to learn Torah and the local synagogue is too politicized, then get yourself an Avi Ezri of Rav Shach and take a piece and work on it at home. Get Gemara and Musar, and do not depend on the local place which is likely to have too many bad influences.
31.8.16
The result of "Torah alone" studies is usually bad.
Keeping out secular studies was the major factor in most yeshivas and it still is in the ultra religious world. To some degree this is very justified because of social studies and the humanities which are mainly garbage. Especially that mentally sick demon, Psychology.
But the result of "Torah alone" studies is usually just as bad,- or worse. It tends to creates sanctimonious, jerk offs. [That is "holier than thou" people. You know the type.] For this reason, I just have not been able to recommend "Torah alone" as a legitimate program.
My ideas is to have balanced program Math, Physics, Music, Gemara, Musar, Survival skills.
Though I realize the great importance of learning Torah, I just can not recommend it by itself, but only in balance.
[I had seen the Torah alone approach in Israel among the ultra religious. This did exist in NY also to some degree in the Mir. But I rarely saw any good in this approach and it certainly was not what the books of Musar from the middle ages were saying. Later Musar itself become anti secular studies but that were definitely against the original set of Musar books like the חובות לבבות and the מעלות המידות.]
I fail to see in "holier than thou" people anything worthy of admiration.
[I suspect part of the motivation to be so much against learning things like Math and Physics stems from the fact that they tend to show that many of those that may know some aspects of Torah are not smart. Knowing some aspects of Torah is relatively easy, while Math and Physics are basically hard. If the natural sciences were part of Torah education then many people could not pull off the scam they they do by seeming to be smart and spreading the word around that- if you know Torah well somehow that makes you the top of the pack and from the top shelf..]
But the result of "Torah alone" studies is usually just as bad,- or worse. It tends to creates sanctimonious, jerk offs. [That is "holier than thou" people. You know the type.] For this reason, I just have not been able to recommend "Torah alone" as a legitimate program.
My ideas is to have balanced program Math, Physics, Music, Gemara, Musar, Survival skills.
Though I realize the great importance of learning Torah, I just can not recommend it by itself, but only in balance.
[I had seen the Torah alone approach in Israel among the ultra religious. This did exist in NY also to some degree in the Mir. But I rarely saw any good in this approach and it certainly was not what the books of Musar from the middle ages were saying. Later Musar itself become anti secular studies but that were definitely against the original set of Musar books like the חובות לבבות and the מעלות המידות.]
I fail to see in "holier than thou" people anything worthy of admiration.
[I suspect part of the motivation to be so much against learning things like Math and Physics stems from the fact that they tend to show that many of those that may know some aspects of Torah are not smart. Knowing some aspects of Torah is relatively easy, while Math and Physics are basically hard. If the natural sciences were part of Torah education then many people could not pull off the scam they they do by seeming to be smart and spreading the word around that- if you know Torah well somehow that makes you the top of the pack and from the top shelf..]
female empowerment. Every society that has tried female empowerment has died. Tellingly no society with empowered women has lasted more than 3 generations.
The reality is that female empowerment has reared it’s head throughout human history (most notably at the end of the Roman empire). Empowering women is one of the cycles of human existence, and it always follows the same pattern;
1) a society becomes wealthy and importantly, safe.
2) the men, unchallenged, become weak.
3) the women’s hypergamous instinct is triggered. The women start to doubt their men’s ability to protect them.
4) women initiate a society wide shit-test – pushing for economic, political and societal freedoms.
5) the men, anesthetized by decades (or more) of women behaving decently grant women their freedoms.
6) the women, free of boundaries, behave in an ever more feral manner, desperately trying to provoke the men to push back, to reset the boundaries, to prove their strength, to lay to rest the hypergamous doubt.
7) the men, ever more disgusted by their women’s behavior disengage from women, and in so doing disengage from society, working less, producing less, offering less protection.
8) societal collapse or reset, usually precipitated by a trigger event – maybe a natural disaster, economic collapse, foreign invasion etc.
2) the men, unchallenged, become weak.
3) the women’s hypergamous instinct is triggered. The women start to doubt their men’s ability to protect them.
4) women initiate a society wide shit-test – pushing for economic, political and societal freedoms.
5) the men, anesthetized by decades (or more) of women behaving decently grant women their freedoms.
6) the women, free of boundaries, behave in an ever more feral manner, desperately trying to provoke the men to push back, to reset the boundaries, to prove their strength, to lay to rest the hypergamous doubt.
7) the men, ever more disgusted by their women’s behavior disengage from women, and in so doing disengage from society, working less, producing less, offering less protection.
8) societal collapse or reset, usually precipitated by a trigger event – maybe a natural disaster, economic collapse, foreign invasion etc.
Sometimes these resets are mild, sometimes they are severe. And they are technology agnostic. Whatever technology of the time is co-oped by the women as a force multiplier. But there is a case to be made that this instinctive hypergamous instinct in women is what keeps humans moving forward, never resting on our laurels, continually de- stabilizing human societies when we get a bit lazy.
How many generations does it take to tear it down. Back in the 1930's a professor at Oxford and Cambridge – J D Ulwin – set out to prove how female equality would benefit society. He didn't find what he expected to find and to his credit he published his findings. He studied 85 societies and found that whilst not every society that has died has had female empowerment, every society that has tried female empowerment has died.
Tellingly no society with empowered women has lasted more than 3 generations. The young women entering the smp today are, broadly, the third generation. The whole cluster.. of feminism will implode on their watch. Plan accordingly
Every woman has a lifetime allotment of NO.
Each time she says it or implies a no via rudeness or cruelty uses up her store.
Then one day she hits the last No and the MAN flips the switch.
She is beyond her quota. She is of no importance.
Then one day she hits the last No and the MAN flips the switch.
She is beyond her quota. She is of no importance.
And its not retrievable by being nice. It is a paradigm shift. a solid impression.
Just as the wife goggles gave her the bank of NO, that made him put up waiting for the nice girl inside he knew was there.
Just as the wife goggles gave her the bank of NO, that made him put up waiting for the nice girl inside he knew was there.
Once the bank is dry the goggles are smashed replaced by a new set. A cast iron impression on one thing and one thing only. SELFISH BITCH.
A man is programmed to sacrifice, to endure for others. What can be the ultimate unforgivable in that mindset….Selfishness.
So one that selfishness arises once past the last NO, he then sees all she has done, all the NOs in a new light, of selfishness. And forever more she is a SELFISH BITCH.
Thus not worth his time. In fact not worth even looking at. and so
SHE CEASES TO EXIST….FOREVER.
SHE CEASES TO EXIST….FOREVER.
Its not a slow slide or a NO gauge winding down.
It is sudden. Immediate. Irretrievable.
How many generations does it take to tear it down. Back in the 1930s a professor at oxford and cambridge – J D Ulwin – set out to prove how female equality would benefit society. He didnt find what he expected to find and to his credit he published his findings. He studied 85 societies and (to summerise) found that whilst not every society that has died has had female empowerment, every society that has tried female empowerment has died.
It is sudden. Immediate. Irretrievable.
How many generations does it take to tear it down. Back in the 1930s a professor at oxford and cambridge – J D Ulwin – set out to prove how female equality would benefit society. He didnt find what he expected to find and to his credit he published his findings. He studied 85 societies and (to summerise) found that whilst not every society that has died has had female empowerment, every society that has tried female empowerment has died.
Tellingly no society with empowered women has lasted more than 3 generations. The young women entering the smp today are, broadly, the third generation. The whole clusterfuck of feminism will implode on their watch. Plan accordingly
30.8.16
Cuckolding
Cuckolding is in fact very serious. It comes under the category of ניאוף. [adultry]The definition of adultery in the Torah is sexual intercourse with a married woman or a betrothed woman by anyone other than her husband. It makes the woman forbidden to her husband. The children are ממזרים bastards, [and can not marry an Israelite woman]. If the act is done in front of two witnesses there is the death penalty for both the adulterer and adulteress. [Leviticus 18 and 20]
Gentiles are entirely unaware of this. They try to piece together a coherent idea of what the Torah holds based on random readings and scraps from place to place. Clearly that can not work.They do this based on Luther. That was a reaction to the problem that the Catholic church which had started out sincere and had become a self perpetrating bureaucracy. So on one hand he was doing a good thing- but it left a lot of misunderstandings. Since then it has been up to debate what the simple meaning of any verse is. How the individual wants to understand it? How the author meant? How the people reading it thought it meant when it was written? Etc.
Gentiles are entirely unaware of this. They try to piece together a coherent idea of what the Torah holds based on random readings and scraps from place to place. Clearly that can not work.They do this based on Luther. That was a reaction to the problem that the Catholic church which had started out sincere and had become a self perpetrating bureaucracy. So on one hand he was doing a good thing- but it left a lot of misunderstandings. Since then it has been up to debate what the simple meaning of any verse is. How the individual wants to understand it? How the author meant? How the people reading it thought it meant when it was written? Etc.
The rise and fall of Navardok yeshivas.But besides the great Litvak yeshivas in NY, the system has become a self perpetuating bureaucracy.
I mentioned a few times some critiques on the yeshiva system nowadays. These institutions started out sincere and great based on Reb Chaim from Voloshins's model of separating the yeshiva from the "Kahal" and authority of the local religious authorities. [Before that the local yeshiva was simply the local synagogue where teenagers learned during the day and the local home owners put them up with a place to sleep and meals].
But besides the great Litvak yeshivas in NY, the system has become a self perpetuating bureaucracy.
So Avi Preder suggested a return to the basic Beit Midrash Model, [i.e., study hall model].
Based on what I have seen and heard from many people, this makes sense. Too many people have been burnt by the system as it is in place today.
So what I suggest is a "Musar Beit Midrash." That is a kind of permutation from the "Musar Yeshiva" to a Musar Beit Midrash where the main emphasis is development of good character.
[This all came up because I was thinking about the rise and fall of Navardok yeshivas and thinking about the amazing effect they had on the students that learned in them.]
[I am I admit not sure how this would work in Israel. The Ponovitch yeshiva which is the greatest yeshiva in the world still goes by the old yeshiva model, and that might be the only practical way to go about things in Israel itself.]
[But what would happen if you don't pay people to learn Torah? All the yeshivas would empty out. I say that is a good thing. The only people then that would learn Torah would be the ones that do it for its own sake. Torah Lishma.]
But besides the great Litvak yeshivas in NY, the system has become a self perpetuating bureaucracy.
So Avi Preder suggested a return to the basic Beit Midrash Model, [i.e., study hall model].
Based on what I have seen and heard from many people, this makes sense. Too many people have been burnt by the system as it is in place today.
So what I suggest is a "Musar Beit Midrash." That is a kind of permutation from the "Musar Yeshiva" to a Musar Beit Midrash where the main emphasis is development of good character.
[This all came up because I was thinking about the rise and fall of Navardok yeshivas and thinking about the amazing effect they had on the students that learned in them.]
[I am I admit not sure how this would work in Israel. The Ponovitch yeshiva which is the greatest yeshiva in the world still goes by the old yeshiva model, and that might be the only practical way to go about things in Israel itself.]
[But what would happen if you don't pay people to learn Torah? All the yeshivas would empty out. I say that is a good thing. The only people then that would learn Torah would be the ones that do it for its own sake. Torah Lishma.]
29.8.16
So who do you trust to have a true and clear idea of what the Torah says? The Rambam or them?
On a related not to the previous blog entry I wanted to add that books that claim to be teaching the worldview of Torah are almost always teaching their worldview in the name of Torah.
After all people smart enough have already done the job of telling us the basic השקפה thought structure of the Torah--the Rambam and Saadia Gaon. And there is no book on השקפה today that agrees with anything they wrote. In the religious world, no one dares touch the Guide For the Perplexed of the Rambam or the אמונות ודעות of Saadia Gaon because the world view of the religious world is in fact directly opposed to everything the Rambam wrote in the Guide and Saadia Gaon.
So who do you trust to have a true and clear idea of what the Torah says? The Rambam or them?
And it is not as if the Rambam is hard to understand. The trouble is that he is infinitely easy to understand. The religious just don't like what he has to say.
After all people smart enough have already done the job of telling us the basic השקפה thought structure of the Torah--the Rambam and Saadia Gaon. And there is no book on השקפה today that agrees with anything they wrote. In the religious world, no one dares touch the Guide For the Perplexed of the Rambam or the אמונות ודעות of Saadia Gaon because the world view of the religious world is in fact directly opposed to everything the Rambam wrote in the Guide and Saadia Gaon.
So who do you trust to have a true and clear idea of what the Torah says? The Rambam or them?
And it is not as if the Rambam is hard to understand. The trouble is that he is infinitely easy to understand. The religious just don't like what he has to say.
"Outside books".[ ספרים חיצוניים
"Outside books".[ ספרים חיצוניים] The way the Rif and Rosh understand this is that outside books are books that explain the Torah not according to קבלת חז''ל. There are lots of books in the Ultra-Religious world that would come under the category of ספרים חיצוניים outside books according to that definition.
I did not go into detail because I am not sure where to draw the line. [Almost all religious books nowadays explain the Torah not according to the tradition of Chazal {the sages of the Talmud}] They always add mizvot that are not from Torah nor the Talmud. Always. And they subtract things the Chazal (sages) say are important. And they pervert the meaning of Torah to always mean that their cult is the right one. [And the things they add are always related to OCD things like mikveh or food preparation or graves of tzadikim or sexual hangups or to advance their cult. They say keep Torah but add this such and such. This is opposed to the Torah which says "Thou shalt not add nor subtract to the things that God has commanded you in the book of the Law."
(No offence intended towards Reb Nachman who was a great tzadik. Rather the critique here is directed to those groups that make a cult out him.)
The back topic starts with a mishna in Sanhedrin: "These are those who have no portion in the next world... R. Akiva added, 'One who reads outside books'." The Rambam does not poskin [decide]like R. Akiva. He brings in Laws of Repentance all the things that one loses his portion in the next world for and does not include the statement of R Akiva. But to the Rambam there are books that are forbidden ספרי עבודה זרה books on idol worship. This is brought in Laws of Idolatry.
Does the Rambam have the version printed in our Gemaras outside books are "Books of Minim?"
"Minim" Rashi there says means "books of idol worship." Is this perhaps what the Rambam is thinking? Minim we know has a specific definition and it does not mean idolatry?
[We know the Rambam is not just borrowing from Aristotle but also says that the command to learn the Oral Law includes the two subjects of Physics and Metaphysics as understood by the ancient Greeks. So he is certainly not thinking of Aristotle of Plato as being forbidden.
One person was involved in a cult (the Adi Da group) and left it. He died in a plane crash a few months later. But he left a few writings and interviews which explain the problem. He called it "consciousness trap." Books that seems to have everything right and even great advice--but there is some consciousness trap hidden inside them.
[כל הפורש מעבודה זרה מיד מת who ever separates himself from idol worship immediately dies. That is there is no escape. As for that fellow who fell into that cult I can only say that some people have come into the world to reveal some great secret and once they reveal it they are gone. It is almost as if they gave their life in order to bring some great knowledge into the world.
Like President Kennedy brought the awareness of jogging into the world. So that fellow who fell into that cult- perhaps he existed just to tell us all some of the dangers of cults and how to be afraid of things we ought to be afraid of.
In any case, if there are people out there that want to know what I think are kosher Torah books: the Written and Oral Law [the two Talmuds and midrashei Chazal]. There is little in mysticism that I think is kosher. The only kosher things would be the Arizal himself and Yaakov Abuchatzeira, nothing else. Everything else I would burn [just like the Gra did in Villna] as being books using the Chazal to create cults of idolatry.\
___________________________________________________________________________
ספרים חיצוניים. The way the רי''ף and רא''ש understand this is that ספרים חיצוניים are books that explain the Torah not according to קבלת חז''ל. There are lots of books in the חרדי world that would come under the category of ספרים חיצוניים outside books according to that definition.
Almost all religious books nowadays explain the Torah not according to the tradition of חז''ל the sages of the Talmud. They always add מצוות that are not from Torah nor the Talmud. Always. And they subtract things the חז''ל say are important. And they pervert the meaning of Torah to always mean that their cult is the right one.
The back topic starts with a משנה in סנהדרין: אלו בם שאין להם חלק בעולם הבאה האפיקורסים וכו' רבי עקיבא אמר גם הקורא בספרים חיצונים The רבב''ם does אינו פוסק כרבי עקיבא. He brings in הלכות תשובה all the things that one loses his portion in the next world for and does not include the statement of רבי עקיבא. But to the רמב''ם there are books that are forbidden ספרי עבודה זרה books on idol worship. This is brought in הלכות עבודה זרה.
Does the רמב''ם have the version printed in our גמרא outside books are ספרי מינים?
רש''י מפרש מינים להיות עובדי כוכבים Is this perhaps what the רמב''ם is thinking? מינים we know has a specific definition and it does not mean idolatry.
We know the רמב''ם is not just borrowing from אריסטו but also says that the command to learn the Oral Law includes the two subjects of פיסיקה and Metaphysics as understood by the ancient Greeks. So he is certainly not thinking of Aristotle of Plato as being forbidden.
One person was involved in a cult and left it. He died in a plane crash a few months later. But he left a few writings and interviews which explain the problem. He called it "consciousness trap." Books that seems to have everything right and even great advice--but there is some consciousness trap hidden inside them.
[כל הפורש מעבודה זרה מיד מת who ever separates himself from idol worship immediately dies. That is there is no escape. As for that fellow who fell into that cult I can only say that some people have come into the world to reveal some great secret and once they reveal it they are gone. It is almost as if they gave their life in order to bring some great knowledge into the world.
) סנהדרין. פרק חלק. ספרים חיצוניים. האופן שבו רי''ף ורא''ש הבינו את זאת הוא כי ספרים חיצוניים הם ספרים המסבירים את התורה ולא על פי קבלת חז''ל. יש המון ספרים בעולם החרדיים שיגיעו תחת הקטגוריה של הספרים חיצוניים. כל הספרים הדתיים כמעט כולם בימינו באים לפרש את התורה ולא על פי המסורת של חז''ל. הם תמיד רוצים להוסיף מצוות שאינן מן התורה ולא בתלמוד. תמיד. והם רוצים להחסיר דברים שחז''ל אומרים שהם חשובים. והם סוטים המשמעות של התורה תמיד לומר כי הפולחן שלהם הוא נכון. את הנושא מתחיל עם המשנה בסנהדרין: אלו בם שאין להם חלק בעולם הבא האפיקורסים וכו' רבי עקיבא אמר גם הקורא בספרי חיצונים. רבב''ם אינו פוסק כרבי עקיבא. הוא מביא בהלכות תשובה כל הדברים שאחד מאבד את חלקו בעולם הבא ואינו כולל את הדעה על רבי עקיבא. אבל להרמב''ם ישנם ספרים אסורים, ספרים על עבודת אלילים. זה מובא הלכות עבודה זרה. האם לרמב''ם את הגרסה של הגמרא שלנו "ספרי מינים"? רש''י מפרש מינים להיות עובדי כוכבים. האם זה אולי מה שהיה רמב''ם גרס. אבל מינים אנחנו יודעים את ההגדרה הספציפית וזה לא עבודה זרה. אנחנו יודעים את רמב''ם הוא פשוט לא רק לווה מאריסטו אלא גם אומר כי הפקודה כדי ללמוד את התורה שבעל פה כוללת את שני נושאים של פיסיקה ומטאפיסיקה כפי שהם היו מובנים על ידי היוונים העתיקים. אז הוא בהחלט לא חושב על אריסטו ואפלטון כמי אסור.
ספרים חיצונים יש להם "מלכודת תודעה." ספרים שנראה שיש להם את הכל נכון ואפילו עצות נהדרות - אבל יש מלכודת תודעה, חלק חבוי בהם.
I did not go into detail because I am not sure where to draw the line. [Almost all religious books nowadays explain the Torah not according to the tradition of Chazal {the sages of the Talmud}] They always add mizvot that are not from Torah nor the Talmud. Always. And they subtract things the Chazal (sages) say are important. And they pervert the meaning of Torah to always mean that their cult is the right one. [And the things they add are always related to OCD things like mikveh or food preparation or graves of tzadikim or sexual hangups or to advance their cult. They say keep Torah but add this such and such. This is opposed to the Torah which says "Thou shalt not add nor subtract to the things that God has commanded you in the book of the Law."
(No offence intended towards Reb Nachman who was a great tzadik. Rather the critique here is directed to those groups that make a cult out him.)
The back topic starts with a mishna in Sanhedrin: "These are those who have no portion in the next world... R. Akiva added, 'One who reads outside books'." The Rambam does not poskin [decide]like R. Akiva. He brings in Laws of Repentance all the things that one loses his portion in the next world for and does not include the statement of R Akiva. But to the Rambam there are books that are forbidden ספרי עבודה זרה books on idol worship. This is brought in Laws of Idolatry.
Does the Rambam have the version printed in our Gemaras outside books are "Books of Minim?"
"Minim" Rashi there says means "books of idol worship." Is this perhaps what the Rambam is thinking? Minim we know has a specific definition and it does not mean idolatry?
[We know the Rambam is not just borrowing from Aristotle but also says that the command to learn the Oral Law includes the two subjects of Physics and Metaphysics as understood by the ancient Greeks. So he is certainly not thinking of Aristotle of Plato as being forbidden.
One person was involved in a cult (the Adi Da group) and left it. He died in a plane crash a few months later. But he left a few writings and interviews which explain the problem. He called it "consciousness trap." Books that seems to have everything right and even great advice--but there is some consciousness trap hidden inside them.
[כל הפורש מעבודה זרה מיד מת who ever separates himself from idol worship immediately dies. That is there is no escape. As for that fellow who fell into that cult I can only say that some people have come into the world to reveal some great secret and once they reveal it they are gone. It is almost as if they gave their life in order to bring some great knowledge into the world.
Like President Kennedy brought the awareness of jogging into the world. So that fellow who fell into that cult- perhaps he existed just to tell us all some of the dangers of cults and how to be afraid of things we ought to be afraid of.
In any case, if there are people out there that want to know what I think are kosher Torah books: the Written and Oral Law [the two Talmuds and midrashei Chazal]. There is little in mysticism that I think is kosher. The only kosher things would be the Arizal himself and Yaakov Abuchatzeira, nothing else. Everything else I would burn [just like the Gra did in Villna] as being books using the Chazal to create cults of idolatry.\
___________________________________________________________________________
ספרים חיצוניים. The way the רי''ף and רא''ש understand this is that ספרים חיצוניים are books that explain the Torah not according to קבלת חז''ל. There are lots of books in the חרדי world that would come under the category of ספרים חיצוניים outside books according to that definition.
Almost all religious books nowadays explain the Torah not according to the tradition of חז''ל the sages of the Talmud. They always add מצוות that are not from Torah nor the Talmud. Always. And they subtract things the חז''ל say are important. And they pervert the meaning of Torah to always mean that their cult is the right one.
The back topic starts with a משנה in סנהדרין: אלו בם שאין להם חלק בעולם הבאה האפיקורסים וכו' רבי עקיבא אמר גם הקורא בספרים חיצונים The רבב''ם does אינו פוסק כרבי עקיבא. He brings in הלכות תשובה all the things that one loses his portion in the next world for and does not include the statement of רבי עקיבא. But to the רמב''ם there are books that are forbidden ספרי עבודה זרה books on idol worship. This is brought in הלכות עבודה זרה.
Does the רמב''ם have the version printed in our גמרא outside books are ספרי מינים?
רש''י מפרש מינים להיות עובדי כוכבים Is this perhaps what the רמב''ם is thinking? מינים we know has a specific definition and it does not mean idolatry.
We know the רמב''ם is not just borrowing from אריסטו but also says that the command to learn the Oral Law includes the two subjects of פיסיקה and Metaphysics as understood by the ancient Greeks. So he is certainly not thinking of Aristotle of Plato as being forbidden.
One person was involved in a cult and left it. He died in a plane crash a few months later. But he left a few writings and interviews which explain the problem. He called it "consciousness trap." Books that seems to have everything right and even great advice--but there is some consciousness trap hidden inside them.
[כל הפורש מעבודה זרה מיד מת who ever separates himself from idol worship immediately dies. That is there is no escape. As for that fellow who fell into that cult I can only say that some people have come into the world to reveal some great secret and once they reveal it they are gone. It is almost as if they gave their life in order to bring some great knowledge into the world.
) סנהדרין. פרק חלק. ספרים חיצוניים. האופן שבו רי''ף ורא''ש הבינו את זאת הוא כי ספרים חיצוניים הם ספרים המסבירים את התורה ולא על פי קבלת חז''ל. יש המון ספרים בעולם החרדיים שיגיעו תחת הקטגוריה של הספרים חיצוניים. כל הספרים הדתיים כמעט כולם בימינו באים לפרש את התורה ולא על פי המסורת של חז''ל. הם תמיד רוצים להוסיף מצוות שאינן מן התורה ולא בתלמוד. תמיד. והם רוצים להחסיר דברים שחז''ל אומרים שהם חשובים. והם סוטים המשמעות של התורה תמיד לומר כי הפולחן שלהם הוא נכון. את הנושא מתחיל עם המשנה בסנהדרין: אלו בם שאין להם חלק בעולם הבא האפיקורסים וכו' רבי עקיבא אמר גם הקורא בספרי חיצונים. רבב''ם אינו פוסק כרבי עקיבא. הוא מביא בהלכות תשובה כל הדברים שאחד מאבד את חלקו בעולם הבא ואינו כולל את הדעה על רבי עקיבא. אבל להרמב''ם ישנם ספרים אסורים, ספרים על עבודת אלילים. זה מובא הלכות עבודה זרה. האם לרמב''ם את הגרסה של הגמרא שלנו "ספרי מינים"? רש''י מפרש מינים להיות עובדי כוכבים. האם זה אולי מה שהיה רמב''ם גרס. אבל מינים אנחנו יודעים את ההגדרה הספציפית וזה לא עבודה זרה. אנחנו יודעים את רמב''ם הוא פשוט לא רק לווה מאריסטו אלא גם אומר כי הפקודה כדי ללמוד את התורה שבעל פה כוללת את שני נושאים של פיסיקה ומטאפיסיקה כפי שהם היו מובנים על ידי היוונים העתיקים. אז הוא בהחלט לא חושב על אריסטו ואפלטון כמי אסור.
ספרים חיצונים יש להם "מלכודת תודעה." ספרים שנראה שיש להם את הכל נכון ואפילו עצות נהדרות - אבל יש מלכודת תודעה, חלק חבוי בהם.
28.8.16
Religious people often display the basic set of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) behavior that is characteristic of very sick schizoid personalities.
Without Musar [the Ethics of the Torah], religious people display the basic set of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) behavior that is characteristic of very sick schizoid personalities. That is what is the top of the list with obsessive compulsive disorder? Obsession with bodily cleanliness, food preparation, obsession with holy places and sexual obsessions. When people are religious, but without Musar, they become infected with schizoid personality traits. They get obsessed with mikveh, with extra restrictions on food preparation that have nothing to do with Torah, they get obsessed with graves of tzadikim (and even graves of not tzadikim) and sexual obsessions e.g. with zniut and the like.
And they think their obsessions with these things makes them tzadikim, and they expect to get paid for being tzadikim. What got me fed up with them is after they spend all their time and effort on their obsessions (which have nothing to do with Torah), they have no time or energy left to be decent human beings.
I also found their idol worship highly annoying, [That is worship of their so called tzadikim.]
The word "Musar" refeers to books of moral principles written mainly during the Middle Ages, but also refers to one book written later,- the Mesilaat Yesharim by Luzato. That is the strict meaning. But in a more loose sense,it refers even to later books on ethics, even and including books wriiten by the diciples of Rav Israel Salanter
And they think their obsessions with these things makes them tzadikim, and they expect to get paid for being tzadikim. What got me fed up with them is after they spend all their time and effort on their obsessions (which have nothing to do with Torah), they have no time or energy left to be decent human beings.
I also found their idol worship highly annoying, [That is worship of their so called tzadikim.]
27.8.16
In terms of the beginning of the night I added this thought to what I had already written:
לתרץ את קושיית של נוגנבוער על ברמב''ם קידוש החודש פרק י''א הלכה ט''ז הרמב''ם קובע ניסן ג' בשעה 18:00 כבסיס בשנת 1,178 והוא אומר שהשמש הממוצעת היה ב 7/3/32. אם הולכים בחזרה שני ימים מוצאים המולד האמצעי היה ניסן א' 6:23 בערב. אבל אם מסתכלים בפרק ו' איפה שהוא מסביר איך למצוא את המולד הממוצע, יוצא המולד בניסן א' ב7:40 בערב.
שמעתי שויסנבערג תירץ את זה על ידי שהשקיעה הייתה ב6:14 ועוד הוא מוסיף עשרים דקות לראות את הלבנה, אבל עדיין נשארות חמישים דקות בלי הסבר.
דָּוִד אמר: התירוץ הוא, שאם היה מולד ממוצע אחד, זה היה קשה. אבל יש שנים,- יש המהירות הממוצעת של הלבנה סביב הגלגל הגדול. ויש מהירות של הלבנה סביב הטבעת הקטנה. בשביל שהלבנה קבועה בתוך הטבעת הקטנה, היא הולכת במהירות יתירה כשהיא הולכת בכיוון גלגל הגדול. והיא הולכת לאט כשהיא הולכת בכיוון להיפוך. אגב הרמב''ם כתב שהחישובים שלו הם רק השערות, שלמעשה המולד באותו יום היה ב5:57 בערב." אגבת נראה שהרמב''ם פוסק כמו רבינו תם בעניין שקיעה, שאם לא כן והוא מחזיק המולד בשבע וארבעים, אז זה ניסן ב'.אבל אם הרמב''ם מחזיק שמן השקיעה הראשונה עד הלילה תשעים דקות אז המולד חל בניסן א
I want to add that the Radvaz also has a teshuva [letter] saying that the Rambam holds by Rabbainu Tam. I did not see his reasoning at the time but it might be what I have written here
לתרץ את קושיית של נוגנבוער על ברמב''ם קידוש החודש פרק י''א הלכה ט''ז הרמב''ם קובע ניסן ג' בשעה 18:00 כבסיס בשנת 1,178 והוא אומר שהשמש הממוצעת היה ב 7/3/32. אם הולכים בחזרה שני ימים מוצאים המולד האמצעי היה ניסן א' 6:23 בערב. אבל אם מסתכלים בפרק ו' איפה שהוא מסביר איך למצוא את המולד הממוצע, יוצא המולד בניסן א' ב7:40 בערב.
שמעתי שויסנבערג תירץ את זה על ידי שהשקיעה הייתה ב6:14 ועוד הוא מוסיף עשרים דקות לראות את הלבנה, אבל עדיין נשארות חמישים דקות בלי הסבר.
דָּוִד אמר: התירוץ הוא, שאם היה מולד ממוצע אחד, זה היה קשה. אבל יש שנים,- יש המהירות הממוצעת של הלבנה סביב הגלגל הגדול. ויש מהירות של הלבנה סביב הטבעת הקטנה. בשביל שהלבנה קבועה בתוך הטבעת הקטנה, היא הולכת במהירות יתירה כשהיא הולכת בכיוון גלגל הגדול. והיא הולכת לאט כשהיא הולכת בכיוון להיפוך. אגב הרמב''ם כתב שהחישובים שלו הם רק השערות, שלמעשה המולד באותו יום היה ב5:57 בערב." אגבת נראה שהרמב''ם פוסק כמו רבינו תם בעניין שקיעה, שאם לא כן והוא מחזיק המולד בשבע וארבעים, אז זה ניסן ב'.אבל אם הרמב''ם מחזיק שמן השקיעה הראשונה עד הלילה תשעים דקות אז המולד חל בניסן א
I want to add that the Radvaz also has a teshuva [letter] saying that the Rambam holds by Rabbainu Tam. I did not see his reasoning at the time but it might be what I have written here
An answer for the Rambam
[Link to book on Shas] Link to book on Bava Metzia chs 8 and 9
For an introduction: There are 43 things one needs to brings a sin offering for, One is eating forbidden fat. If he ate a piece of fat and his wife comes in and asks, "Where is the forbidden fat I left on the table?" then he has to bring a sacrifice. If he ate one piece then another in one span and then knows about the first and brings a sacrifice, the second is included. If he ate two pieces and then remembers the first, and then eats a third and then brings a sacrifice on the first, the third is not included. "Knowings divide." In the way I explain the end of the Halacha; if he eats the first and second and remembers the first and then eats the third and remembers the second [so it is not all one span], then bringing on the second takes care of all three.
I wanted to answer a question in the Rambam laws of sacrifices for accidental sins. 6:11. My basic idea is this. He ate the first and second kezait (size of an olive) in one span of forgetfulness. Then he remembered the first one. And then ate a third kezait (size of an olive) in the same span of forgetfulness as the second one. [same as the beginning of that halacha]. But then (and this is the essential difference and the essential point.): At that point he remembered the second kezait. And he brings a sacrifice for the second Kezait (size of an olive).
The major difference in my new way is that he brings a sacrifice for the second Kezait not the first, and in that case the first and the third are included. The Rambam did spell this out clearly. And also is the important point that there are two knowings. The first knowing is after he ate the first two and then he knows about the first Kezait (not the second), So when then he eats the third the second and third are in one span of forgetting. But it is not all one span.
The way to think of this is where is the center of gravity? If one the acts of knowing then it is true the first and third are not in one span. But if the center of gravity is on the sacrifice then it is clear. He brings a sacrifice on the second-so you ask is the the kezait included? Yes, because it was in one span of forgetting with the second. Now you ask is the third included? You also have to answer yes, because it also was in one span of forgetting as the second. Therefore when he brings a sin offering for the second the first and third are both included.
[I forget who brought up the fact that this Rambam is hard to understand maybe it was the Beit Yoseph or maybe Rav Shach. We stumbled upon it when we were learning Rav Shach's Avi Ezri]
[In short the Rambam says he knows about the second. But that does not mean before he ate the third. That is the source of confusion.]
[I do not know why David Bronson did not answer the Rambam the way I just did, or even if he would accept it. ]
_________________________________________________________________________________
מבוא: יש ארבעים ושלשה סוגים של חטא שצריך להביא עליהם חטאת . חלב אחד מהם. אז הנה יש לנו מקרה שבו היה כזית חלב בתנור . בן אדם נכנס ואכל אותו. ואז אשתו נכנס ושאל, "איפה הוא כזית חלב ששם בתנור?" הוא צריך להביא חטאת. אם הוא אכל חתיכה אחת ואחר כך עוד אחת בפרק אחד ואז יודע על הראשונה הוא מביא קרבן, והשניה כלולה. אם הוא אכל שתי חתיכות ולאחר מכן זוכר את הראשונה ואז אוכל שלישית ואז מביא קרבן על הראשונה, השלישית אינה כלולה. ידיעה מחלקת. בדרך שאני מסביר סוף החוק: אם הוא אוכל את כזית הראשון והשני וזוכר את הראשון ואז אוכל את השלישי וזוכר את השני [כך שזה לא כל העלם אחד], אז מביא על השני ומתכפר על כל שלושתם .
רציתי לענות על שאלה בהלכות שגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו 'הלכה ט' והלכה י''א. הרעיון הבסיסי שלי היא כזאת. הוא אכל את כזית הראשונה ושנייה בפרק אחד של שכחה. ואז נזכר הראשון. ואז אכל כזית שלישית באותה התקופה של שיכחה של השנייה. זה אותו דבר כתחילת דין זה. אבל אז (וזה ההבדל המהותי ואת הנקודה החשובה.): בשלב זה נזכר בכזית השני. והוא מביא קרבן עבור השני. הראשון והשלישי כלולים. רמב''ם כתב את זה בבירור. הנקודה החשובה היא שיש שתי ידיעות. הידיעה הראשונה היא לאחר שאכל שני הראשונים ואז הוא יודע על כזית הראשון, ולא על השני. לכן, כאשר לאחר מכן הוא אוכל השלישי, השני והשלישי הם בפרק אחד של שיכחה. הדרך לחשוב על זה. איפה מרכז הכובד? אם מרכז הכובד הוא בידיעה, אז זה נכון שהראשון ושלישי אינם בפרק אחד. אבל אם מרכז הכובד הוא על הקרבה, אז ברור. הוא מביא קרבן על השני. אז אתה שואל "האם כזית הראשון כלול?" כן, כי זה היה בפרק אחד של שיכחה עם השני. עכשיו אתה שואל, "האם השלישי בכלל?" אתה גם צריך לענות "כן", כי זה גם היה בפרק אחד של שכחה כמו השני. לכן כאשר הוא מביא קורבן חטאת עבור השני הראשון והשלישי שניהם כלולים.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Here is what I had written about this subject beforehand and as you can see I tried to answer the questions on the Rambam and then my learning partner David Bronson showed that my answer then did not work. Now I am answering this question in a new way.
) הלכות שגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו' הלכה ט' והלכה י''א. אני מביא כאן שאלה על רמב''ם. אבל לפני כן אני מחויב לעבור את הנושא. מבוא. יש ארבעים ושלשה סוגים של חטא שצריך להביא עליהם חטאת . כלומר עז נקבה או כבשה. חטאת ניתן להביא רק לשוגג. אז הנה יש לנו מקרה שבו הייתה כזית חלב בתנור. בן אדם נכנס ואכל אותו. ואז אשתו נכנסה ושאלה, "איפה הוא כזית החלב ששמתי בתנור?" הוא צריך להביא חטאת. אם אוכל חתיכת החלב, הוא מביא חטאת. אם הוא אכל כזית ולאחר מכן ידע שהיה חלב, ואז אכל כזית נוספת ולאחר מכן ידע על השני שהיה חלב, יש לו להביא חטאת על כל חתיכה. לא רק זה, אלא אם היו שתי ידיעות, היינו שהוא אכל כזית חלב, ואכל עוד כזית חלב, ואז הוא ידע על כזית הראשון ואחרי כן ידע על כזית השני, הוא מביא שתי חטאות. אתה לא צריך שתהיינה הידיעות בין שני מעשים של אכילה. שבת דף ע''א וכן ברמב''ם הלכות שגגות פרק ו': הלכה ט'. כלומר הרמב''ם החליט כמו רבי יוחנן שידיעות מחלקות, לא כמו ריש לקיש שהקרבת הקורבן היא מחלקת. כפרות מחלקות.
אם הוא אכל שני כזיתים כאחד בהעלמה אחת, ולאחר מכן ידע על כזית הראשון. לאחר מכן, באותו פרק הזמן של שיכחת השני אכל כזית שלישי. כשהוא מביא חטאת לחתיכה הראשונה, הוא פוטר את הכזית השנייה. זה משגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו' הלכה י''א. כל זה מהרמב''ם שגגות ו:י''א הוא אוכל שני כזיתים של חלב בהעלמה אחת. ואז הוא יודע על כזית הראשון. לאחר מכן, באותו העלמה של כזית השני, הוא אוכל כזית שלישי. הידיעה מחלקת הראשון מן השלישי. הוא יידרש חטאת לכזית הראשון, והשני ייכלל גם אם הוא לא יודע על זה עדיין. אם במקום זאת הוא הביא לשלישי גם השני ייכלל. סוף ההלכה הוא זה: אם הוא נזכר בכזית השני, ומביא חטאת לזה, אז הראשון ושלישי יהיו כלולים, וכשהוא זוכר אותם הוא לא יידרש להקריב עוד. בטעות חשבתי להסביר את סוף הלכה י''א. חשבתי שהמקרה דומה לתחילת ההלכה אבל בהבדל אחד. הוא אכל כזית ראשון והשני, ואז נזכר בכזית השני, ולאחר מכן באותה העלמה של כזית הראשון אכל כזית השלישי. עכשיו הוא מביא חטאת לכזית השני. הראשון ושלישי מתכפרים לפי שהם היו באותה העלמה כשני, אבל זה לא אותו הדבר כמו העלמה אחת על כולם. בדרך שלי כזית הראשונה וכזית שלישי נמצאים בהעלמה אחת, וכי העובדה שלא היתה ידיעה שנייה עושה את כל זה העלמה אחת. בדרך זו היא לא מקרה טריוויאלי שכל השלושה כזיתים נאכלו בהעלם אחד. החטאת באה אחרי כזית השלישי נאכל, ואז כשהוא נזכר בכזית הראשון והשלישי הם ייכללו. המוטיבציה לגישה שלי היא העובדה שאם במקרה שבו יש רק שני כזיתים, והוא אוכל כזית ראשון וכזית שני בהעלם אחד, ולאחר מכן זכר כזית ראשון ומביא חטאת לכזית הראשון לבד, כזית השני כלול באופן אוטומטי משום שלא היתה ידיעה שנייה לכזית השני. אבל אם הוא ידע על כזית שני לפני החטאת, הוא יצטרך להביא עוד חטאת כי הידיעה השנייה עושה הפרד.
למחרת: אמרתי להחברותא שלי את הרעיון. אמרתי שכזית הראשון וכזית השני מחוברים. ולאחר מכן כזית שלישי וכזית ראשון מחוברים. לכן כזית שלישי מחובר לכזית שני באמצעות גשר דרך כזית הראשון.
הוא ציין כי זה לא יכול להיות נכון, כי אז זה יעבוד לתחילת ההלכה,הלכה י''א, כלומר, כאשר כזית הראשון וכזית השני היו בפרק אחד, ואז הוא נזכר בכזית הראשון ולאחר מכן אכל כזית שלישי באותה העלמה של כזית השני, במקרה שרק הראשון והשני מחוברים, וכשהוא מביא חטאת על הראשון, אז כזית השני מוכלל. אז ברור כזית השני לא יכול לגשר בין השלישי וראשון. אז כזית הראשון לא יכול לגשר בין השלישי והשני. וחוץ מזה הוא ציין כי הגמרא עצמה אומרת גררא אחת אמרינן, שתי גררות לא אמרינן. ויתר על כן זה שכל ישר. אם הוא אכל הראשון ואז נזכר בו ולאחר מכן אכל כזית שנייה, אז כזית השני הוא לא באותה העלמה. אז במקרה שלי גם. כשהוא נזכר כזית השני זה עושה כזית השני וכזית השלישי בהעלמות נפרדות.
________________________________________________________________
For an introduction: There are 43 things one needs to brings a sin offering for, One is eating forbidden fat. If he ate a piece of fat and his wife comes in and asks, "Where is the forbidden fat I left on the table?" then he has to bring a sacrifice. If he ate one piece then another in one span and then knows about the first and brings a sacrifice, the second is included. If he ate two pieces and then remembers the first, and then eats a third and then brings a sacrifice on the first, the third is not included. "Knowings divide." In the way I explain the end of the Halacha; if he eats the first and second and remembers the first and then eats the third and remembers the second [so it is not all one span], then bringing on the second takes care of all three.
I wanted to answer a question in the Rambam laws of sacrifices for accidental sins. 6:11. My basic idea is this. He ate the first and second kezait (size of an olive) in one span of forgetfulness. Then he remembered the first one. And then ate a third kezait (size of an olive) in the same span of forgetfulness as the second one. [same as the beginning of that halacha]. But then (and this is the essential difference and the essential point.): At that point he remembered the second kezait. And he brings a sacrifice for the second Kezait (size of an olive).
The major difference in my new way is that he brings a sacrifice for the second Kezait not the first, and in that case the first and the third are included. The Rambam did spell this out clearly. And also is the important point that there are two knowings. The first knowing is after he ate the first two and then he knows about the first Kezait (not the second), So when then he eats the third the second and third are in one span of forgetting. But it is not all one span.
The way to think of this is where is the center of gravity? If one the acts of knowing then it is true the first and third are not in one span. But if the center of gravity is on the sacrifice then it is clear. He brings a sacrifice on the second-so you ask is the the kezait included? Yes, because it was in one span of forgetting with the second. Now you ask is the third included? You also have to answer yes, because it also was in one span of forgetting as the second. Therefore when he brings a sin offering for the second the first and third are both included.
[I forget who brought up the fact that this Rambam is hard to understand maybe it was the Beit Yoseph or maybe Rav Shach. We stumbled upon it when we were learning Rav Shach's Avi Ezri]
[In short the Rambam says he knows about the second. But that does not mean before he ate the third. That is the source of confusion.]
[I do not know why David Bronson did not answer the Rambam the way I just did, or even if he would accept it. ]
_________________________________________________________________________________
מבוא: יש ארבעים ושלשה סוגים של חטא שצריך להביא עליהם חטאת . חלב אחד מהם. אז הנה יש לנו מקרה שבו היה כזית חלב בתנור . בן אדם נכנס ואכל אותו. ואז אשתו נכנס ושאל, "איפה הוא כזית חלב ששם בתנור?" הוא צריך להביא חטאת. אם הוא אכל חתיכה אחת ואחר כך עוד אחת בפרק אחד ואז יודע על הראשונה הוא מביא קרבן, והשניה כלולה. אם הוא אכל שתי חתיכות ולאחר מכן זוכר את הראשונה ואז אוכל שלישית ואז מביא קרבן על הראשונה, השלישית אינה כלולה. ידיעה מחלקת. בדרך שאני מסביר סוף החוק: אם הוא אוכל את כזית הראשון והשני וזוכר את הראשון ואז אוכל את השלישי וזוכר את השני [כך שזה לא כל העלם אחד], אז מביא על השני ומתכפר על כל שלושתם .
רציתי לענות על שאלה בהלכות שגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו 'הלכה ט' והלכה י''א. הרעיון הבסיסי שלי היא כזאת. הוא אכל את כזית הראשונה ושנייה בפרק אחד של שכחה. ואז נזכר הראשון. ואז אכל כזית שלישית באותה התקופה של שיכחה של השנייה. זה אותו דבר כתחילת דין זה. אבל אז (וזה ההבדל המהותי ואת הנקודה החשובה.): בשלב זה נזכר בכזית השני. והוא מביא קרבן עבור השני. הראשון והשלישי כלולים. רמב''ם כתב את זה בבירור. הנקודה החשובה היא שיש שתי ידיעות. הידיעה הראשונה היא לאחר שאכל שני הראשונים ואז הוא יודע על כזית הראשון, ולא על השני. לכן, כאשר לאחר מכן הוא אוכל השלישי, השני והשלישי הם בפרק אחד של שיכחה. הדרך לחשוב על זה. איפה מרכז הכובד? אם מרכז הכובד הוא בידיעה, אז זה נכון שהראשון ושלישי אינם בפרק אחד. אבל אם מרכז הכובד הוא על הקרבה, אז ברור. הוא מביא קרבן על השני. אז אתה שואל "האם כזית הראשון כלול?" כן, כי זה היה בפרק אחד של שיכחה עם השני. עכשיו אתה שואל, "האם השלישי בכלל?" אתה גם צריך לענות "כן", כי זה גם היה בפרק אחד של שכחה כמו השני. לכן כאשר הוא מביא קורבן חטאת עבור השני הראשון והשלישי שניהם כלולים.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Here is what I had written about this subject beforehand and as you can see I tried to answer the questions on the Rambam and then my learning partner David Bronson showed that my answer then did not work. Now I am answering this question in a new way.
) הלכות שגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו' הלכה ט' והלכה י''א. אני מביא כאן שאלה על רמב''ם. אבל לפני כן אני מחויב לעבור את הנושא. מבוא. יש ארבעים ושלשה סוגים של חטא שצריך להביא עליהם חטאת . כלומר עז נקבה או כבשה. חטאת ניתן להביא רק לשוגג. אז הנה יש לנו מקרה שבו הייתה כזית חלב בתנור. בן אדם נכנס ואכל אותו. ואז אשתו נכנסה ושאלה, "איפה הוא כזית החלב ששמתי בתנור?" הוא צריך להביא חטאת. אם אוכל חתיכת החלב, הוא מביא חטאת. אם הוא אכל כזית ולאחר מכן ידע שהיה חלב, ואז אכל כזית נוספת ולאחר מכן ידע על השני שהיה חלב, יש לו להביא חטאת על כל חתיכה. לא רק זה, אלא אם היו שתי ידיעות, היינו שהוא אכל כזית חלב, ואכל עוד כזית חלב, ואז הוא ידע על כזית הראשון ואחרי כן ידע על כזית השני, הוא מביא שתי חטאות. אתה לא צריך שתהיינה הידיעות בין שני מעשים של אכילה. שבת דף ע''א וכן ברמב''ם הלכות שגגות פרק ו': הלכה ט'. כלומר הרמב''ם החליט כמו רבי יוחנן שידיעות מחלקות, לא כמו ריש לקיש שהקרבת הקורבן היא מחלקת. כפרות מחלקות.
אם הוא אכל שני כזיתים כאחד בהעלמה אחת, ולאחר מכן ידע על כזית הראשון. לאחר מכן, באותו פרק הזמן של שיכחת השני אכל כזית שלישי. כשהוא מביא חטאת לחתיכה הראשונה, הוא פוטר את הכזית השנייה. זה משגגות ברמב''ם פרק ו' הלכה י''א. כל זה מהרמב''ם שגגות ו:י''א הוא אוכל שני כזיתים של חלב בהעלמה אחת. ואז הוא יודע על כזית הראשון. לאחר מכן, באותו העלמה של כזית השני, הוא אוכל כזית שלישי. הידיעה מחלקת הראשון מן השלישי. הוא יידרש חטאת לכזית הראשון, והשני ייכלל גם אם הוא לא יודע על זה עדיין. אם במקום זאת הוא הביא לשלישי גם השני ייכלל. סוף ההלכה הוא זה: אם הוא נזכר בכזית השני, ומביא חטאת לזה, אז הראשון ושלישי יהיו כלולים, וכשהוא זוכר אותם הוא לא יידרש להקריב עוד. בטעות חשבתי להסביר את סוף הלכה י''א. חשבתי שהמקרה דומה לתחילת ההלכה אבל בהבדל אחד. הוא אכל כזית ראשון והשני, ואז נזכר בכזית השני, ולאחר מכן באותה העלמה של כזית הראשון אכל כזית השלישי. עכשיו הוא מביא חטאת לכזית השני. הראשון ושלישי מתכפרים לפי שהם היו באותה העלמה כשני, אבל זה לא אותו הדבר כמו העלמה אחת על כולם. בדרך שלי כזית הראשונה וכזית שלישי נמצאים בהעלמה אחת, וכי העובדה שלא היתה ידיעה שנייה עושה את כל זה העלמה אחת. בדרך זו היא לא מקרה טריוויאלי שכל השלושה כזיתים נאכלו בהעלם אחד. החטאת באה אחרי כזית השלישי נאכל, ואז כשהוא נזכר בכזית הראשון והשלישי הם ייכללו. המוטיבציה לגישה שלי היא העובדה שאם במקרה שבו יש רק שני כזיתים, והוא אוכל כזית ראשון וכזית שני בהעלם אחד, ולאחר מכן זכר כזית ראשון ומביא חטאת לכזית הראשון לבד, כזית השני כלול באופן אוטומטי משום שלא היתה ידיעה שנייה לכזית השני. אבל אם הוא ידע על כזית שני לפני החטאת, הוא יצטרך להביא עוד חטאת כי הידיעה השנייה עושה הפרד.
למחרת: אמרתי להחברותא שלי את הרעיון. אמרתי שכזית הראשון וכזית השני מחוברים. ולאחר מכן כזית שלישי וכזית ראשון מחוברים. לכן כזית שלישי מחובר לכזית שני באמצעות גשר דרך כזית הראשון.
הוא ציין כי זה לא יכול להיות נכון, כי אז זה יעבוד לתחילת ההלכה,הלכה י''א, כלומר, כאשר כזית הראשון וכזית השני היו בפרק אחד, ואז הוא נזכר בכזית הראשון ולאחר מכן אכל כזית שלישי באותה העלמה של כזית השני, במקרה שרק הראשון והשני מחוברים, וכשהוא מביא חטאת על הראשון, אז כזית השני מוכלל. אז ברור כזית השני לא יכול לגשר בין השלישי וראשון. אז כזית הראשון לא יכול לגשר בין השלישי והשני. וחוץ מזה הוא ציין כי הגמרא עצמה אומרת גררא אחת אמרינן, שתי גררות לא אמרינן. ויתר על כן זה שכל ישר. אם הוא אכל הראשון ואז נזכר בו ולאחר מכן אכל כזית שנייה, אז כזית השני הוא לא באותה העלמה. אז במקרה שלי גם. כשהוא נזכר כזית השני זה עושה כזית השני וכזית השלישי בהעלמות נפרדות.
________________________________________________________________
The soft sciences I do not think are science at all but propaganda dressed in the clothing of science. But for the hard sciences, I do not think they contradict the Torah.
This all came about from the Enlightenment project of depriving kings and priests of their power and replacing them with scientists. It was inevitable at that point that once science gained the upper hand, there would be just as much abuse that had existed before in the priesthood, in kings and princes. Whoever wanted power could dress their illusions as science.
The best approach then, based on the (Rambam) Maimonides, is a balance between learning Torah and the true sciences-- Physics, Math, and STEM. The trouble however remains that the Enlightenment tried to address. Abuse of religion and politics. Abuse did not change its basic nature because it switched to science, and going back to religion does not change it ether. The Evil Inclination retains its power. As my brother put it: "people are people... are people."
The need for Guru
A lot of religious groups take advantage of the human need for a shaman, a holy man, a guru. The man that can play this role gets an amazing amount of benefits including the "Lift" of being adored by countless numbers of women much more than their own husbands. And the people that follow get the benefit of having a "Shaman" holy man. It matters little what religion involved because they all are trying to make profit by this human dynamic.
The first order of business of the Guru is the castrate all the other males--that is to make them into Beta Males where their wives listen to the shaman, guru or pastor; not their husbands.
And since being part of a group (a social super-organism) is central to all humans --and since the most effective and powerful super-organism is the one centered on the Alpha Male--one can not very well avoid this dynamic.
The best idea thus is to find the group that most accurately goes by objective morality. To my mind that is the Litvak Yeshiva [yeshiva based on the path of the Gra]. But that is really just based on my own positive experience in two of those kinds of places. Shar Yashuv and the Mir--both in NY. I admit other people may have had a worse experience, and I myself had some reason to think they are not all of equal quality after seeing many others besides those two in NY.
But I try to support any group that I see as doing good work and I see their vector is towards objective morality and the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob.
The first order of business of the Guru is the castrate all the other males--that is to make them into Beta Males where their wives listen to the shaman, guru or pastor; not their husbands.
And since being part of a group (a social super-organism) is central to all humans --and since the most effective and powerful super-organism is the one centered on the Alpha Male--one can not very well avoid this dynamic.
The best idea thus is to find the group that most accurately goes by objective morality. To my mind that is the Litvak Yeshiva [yeshiva based on the path of the Gra]. But that is really just based on my own positive experience in two of those kinds of places. Shar Yashuv and the Mir--both in NY. I admit other people may have had a worse experience, and I myself had some reason to think they are not all of equal quality after seeing many others besides those two in NY.
But I try to support any group that I see as doing good work and I see their vector is towards objective morality and the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob.
26.8.16
Trust that God will provide.
I see my level of trust has gotten so low that I need something to imbed trust in Hashem back into my soul. It did occur to me that some of the major tests that I have gone trough in life and that did not turn out well was because I did not have trust.
How to put this? Some of the best decisions I think I made were because I trusted in God and some of the worst decisions I made were based on lack of trust.
That to me means that this is an important issue for me. I mean it might be that it is a particular area that I need to work on.
In short, going to NY to a very good Lithuanian yeshiva, Shar Yashuv was at least based on some degree of trust that God would provide. That was in fact an important move because I highly doubt if I would ever have been “able to learn” without the few very crucial years I spent there and learned with the great Gaon, Naphtali Yegeer.
Later going to Israel also was based on a certain degree of trust that God would provide for my needs and the needs of my wife and children.
And leaving Israel was clearly based on a lack of trust.
So I am beginning to see this is an important issue.
Jesus said to keep the law of Moses
Jesus said one has to keep all the commandments of the Written and Oral Law.
["Not one word of the Law of Moses will ever be nullified." "The Pharisees sit on Moses seat. so all they say to do one must do."]
I was never able to see in the actions or words that are recorded in the name of Jesus anything but a call to keep the holy Torah, and avoid hypocrites. There is nothing to indicate otherwise to me.
But it occurred to me a few day ago why Christians do not see things in this way?
It depends on your starting point. If you start with Paul and the Book of Hebrews, and then work backwards towards the four gospels, then you can see how Christians take the words of Jesus and get them to fit into the worldview of Paul.
I feel that my approach is more accurate, but I can see why Christians see things differently based on their starting point.
As my brother put it, he (Jesus) is comparable to R. Shimon Ben Yohai. Same message same kind of expressions. (I was thinking more along the lines of R. Hanina Ben Dosa, the miracle worker, who also was highly misunderstood.) Maybe it makes sense to go into this in detail, but I am pretty sure I am not the first person to notice this. [Daniel Defoe also noted that Paul never said Jews need not keep the Law and he goes into great detail about that.]
I can't look anything up but perhaps I should write a drop off hand to make it clear what I mean.
(1) Heaven and Earth are still around therefore one has to keep all the Mitzvot, since "Heaven and earth will pass away but not one jot or title of the Law of Moses."
(2) Being the "son of Man" (as Jesus said he is) is not the same as being God.
(3) Nor is being the son of God the same as being God. The angels are called בני האלהים [children of God] in Job. In Genesis the בני האלהים "children of God came upon the daughters of man and gave birth." All the Jewish people are called the "children of God" in Exodus. They are called "בני בכורי" "my child, my first born" when Moses was telling Pharaoh to let them go. "Let my son, my first born Israel go!"
(4) Revival was a miracle done by the prophet Elisha in Kings and also Eliyahu the prophet and that does not indicate either Elisha or Eliyahu were God.
(5) When someone called Jesus, "good," he said, "Do not call me good. Only call God 'good.'"
(6) Contrary to the book of Hebrews, the Law of Moses is the life and the good. "These are the commandments that one should do and by doing so he will live"--Leviticus. "I place before you this day life and the good, and death and evil. Therefore choose life to walk in the commandments of God"-Deuteronomy.
The prophets end with "Remember the Law of Moses" Malachi.
The commandments do not sound like they temporary as long as one wants "the life and the good."
I should mention that in spite of all this people that make a show of keeping the commandments and expect to get paid for doing so as the ultra religious do are also not keeping the law of God and there is good reason to run from them.
(7) The book of Hebrews makes it clear that the Law of God is a burden and bad thing. It could not be more clear even if he had wanted to be. That is in direct contradiction to everything it says in the Law of Moses about the Law being a good thing. And in contradiction to Jesus himself that the law will never pass away. Therefore you have to say that the approach of Jesus and that of the author of the book of Hebrews is not the same.--as long as words mean something.
(8) Mixing dirt and water on Shabat is subject to an argument among the rishonim. See the Rosh [Rabbainu Asher]. So there is no reason to think Jesus was violating the Shabat.
(9) Eating grains from attached sheaves on Shabat is not violating Shabat if the sheaves are ripe already are no longer getting sustenance from the ground.
(10) Swearing by the altar in the Holy Temple is an argument among the sages of the Mishna as brought in Tractate Nedarim and Jesus was going with the opinion of R. Yehuda. Not that he was disagreeing with the sages.
Or for beginners that do not know Hebrew what they could do is to get Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch's Horev which gives a great introduction to the Torah.
The setback to all this is that the t groups that claim to be keeping the Law of Moses are all terrible cults, and it is not my intention for people to get involved in any of those horrific, demonic cults. For this reason I have tried to mention on this blog the importance of Litvak {Lithuanian}yeshivas based on the path of the Gra and Rav Elazar Menachem Shach and to avoid all the cults. Or to learn Torah at home.
Appendix:
I should mention:I grew up in John Birch society area. It was basically WASP and very nice. I kind of had a glimpse of Old American Values, and it was a really nice world. So I have a certain degree of respect for those kinds of values. But the values of Jesus and the Talmud are exactly the same, -only Paul comes out making a different religion.
Where do you see this in the Talmud? Mainly in books of Musar. The Talmud itself is not concerned with the larger issues of morals and compassion but with law. It was the later Musar books that condensed the basic world view of the Torah into simple forms that you can see this. The idea of compassion being central in Torah is clear in Musar and the sermon on the mount is mainly word for word what you find in Reshit Chachma at the end where is brought ancient teachings from the second Temple period.
So even though Christians have a great deal for respect for Jesus -and that is a good thing-still their interpretations of him seem to me to be very much contrary to everything that Jesus himself thought and said.
["Not one word of the Law of Moses will ever be nullified." "The Pharisees sit on Moses seat. so all they say to do one must do."]
I was never able to see in the actions or words that are recorded in the name of Jesus anything but a call to keep the holy Torah, and avoid hypocrites. There is nothing to indicate otherwise to me.
But it occurred to me a few day ago why Christians do not see things in this way?
It depends on your starting point. If you start with Paul and the Book of Hebrews, and then work backwards towards the four gospels, then you can see how Christians take the words of Jesus and get them to fit into the worldview of Paul.
I feel that my approach is more accurate, but I can see why Christians see things differently based on their starting point.
As my brother put it, he (Jesus) is comparable to R. Shimon Ben Yohai. Same message same kind of expressions. (I was thinking more along the lines of R. Hanina Ben Dosa, the miracle worker, who also was highly misunderstood.) Maybe it makes sense to go into this in detail, but I am pretty sure I am not the first person to notice this. [Daniel Defoe also noted that Paul never said Jews need not keep the Law and he goes into great detail about that.]
I can't look anything up but perhaps I should write a drop off hand to make it clear what I mean.
(1) Heaven and Earth are still around therefore one has to keep all the Mitzvot, since "Heaven and earth will pass away but not one jot or title of the Law of Moses."
(2) Being the "son of Man" (as Jesus said he is) is not the same as being God.
(3) Nor is being the son of God the same as being God. The angels are called בני האלהים [children of God] in Job. In Genesis the בני האלהים "children of God came upon the daughters of man and gave birth." All the Jewish people are called the "children of God" in Exodus. They are called "בני בכורי" "my child, my first born" when Moses was telling Pharaoh to let them go. "Let my son, my first born Israel go!"
(4) Revival was a miracle done by the prophet Elisha in Kings and also Eliyahu the prophet and that does not indicate either Elisha or Eliyahu were God.
(5) When someone called Jesus, "good," he said, "Do not call me good. Only call God 'good.'"
(6) Contrary to the book of Hebrews, the Law of Moses is the life and the good. "These are the commandments that one should do and by doing so he will live"--Leviticus. "I place before you this day life and the good, and death and evil. Therefore choose life to walk in the commandments of God"-Deuteronomy.
The prophets end with "Remember the Law of Moses" Malachi.
The commandments do not sound like they temporary as long as one wants "the life and the good."
I should mention that in spite of all this people that make a show of keeping the commandments and expect to get paid for doing so as the ultra religious do are also not keeping the law of God and there is good reason to run from them.
(7) The book of Hebrews makes it clear that the Law of God is a burden and bad thing. It could not be more clear even if he had wanted to be. That is in direct contradiction to everything it says in the Law of Moses about the Law being a good thing. And in contradiction to Jesus himself that the law will never pass away. Therefore you have to say that the approach of Jesus and that of the author of the book of Hebrews is not the same.--as long as words mean something.
(8) Mixing dirt and water on Shabat is subject to an argument among the rishonim. See the Rosh [Rabbainu Asher]. So there is no reason to think Jesus was violating the Shabat.
(9) Eating grains from attached sheaves on Shabat is not violating Shabat if the sheaves are ripe already are no longer getting sustenance from the ground.
(10) Swearing by the altar in the Holy Temple is an argument among the sages of the Mishna as brought in Tractate Nedarim and Jesus was going with the opinion of R. Yehuda. Not that he was disagreeing with the sages.
These are merely a small sample of what occurs to me off hand about this. But you can already see where I am going with all this. Churchianity has nothing to do with Jesus. If one wants to follow Jesus he need to learn and keep the Law of Moses and the Oral commentary.
And just to lay my cards on the table what I am suggesting is for people to learn the whole written law in Hebrew {That is the Old Testament} word for word. Plus the Oral Law which also is very easy if you simply start at the beginning of Tractate Brachot and just say page after page as fast as possible until you have finished the two Talmuds the Sifra Sifri Mechilta Tora, Kohanim and the Midrash Raba and Midrash Tanchuma.(I personally prefer to do this kind of thing with Rashi and Tosphot but you do not have to. You can do instead just the simple basic oral law itself with no commentary if you want.)Or for beginners that do not know Hebrew what they could do is to get Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch's Horev which gives a great introduction to the Torah.
The setback to all this is that the t groups that claim to be keeping the Law of Moses are all terrible cults, and it is not my intention for people to get involved in any of those horrific, demonic cults. For this reason I have tried to mention on this blog the importance of Litvak {Lithuanian}yeshivas based on the path of the Gra and Rav Elazar Menachem Shach and to avoid all the cults. Or to learn Torah at home.
Appendix:
So even though Christians have a great deal for respect for Jesus -and that is a good thing-still their interpretations of him seem to me to be very much contrary to everything that Jesus himself thought and said.
25.8.16
Mark Twain has an essay that is very favorable towards the Jewish people and his ideas are accurate as
per his time. But things nowadays seem different. As the world has changed so
the situation with Jewish people. My own impression about this kind of
thing is what Reb Shmuel Berenbaum, used to say:"Learn Torah."
That
is to say there are issues that sometimes I have some idea about. and other
times I don't. Lots of issues have arisen in my life in which clarity was
lacking. I have found the best advice is to learn Torah. The issues facing the
Jewish people today seem very different from the ones that people were asking
Mark Twain about.
On modern day issues, I have some clarity. He mentioned about
Dr Herzel in his characteristic ironic way. I am basically impressed with
Zionism and the State of Israel.
Today when Ultra-Religious people disparage the State of
Israel, I feel they are simply anti-Semites.
Mark Twain's ideas also relate to Jewish pride.
I have encountered that a lot, and it is hard to say much about it. Some people think
that being Jewish makes them morally superior or mentally superior. Maybe in
Mark Twain’s days, but nowadays that seems false.
But on the subject of
Jewish nationalism—the idea of nationalism is gaining nowadays momentum. That
means even people that are for a kind of renewal of American nationalism see
the kind of Jewish nationalism the State of Israel was built on is a good
thing.
I do not have strong
feelings about this. I feel what is important to a Jew is the Oral and Written
Law of God. Not Jewish identity.
Still the
idea (of nationalism) is not bad. Anti Zionism is a mistake that the entire
Religious community shares, but is mainly embodied in the writings of the Rav of
Satmer. I think he was a great man, but made a very serious error. And that
error has become a part of the Ultra Religious world—to be anti Zionist, or at least cold about the State of Israel.
My parents supported
the State of Israel.
Nationalism itself has support from Howard Bloom and Hegel. The group—the super
organism is certainly important to people.
But in what way I am not sure. In the Torah itself, keeping God’s laws
are what is important,-- not what group one belongs to.
Most yeshivas are part of the problem
Most yeshivas [but not all] are part of the problem, not the solution. They turn out kids barely wet behind the ears, who then expect to automatically be prepared to serve a congregation, or other people. Which they can’t. I’ve tried telling them this before, that serving God is not a career. You don’t go to school for it. They will not suffer to hear. Instead, I’m the problem.
There are however the great Litvak yeshivas that realize that learning Torah is not a supposed to be a business to make money from.
There are however the great Litvak yeshivas that realize that learning Torah is not a supposed to be a business to make money from.
The Guide of the Rambam
The Guide of the Rambam states that stars have knowledge. This is rather easy to understand based on Quantum Mechanics and the two slit experiment. The electron knows when there are two slits and when there is just one. So when there are two it acts as a wave and interferes with itself producing an interference pattern. When there is only one slit, it knows to reduce itself into a particle. Matter has Daat. This is easily explained with Neo Platonic thought.
The approach to marriage that seems best to me is the way that it basically worked for me. I put off going to university for some years and instead decided to go to a Lithuanian kind of Yeshiva. In yeshiva things were on the fast track to lead to marriage. Every week there was at least one "Vort." [announcement] I felt left out but from many indications the Rosh Yeshiva was planning on me for his son in law. So other offers were dried up. In the meantime I kept up a friendship with a girl I knew in Beverly Hills High school. I explained to her on the phone a few times what Torah is about and she got all excited about it, and started herself implying she was interested in a shiduch [marriage] with me. Eventually I took the second girl -the one from California. But marriage then was of a different nature than it is today. Though this is hard to explain. The basic idea is you have two people going into a relationship in which the rules and obligations are clear and accepted by them and by everyone around them.
This is very difficult to explain in a modern context.
I am not saying this is better or worse than Marriage in the modern world. But my point is that it is "Rule Based." where the rules are very well spelled out.
It is not just that you and your wife accept the rules of the Torah. It is that the whole world around you also does.
What are the rules? Mainly you have to spend about a year on each major tractate in Nashim [Mishna] to get an idea. That is one year on Ketubot, one year on Kidushin, another on Gittin, etc.
There is also I have to mention the invaluable Sidur of Yaakov Emden which has a part in it which goes into marriage in detail.
The main reason why I emphasis a Lithuanian yeshiva is that that is the kind of place where as a rule the Sitra Achra is excluded. That is they go mainly with the Gra and Rav Shach and keep out the Dark Side. I mean to say in the large context of the Religious world, the Sitra Achra is in control. (This is why people that become religious in general become bad people and lose whatever good character they may have had beforehand.) So in terms of those who try to keep Torah most are infected by the virus of the Sitra Achra without their being aware of it. So to get any benefit out of Torah in a way that one does not lose more by becoming an agent of the Dark Side, this is only possible in a Litvak environment.
[I should mention that Reb Nachman himself was very aware of this problem and warned about it. But the only group that got his point is the Na Nach people.]
This is very difficult to explain in a modern context.
I am not saying this is better or worse than Marriage in the modern world. But my point is that it is "Rule Based." where the rules are very well spelled out.
It is not just that you and your wife accept the rules of the Torah. It is that the whole world around you also does.
What are the rules? Mainly you have to spend about a year on each major tractate in Nashim [Mishna] to get an idea. That is one year on Ketubot, one year on Kidushin, another on Gittin, etc.
There is also I have to mention the invaluable Sidur of Yaakov Emden which has a part in it which goes into marriage in detail.
The main reason why I emphasis a Lithuanian yeshiva is that that is the kind of place where as a rule the Sitra Achra is excluded. That is they go mainly with the Gra and Rav Shach and keep out the Dark Side. I mean to say in the large context of the Religious world, the Sitra Achra is in control. (This is why people that become religious in general become bad people and lose whatever good character they may have had beforehand.) So in terms of those who try to keep Torah most are infected by the virus of the Sitra Achra without their being aware of it. So to get any benefit out of Torah in a way that one does not lose more by becoming an agent of the Dark Side, this is only possible in a Litvak environment.
[I should mention that Reb Nachman himself was very aware of this problem and warned about it. But the only group that got his point is the Na Nach people.]
The Rambam (Maimonides) has a V shaped approach to history.
The Rambam (Maimonides) has a V shaped approach to history. That is Adam Harishon [אדם הראשון] starts out on top and then falls with his descendants. Then starts the slow climb. The first step in the climb is נימוסי היוונים the laws of Ancient Greece, [Sparta and Athens]. The Rambam says these were revealed to Avraham Avinu (אברהם אבינו Abraham the patriarch). Natural Law. This step he says is necessary for the next step -Matan Torah.
Maimonides in part III chapter 34 of the Guide: concerning the Natural Law discovered by Avraham: "Indeed all things proceed from one deity and one agent and "have been given from one shepherd" (Prov. 30:12-13) ...In view of this consideration, it also will not be possible that the laws be dependent on changes in the circumstances of the individuals and of the times, as is the case with regard to medical treatment, which is particularized for every individual in conformity with his present temperament. On the contrary governance of the Law ought to be absolute and universal, including everyone..."
The Rambam also gives reasons for the commandments. To him many of the commandments are to bring to natural law.
This seems like a contradiction. I noticed this before but the way I approach this is thus: There are two levels objective morality [that exists separately from the observer], and numinous value (luminous, holy value).
Both exist in each command of the Torah. Not one kind of value in one command and another in a different command.
So in doing a command like learning Torah there is one aspect of value ones gains, but the higher level of value only comes with proper attitude. To learn "Torah Lishma," for its own sake and not for money.
So when we have the argument between rabbi shimon ben yochai and the sages about דורשין טעמא דקרא that means to r. shimon we go by the known reason for the command and when that does not apply then the command does not apply and nor is there any higher reason of numinous value in such a case. But the sages say we are not דורשין טעמא דקרא meaning that though the reason for the command based on natural law does not apply still the numinous value still applies
________________________________________________________________________________
The רמב''ם has a ט shaped approach to history. That is אדם הראשון starts out on top and then falls with his descendants. Then starts the slow climb. The first step in the climb is נימוסי היוונים that is the laws of Ancient Greece, Sparta and Athens. The רמב''ם says these were revealed to אברהם אבינו . Natural Law. This step he says is necessary for the next step מתן תורה.
The רמב''ם also gives reasons for the commandments. To him many of the commandments are to bring to natural law.
This seems like a contradiction. The way I approach this is thus. There are two levels objective morality , that exists separately from the observer, and luminous, holy value.
Both exist in each command of the Torah. Not one kind of value in one command and another in a different command.
So in doing a command like learning Torah there is one aspect of value ones gains, but the higher level of value only comes with proper attitude. To learn "Torah Lishma," for its own sake and not for money.
So when we have the argument between ר. שמעון בן יוחאי and the sages about דורשין טעמא דקרא that means to ר. שמעון בן יוחאי we go by the known reason for the command and when that does not apply then the command does not apply and nor is there any higher reason of numinous value in such a case. But the sages say we are not דורשין טעמא דקרא meaning that though the reason for the command based on natural law does not apply still the numinous value still applies
________________________________________________________________________________
לרמב''ם יש גישה להיסטוריה בצורת ט. כלומר אדם הראשון מתחיל על גבי ההר ואז נופל עם צאצאיו לגבעה. ואז מתחיל בטיפוס האיטי. הצעד הראשון בטיפוס הוא נימוסי היוונים היינו חוקי יוון העתיקה, ספרטה ואתונה. רמב''ם אומר אלה נגלו לאברהם אבינו. חוק הטבע. הרמב''ם אומר יש צורך לצעד הזה לשלב הבא של מתן תורה. הרמב''ם גם נותן טעמי המצוות. לו רבים מן המצוות הם להביא את לחוקי טבע. זה נראה כמו סתירה. הדרך שאני מתקרב לזה כך. ישנן שתי רמות. מטרה מוסרית, שקיים בנפרד מן הצופה, וערך זורח, ערך קדוש. שניהם קיימות בכל פקודה של התורה. לא שיש סוג אחד של ערך בפקודה אחת, ואחת בפקודה שונה. אז לעשות פקודה כמו ללמוד תורה יש עליות מוסרית, אבל הרמה הגבוהה יותר של הערך מגיעה רק עם גישה נכונה היינו ללמוד "תורה לשמה" לשמה ולא עבור כסף. עכשיו יש לנו את הויכוח בין ר. שמעון בן יוחאי והחכמים על דורשין טעמא דקרא. זה אומר ר. שמעון בן יוחאי אומר הולכים לפי הסיבה הידועה עבור הפקודה, וכשזה אינו חל אז הפקודה אינה חלה. והסיבה הגבוהה של המצווה אינה שייכת במצב כזה. אך החז"ל אומרים שאנחנו לא דורשין טעמא דקרא, כלומר אם הסיבה הפקודה המבוססת על חוקי טבע אינה חלה, עדיין הערך הגבוה עדיין חל.
Maimonides in part III chapter 34 of the Guide: concerning the Natural Law discovered by Avraham: "Indeed all things proceed from one deity and one agent and "have been given from one shepherd" (Prov. 30:12-13) ...In view of this consideration, it also will not be possible that the laws be dependent on changes in the circumstances of the individuals and of the times, as is the case with regard to medical treatment, which is particularized for every individual in conformity with his present temperament. On the contrary governance of the Law ought to be absolute and universal, including everyone..."
The Rambam also gives reasons for the commandments. To him many of the commandments are to bring to natural law.
This seems like a contradiction. I noticed this before but the way I approach this is thus: There are two levels objective morality [that exists separately from the observer], and numinous value (luminous, holy value).
Both exist in each command of the Torah. Not one kind of value in one command and another in a different command.
So in doing a command like learning Torah there is one aspect of value ones gains, but the higher level of value only comes with proper attitude. To learn "Torah Lishma," for its own sake and not for money.
So when we have the argument between rabbi shimon ben yochai and the sages about דורשין טעמא דקרא that means to r. shimon we go by the known reason for the command and when that does not apply then the command does not apply and nor is there any higher reason of numinous value in such a case. But the sages say we are not דורשין טעמא דקרא meaning that though the reason for the command based on natural law does not apply still the numinous value still applies
________________________________________________________________________________
The רמב''ם has a ט shaped approach to history. That is אדם הראשון starts out on top and then falls with his descendants. Then starts the slow climb. The first step in the climb is נימוסי היוונים that is the laws of Ancient Greece, Sparta and Athens. The רמב''ם says these were revealed to אברהם אבינו . Natural Law. This step he says is necessary for the next step מתן תורה.
The רמב''ם also gives reasons for the commandments. To him many of the commandments are to bring to natural law.
This seems like a contradiction. The way I approach this is thus. There are two levels objective morality , that exists separately from the observer, and luminous, holy value.
Both exist in each command of the Torah. Not one kind of value in one command and another in a different command.
So in doing a command like learning Torah there is one aspect of value ones gains, but the higher level of value only comes with proper attitude. To learn "Torah Lishma," for its own sake and not for money.
So when we have the argument between ר. שמעון בן יוחאי and the sages about דורשין טעמא דקרא that means to ר. שמעון בן יוחאי we go by the known reason for the command and when that does not apply then the command does not apply and nor is there any higher reason of numinous value in such a case. But the sages say we are not דורשין טעמא דקרא meaning that though the reason for the command based on natural law does not apply still the numinous value still applies
________________________________________________________________________________
לרמב''ם יש גישה להיסטוריה בצורת ט. כלומר אדם הראשון מתחיל על גבי ההר ואז נופל עם צאצאיו לגבעה. ואז מתחיל בטיפוס האיטי. הצעד הראשון בטיפוס הוא נימוסי היוונים היינו חוקי יוון העתיקה, ספרטה ואתונה. רמב''ם אומר אלה נגלו לאברהם אבינו. חוק הטבע. הרמב''ם אומר יש צורך לצעד הזה לשלב הבא של מתן תורה. הרמב''ם גם נותן טעמי המצוות. לו רבים מן המצוות הם להביא את לחוקי טבע. זה נראה כמו סתירה. הדרך שאני מתקרב לזה כך. ישנן שתי רמות. מטרה מוסרית, שקיים בנפרד מן הצופה, וערך זורח, ערך קדוש. שניהם קיימות בכל פקודה של התורה. לא שיש סוג אחד של ערך בפקודה אחת, ואחת בפקודה שונה. אז לעשות פקודה כמו ללמוד תורה יש עליות מוסרית, אבל הרמה הגבוהה יותר של הערך מגיעה רק עם גישה נכונה היינו ללמוד "תורה לשמה" לשמה ולא עבור כסף. עכשיו יש לנו את הויכוח בין ר. שמעון בן יוחאי והחכמים על דורשין טעמא דקרא. זה אומר ר. שמעון בן יוחאי אומר הולכים לפי הסיבה הידועה עבור הפקודה, וכשזה אינו חל אז הפקודה אינה חלה. והסיבה הגבוהה של המצווה אינה שייכת במצב כזה. אך החז"ל אומרים שאנחנו לא דורשין טעמא דקרא, כלומר אם הסיבה הפקודה המבוססת על חוקי טבע אינה חלה, עדיין הערך הגבוה עדיין חל.
24.8.16
There is kind of Achilles heel in yeshivas. Some trip wire that people fall for. I am not sure what it is exactly but it perhaps is a kind of superiority complex.
It is hard for me to recommend yeshivas.The reason is they purposely try to recruit people from university and say to come to the yeshiva to learn Torah all day. Then when one does this, and things are not working out for him as well as he expected, they treat him like dirt.
It is like the just want to recruit the beautiful people [college students with rich parents] because it gives them a good image, so as to be able to con and scam more people in giving them charity. Because after all is said and done, that is all it is about. They pretend it is a living, but all it really is is charity.
The idea of learning Torah is to come to two things objective morality and numinosity. But this does not happen if on learns for money. That is why the yeshivas are not effective any more in creating good character.
Torah is only effective in bringing to objective morality when it is learned for its own sake--not as a means to make money.
When people learn Torah for money that creates a kind of vicious personality. They have a need to show that somehow they are more deserving of people's charity than others. So if others are also learning Torah, the first groups has to show they are somehow superior. And if someone comes along that also wants to learn Torah that creates a situation where the first groups feels the need to put down and be rid of the second guy. It is rare to find much god in this system.
The only yeshivas I can truly recommend and think they are learning Torah for its own sake are the well known Litvak yeshivas Ponovitch, Mir, Brisk,Chaim Berlin, Torah VeDaat.
It is hard for me to recommend yeshivas.The reason is they purposely try to recruit people from university and say to come to the yeshiva to learn Torah all day. Then when one does this, and things are not working out for him as well as he expected, they treat him like dirt.
It is like the just want to recruit the beautiful people [college students with rich parents] because it gives them a good image, so as to be able to con and scam more people in giving them charity. Because after all is said and done, that is all it is about. They pretend it is a living, but all it really is is charity.
The idea of learning Torah is to come to two things objective morality and numinosity. But this does not happen if on learns for money. That is why the yeshivas are not effective any more in creating good character.
Torah is only effective in bringing to objective morality when it is learned for its own sake--not as a means to make money.
When people learn Torah for money that creates a kind of vicious personality. They have a need to show that somehow they are more deserving of people's charity than others. So if others are also learning Torah, the first groups has to show they are somehow superior. And if someone comes along that also wants to learn Torah that creates a situation where the first groups feels the need to put down and be rid of the second guy. It is rare to find much god in this system.
The only yeshivas I can truly recommend and think they are learning Torah for its own sake are the well known Litvak yeshivas Ponovitch, Mir, Brisk,Chaim Berlin, Torah VeDaat.
I also got the idea that there has been a great effort to bring people from 3rd world countries into the USA and to keep out white people. I also ran into a lot of people from first world countries that would have loved to come to the USA but getting any kind of visa was virtually impossible. Someone has been trying hard to change the racial makeup of the USA.
OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) has nothing to do with Fear of God, but to the religious world it is the same thing. The more one focuses on rituals, is the more holy they seem..
A lot of religious motivation has more to do with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder more than with any kind of holiness. But not all.
And the system of the Ultra Religious encourages and nourishes this kind of disorder.
This happens when nothing else seems to work. A time of anxiety brings this on.
The obsessions in the Ultra Religious world are the exact same things as classic OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) , [i.e. cleanliness, food preparation, obsession with sex, holy places. numerology and gematriot.
The leaders are people that have an exaggerated version of this OCD.
And this is the basic reason why the Ultra Religious world is insane.
OCD has nothing to do with Fear of God, but to the religious world it is the same thing. The more they focus on rituals, the more holy they think they are.
So, in spite of the great thing that Reb Israel Salanter did in emphasizing Musar and Fear of God, still there is this troubling side of things in which fear of God can't be discerned or told apart from a diseased imagination.
For this reason Reb Israel Salanter himself focused on the more rational books of Musar Ethics from the Middle Ages more than the later Musar books which were all fused with kabalah and probably were written by people with this disorder. The obsession with religion is not the sign of a healthy personality, even though being true to the word of God in the Oral and Written Law is important.
[After spending time with the religious, you will start noticing this just as I did. A lot the people there simply have diseased imaginations.]
You can see why in Lithuanian kinds of Yeshivas obsessive religious behavior was rigorously excluded in order to prevent these kinds of crazy people from joining. Thus in the ultra Religious world you have people at the heads of the cults have different levels of OCD, but that is rare in the Litvak world which excludes this kind of insanity.
However to avoid people with this kind of disorder it is safer to simply join a Reform Temple. I myself went to Temple Israel and also to a Conservative place in Southern California.
This happens when nothing else seems to work. A time of anxiety brings this on.
The obsessions in the Ultra Religious world are the exact same things as classic OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) , [i.e. cleanliness, food preparation, obsession with sex, holy places. numerology and gematriot.
The leaders are people that have an exaggerated version of this OCD.
And this is the basic reason why the Ultra Religious world is insane.
OCD has nothing to do with Fear of God, but to the religious world it is the same thing. The more they focus on rituals, the more holy they think they are.
So, in spite of the great thing that Reb Israel Salanter did in emphasizing Musar and Fear of God, still there is this troubling side of things in which fear of God can't be discerned or told apart from a diseased imagination.
For this reason Reb Israel Salanter himself focused on the more rational books of Musar Ethics from the Middle Ages more than the later Musar books which were all fused with kabalah and probably were written by people with this disorder. The obsession with religion is not the sign of a healthy personality, even though being true to the word of God in the Oral and Written Law is important.
[After spending time with the religious, you will start noticing this just as I did. A lot the people there simply have diseased imaginations.]
You can see why in Lithuanian kinds of Yeshivas obsessive religious behavior was rigorously excluded in order to prevent these kinds of crazy people from joining. Thus in the ultra Religious world you have people at the heads of the cults have different levels of OCD, but that is rare in the Litvak world which excludes this kind of insanity.
However to avoid people with this kind of disorder it is safer to simply join a Reform Temple. I myself went to Temple Israel and also to a Conservative place in Southern California.
23.8.16
Math, Physics, Gemara Musar, Music, Survival Skills.
I mentioned a few times that my basic approach is Torah with Derech Eretz [manners and a vocation.]. That is Math, Physics, Gemara Musar, Music, Survival Skills. But also I wanted to add the learning these things does not depend on understanding. There is such a thing as a mitzvah to learn Torah even though you do not understand. This is not just because it is assumed that with lots of review one will eventually understand. There is also the idea that in the next world one will be reminded and understand everything he tried to understand in this world but was not able to do so.
This forms the basis of the type of fast learning that all authentic Litvak yeshivas do in the afternoon and I showed how this comes from the Talmud itself. לעולם לגרס איניש אע''ג דמשכח ואע''ג דלא ידע מאי קאמר
I mentioned this in reference to Tosphot --just to say it over day after day, even for months until you understand.[Unless you are learning with a learning partner. In that case you do this kind of learning on your own time.]
But also this applies to learning Gemara, and Tur, Beit Joseph. To put a place marker in the book and every day do one whole page in order, and the next day to go on from where you left off.
I wanted to add the idea of learning standing. This is also a great help to understanding. I remember that this was how I did a lot of the writings of the Ari(zal), Isaac Luria. I did not have "Stender" at home so I pulled out the shelf of one cabinet and stood up learning the Ari. [Not during "seder" or regular yeshiva hours 10:00-2:00 4:00-8:00]
This should not be taken as a kind of agreement with the Ultra Religious who are insane. This should only be taken as agreement with Lithuanian yeshivas where Torah is learned for its own sake. Nothing else in the religious world do I consider kosher at all. [In fact the Gra knew exactly what he was doing when he signed the Cherem and it is wrong for people to ignore it, because it relates to objective reality.] This affected the entire frum world including the yeshivas. Even the yeshivas have gotten a share of the kelipot that penetrated into them. They will make a song and dance around secular Jews that have money but treat other people like dirt.
This forms the basis of the type of fast learning that all authentic Litvak yeshivas do in the afternoon and I showed how this comes from the Talmud itself. לעולם לגרס איניש אע''ג דמשכח ואע''ג דלא ידע מאי קאמר
I mentioned this in reference to Tosphot --just to say it over day after day, even for months until you understand.[Unless you are learning with a learning partner. In that case you do this kind of learning on your own time.]
But also this applies to learning Gemara, and Tur, Beit Joseph. To put a place marker in the book and every day do one whole page in order, and the next day to go on from where you left off.
I wanted to add the idea of learning standing. This is also a great help to understanding. I remember that this was how I did a lot of the writings of the Ari(zal), Isaac Luria. I did not have "Stender" at home so I pulled out the shelf of one cabinet and stood up learning the Ari. [Not during "seder" or regular yeshiva hours 10:00-2:00 4:00-8:00]
This should not be taken as a kind of agreement with the Ultra Religious who are insane. This should only be taken as agreement with Lithuanian yeshivas where Torah is learned for its own sake. Nothing else in the religious world do I consider kosher at all. [In fact the Gra knew exactly what he was doing when he signed the Cherem and it is wrong for people to ignore it, because it relates to objective reality.] This affected the entire frum world including the yeshivas. Even the yeshivas have gotten a share of the kelipot that penetrated into them. They will make a song and dance around secular Jews that have money but treat other people like dirt.
22.8.16
Muslims purposely target Jews on campus with insults and many other ways of making them feel no wanted.
Sephardim picked this up technique of subtle harassment from Muslims. They do it to Ashkenazim pretty consistently. But then you have some Sephardim that are appalled at this behavior, but they can't do anything about it. There is always at least one that makes life intolerable for the Ashkenazi until he is forced to leave town. [Unless the area is Ashkenazi and the sephardim are the guests.]
Musar-Ethics has a promise that goes with it from Isaac Blazzer (the disciple of Reb Israel Salanter) of being a cure for all bodily, and mental, and spiritual diseases.
, The way I decided on what to say when I get up in the morning took time and thought to
develop. It is a long and involved story. At the Mir in NY my interest was kindled in Musar (Ethics) one Rosh Hashanah. Then I lost interest. And then recently I asked a fellow from Bnei Brak to bring some books of straight, normal Musar. The first one was
I think the Obligations of the Heart. After that I asked for a book of Musar
that is well known in yeshivas called Even Sh'lema and the Nefesh HaChaim by the disciple of the Gra, Reb Chaim from
Voloshin and another well know Musar book called Madrgat HaAdam [by Joseph
Yozel Horwitz, a disciple of Reb Israel Salanter].
Then while reading
these books I noticed at certain time areas of character development that I
seemed to be lacking.
Then I wrote down one
long paragraph and I would say it to my self right away when I got up in the
morning. I forget which one it was but it might be the same one that I still
say to myself when I get up: "When a person gets up in the morning and accepts
upon himself that day to be mekababel [accept on himself] the yoke of Torah in
truth –that is he decides in his heart that he will listen to no one and
nothing will prevent him then on that day he will have success in Torah. And
according to the deep of his commitment and strength of his conviction to that
degree from Heaven he will receive help and he distractions and obstacles will
be taken away from him."
After that I decided I
needed help to judge people on the scales of merit and thus started saying to
myself: "It is a known tested fact that when one has enemies –G-d forbid,- and he
judges them on the scale of merit, that is, he decides in his heart that they are
true and perfect saints, then immediately their heart will be turned to be his
friends." {From Reb Chaim from Voloshin the disciple of the Gra}
A long time after that
it occurred to me that I had ceased trusting in God at all and that this had
been an important factor in my upward development. So I decided to start saying
over a paragraph about trust in God that I had seen in the book the Madragat
HaAdam during the middle of the day. But then at some point I started saying it also in the morning.
The whole paragraph is this: “Trust in God with all your heart and do not depend on your intellect.” (Mishlei Proverbs 3) That is your heart should be perfect and whole in trust in God and not with just part of your heart and do not depend on your intellect that is You should not say I will trust in God but I am also obligated to do actions and to depend on my intellect. There it says do not depend even as a staff or support you should not depend on your intellect.
The whole paragraph is this: “Trust in God with all your heart and do not depend on your intellect.” (Mishlei Proverbs 3) That is your heart should be perfect and whole in trust in God and not with just part of your heart and do not depend on your intellect that is You should not say I will trust in God but I am also obligated to do actions and to depend on my intellect. There it says do not depend even as a staff or support you should not depend on your intellect.
Someone heard in the
name of the Gra that this is the explanation of what it says in Rosh HaShanah
25B
The students at the
Beit Midrash did not understand the word Yehavka יהבך in psalms [Cast on God your
yehavka and he will take care of your burden יהבך]. Then one day they heard a gentile merchant
tell Raba Bar Bar Chana “Take your Yehavka (burden) and put it on my camel.” The Gra said it does not mean the students
did not understand the word. Rather it means they thought one should trust in
Go an also do effort. Therefore they had a question on that verse. It should say
your needs. Then they saw the merchant tell Raba Bar Bar Chana to take his
burden and out it on his camel and then they understood that when something is
supposed to come to one from Heaven then it will come no matter what and one does
not need to do any effort to get it.
Musar Ethics has a promise that goes with it from Isaac Blazzer the disciple of Israel Salanter of being a cure for all bodily and mental and spiritual diseases.
Musar Ethics has a promise that goes with it from Isaac Blazzer the disciple of Israel Salanter of being a cure for all bodily and mental and spiritual diseases.
While in my present situation I can't learn Musar [no books available] , I hope at least to encourage others to do so. While the best kind of approach is the Litvak Musar Yeshiva , still if that is not possible at least at home.
21.8.16
Christianity and the Mystic Rav Avraham Abulafia
Christianity I think is mainly based on Paul, and not Jesus at all. Jesus himself I see as simply a Jewish saint. And one could go further based on the medieval Mystic Rav Avraham Abulafia and claim he was משיח בן יוסף (messiah son of Joseph) foretold in the Talmud tractate Sukka.
That still would not provide any reason to worship him, as the Rambam makes clear.
[I mean to say that the Rambam made Monotheism clearer by going with Aristotle. In that case the idea of the First Cause is absolutely simple and consistent with Divine Simplicity.]
Appendix
Note (1) I mean to say that Neo-Platonic thought up until the Rambam had enough problems to cause the Rambam to switch to Aristotle, and Aquinas followed him. I used to think perhaps the reason was Divine Simplicity, but now that I am thinking of it, I realize you can have just as much Divine Simplicity with Neo Platonic thought.
Note (2) Avraham Abulafia's books have been printed in Mea Shearim Jerusalem-or you can buy the whole set on line. When I was researching this topic I had to go through the microfilms with that insane medieval script to see what Rav Abulafia was saying. I should mention Avraham Abulafia was the subject of professor Moshe Idel's (at H.U.) Ph.D thesis and later books. }
Note (3) The subject of Messiah son of Joseph comes up a little in the Zohar, but mainly in Moshe Chaim Lutzatto's Tikunim and the קול התור of the Gra and a drop in the Ari {Isaac Luria}. The Gra's book, Kol HaTor deals mainly with the topic of messiah son of Joseph. Maybe there are more sources that I did not run into.
Note (4) I am not saying this is a topic to spend time on. Mainly it looks to me to be "Bitul Torah" wasting time that could be better spent on learning Torah. But still, in any case, I had I think good reason to get to the bottom of this topic.
Note (5) Sorry. I forgot to mention that Rav Avraham Abulafia was respected by Reb Chaim Vital and the Chida.
Note (6) Rav Abulafia went to debate the pope. He was not happy with the Catholic Church. There were orders to arrest him. No one could lay a hand on him.
Note (7) Rav Abulfia's ideas are brought down in the Remak and also Reb Chaim Vital in detail [in שערי קדושה חלק רביעי].
Note (8) The reason I say that Christianity is based on Paul is that if your take Jesus in his own context there is no claim of Divinity nor nullification of the commandments. These are strictly Pauline doctrines. That is to say major doctrines of the church have no textual support from the New Testament. The said doctrines contradict what Jesus said openly. They depend only on Paul and yet Paul was writing things that contradicted what the disciples of Jesus had written openly in his name.
I should mention:I grew up in John Birch society area. It was basically WASP and very nice. I kind of had a glimpse of Old American Values, and it was a really nice world.
That still would not provide any reason to worship him, as the Rambam makes clear.
[I mean to say that the Rambam made Monotheism clearer by going with Aristotle. In that case the idea of the First Cause is absolutely simple and consistent with Divine Simplicity.]
Appendix
Note (1) I mean to say that Neo-Platonic thought up until the Rambam had enough problems to cause the Rambam to switch to Aristotle, and Aquinas followed him. I used to think perhaps the reason was Divine Simplicity, but now that I am thinking of it, I realize you can have just as much Divine Simplicity with Neo Platonic thought.
Note (2) Avraham Abulafia's books have been printed in Mea Shearim Jerusalem-or you can buy the whole set on line. When I was researching this topic I had to go through the microfilms with that insane medieval script to see what Rav Abulafia was saying. I should mention Avraham Abulafia was the subject of professor Moshe Idel's (at H.U.) Ph.D thesis and later books. }
Note (3) The subject of Messiah son of Joseph comes up a little in the Zohar, but mainly in Moshe Chaim Lutzatto's Tikunim and the קול התור of the Gra and a drop in the Ari {Isaac Luria}. The Gra's book, Kol HaTor deals mainly with the topic of messiah son of Joseph. Maybe there are more sources that I did not run into.
Note (4) I am not saying this is a topic to spend time on. Mainly it looks to me to be "Bitul Torah" wasting time that could be better spent on learning Torah. But still, in any case, I had I think good reason to get to the bottom of this topic.
Note (5) Sorry. I forgot to mention that Rav Avraham Abulafia was respected by Reb Chaim Vital and the Chida.
Note (6) Rav Abulafia went to debate the pope. He was not happy with the Catholic Church. There were orders to arrest him. No one could lay a hand on him.
Note (7) Rav Abulfia's ideas are brought down in the Remak and also Reb Chaim Vital in detail [in שערי קדושה חלק רביעי].
Note (8) The reason I say that Christianity is based on Paul is that if your take Jesus in his own context there is no claim of Divinity nor nullification of the commandments. These are strictly Pauline doctrines. That is to say major doctrines of the church have no textual support from the New Testament. The said doctrines contradict what Jesus said openly. They depend only on Paul and yet Paul was writing things that contradicted what the disciples of Jesus had written openly in his name.
I should mention:I grew up in John Birch society area. It was basically WASP and very nice. I kind of had a glimpse of Old American Values, and it was a really nice world.
a Litvak yeshiva
Ideas in Tractate Bava Metzia edited Ch 8 and ch 9.
The best place to learn Torah, if possible, is a Litvak yeshiva [called Litvak because "Litva" is the proper name of Lithuania] It is where yeshivas were real and authentic
That is they were made in order to learn and keep Torah --not schools to turn out people that use Torah for money. This was an argument I had with my parents. They thought yeshivas were really meant as means to make money. I tried to convince them that, "No. Rather their pursuit is to learn and keep Torah." Which of us was right I still do not know.
I would say that Shar Yashuv and the Mir in NY and Ponovitch in Israel are in fact for Torah "Lishma" (for its own sake.)
The best idea as far as I can tell is to learn a vocation, and not be in a position in which the only way one can make it is by using Torah.
It is considered that Ponovitch is the best of the Litvak yeshivas, and Rav Elazar Menachem Shach was Rosh Yeshiva there for some time. From what I can tell this is accurate. Brisk also has a great reputation which is probably well deserved. But the best is probably Ponovitch [which includes "off shoots" (branches) like yeshivas founded by people that went to Ponovitch, e.g. Tifrach.]
The best place to learn Torah, if possible, is a Litvak yeshiva [called Litvak because "Litva" is the proper name of Lithuania] It is where yeshivas were real and authentic
That is they were made in order to learn and keep Torah --not schools to turn out people that use Torah for money. This was an argument I had with my parents. They thought yeshivas were really meant as means to make money. I tried to convince them that, "No. Rather their pursuit is to learn and keep Torah." Which of us was right I still do not know.
I would say that Shar Yashuv and the Mir in NY and Ponovitch in Israel are in fact for Torah "Lishma" (for its own sake.)
The best idea as far as I can tell is to learn a vocation, and not be in a position in which the only way one can make it is by using Torah.
It is considered that Ponovitch is the best of the Litvak yeshivas, and Rav Elazar Menachem Shach was Rosh Yeshiva there for some time. From what I can tell this is accurate. Brisk also has a great reputation which is probably well deserved. But the best is probably Ponovitch [which includes "off shoots" (branches) like yeshivas founded by people that went to Ponovitch, e.g. Tifrach.]
20.8.16
Old Testament
DNA+ Old Testament+ Athens+ Sparta+ Rome = Western Civilization. So the "white thing" is one important factor. Genes and DNA do matter.
Even among Sephardim it was well known that DNA makes a difference. After the Muslim invaded and took Jewish women for wives it was the custom in all Middle East areas to write Samech Tet (Sephardi Tahor) after one's name to indicate that one could trace his ancestry to Jewish fathers before the Arabs invaded. That is one is "pure Spanish" and not mixed with the Jews of North Africa that all had Muslim parentage mixed in.
[I see the Talmud and the as an important part of Western Civilization.
New Testament itself I consider to have some good points and some bad points. The good ones are obvious--that it emphasis important aspects of the holy Torah--compassion. Compassion is something that people like to give lip service to but when in need people know the only place you can go to get help in an emergency is to a Christian. I have experienced this myself and I know I am not alone. [Other people as a rule talk about kindness, but Christians tend to be the ones to do it.]
The Talmud emphasizes the more obvious aspects of the Law of Moses--the actual nitty gritty about how to understand and keep each particular commandment. That is the the Talmud deal with the specifics of the Torah --how to what doe each mitzvah mean in a practical sense. This is also an important aspect of Torah and it is one that Christians ignore completely.
There are people that make a very big deal about keeping rituals that think that because of that they are close to God and the Law of Moses. They are about as from from God and the Law of Moses as it is possible to get.
Nowadays however everything that people look for as a system has to fail. It is something that is part of some Divine plan that the more one believes in some doctrine or in some group that that group will disappoint him and show itself to be the exact opposite of human decency and everything good.
It is called "the Twilight of the gods". So it does not matter what system you believe in. The more you believe in it the more it will disappoint you.
So DNA is one factor but not determinate. People still have free will and there are plenty of memes an paradigms to choose from. And even if one has made a choice to choose a good meme {Like the Bible} there are still plenty of ways of fouling it up.
Best approach that I know of--to be self sufficient and learn math Physics, Gemara, Musar, and survival skills. And the purpose of this learning is all in order to understand and keep the Law of Moses.
Even among Sephardim it was well known that DNA makes a difference. After the Muslim invaded and took Jewish women for wives it was the custom in all Middle East areas to write Samech Tet (Sephardi Tahor) after one's name to indicate that one could trace his ancestry to Jewish fathers before the Arabs invaded. That is one is "pure Spanish" and not mixed with the Jews of North Africa that all had Muslim parentage mixed in.
[I see the Talmud and the as an important part of Western Civilization.
New Testament itself I consider to have some good points and some bad points. The good ones are obvious--that it emphasis important aspects of the holy Torah--compassion. Compassion is something that people like to give lip service to but when in need people know the only place you can go to get help in an emergency is to a Christian. I have experienced this myself and I know I am not alone. [Other people as a rule talk about kindness, but Christians tend to be the ones to do it.]
The Talmud emphasizes the more obvious aspects of the Law of Moses--the actual nitty gritty about how to understand and keep each particular commandment. That is the the Talmud deal with the specifics of the Torah --how to what doe each mitzvah mean in a practical sense. This is also an important aspect of Torah and it is one that Christians ignore completely.
There are people that make a very big deal about keeping rituals that think that because of that they are close to God and the Law of Moses. They are about as from from God and the Law of Moses as it is possible to get.
Nowadays however everything that people look for as a system has to fail. It is something that is part of some Divine plan that the more one believes in some doctrine or in some group that that group will disappoint him and show itself to be the exact opposite of human decency and everything good.
It is called "the Twilight of the gods". So it does not matter what system you believe in. The more you believe in it the more it will disappoint you.
So DNA is one factor but not determinate. People still have free will and there are plenty of memes an paradigms to choose from. And even if one has made a choice to choose a good meme {Like the Bible} there are still plenty of ways of fouling it up.
Best approach that I know of--to be self sufficient and learn math Physics, Gemara, Musar, and survival skills. And the purpose of this learning is all in order to understand and keep the Law of Moses.
I figure the reason two people developed two eyes instead of one is the classical double split experiment. That is: with two slits you get interference patterns. This gives a better idea of distance than one slit where the particles act as particles, not as waves.
The distance between the eyes in proportion to the distance to the object is a trig function.
The distance between the eyes in proportion to the distance to the object is a trig function.
19.8.16
What we are seeing I think is the death of the gods all the "ism"s, capitalism, communism, and all the cults.
I am looking at this in a global way, but you could take almost any of the ism's. For example the Catholics are headed by a communist pope, and the Protestants have become a kind of Churchianity.
Church now is entertainment of the most superficial type. It is mainly to give sexual stimulus to the alpha male who has all the women listening to his every word. It is mainly geared towards the weakening of the men in the congregation.
The Torah world is no exception. The gods and the yeshivas there died also. It is a global phenomenon.
The main thing that characterizes the world today is disappointment in what ever they believed in.
Family and Home?
I am looking at this in a global way, but you could take almost any of the ism's. For example the Catholics are headed by a communist pope, and the Protestants have become a kind of Churchianity.
Church now is entertainment of the most superficial type. It is mainly to give sexual stimulus to the alpha male who has all the women listening to his every word. It is mainly geared towards the weakening of the men in the congregation.
The Torah world is no exception. The gods and the yeshivas there died also. It is a global phenomenon.
The main thing that characterizes the world today is disappointment in what ever they believed in.
Family and Home?
There is no incentive for a man to marry anymore. A wife to be proud of? Odds are that she’s in open competition with you for status and won’t submit. Kids? Odds are she’s going to take them away. Sex? When she’s in the mood *maybe*.
Throw in the fact that she’s likely to start the process of taking everything away from you including future earnings, time with your kids and beat you in mental submission through counseling and the like? Why would you want to?
Self sufficiency as the most fundamental principle of my Dad.
This manifested itself in many ways. Mainly it was in showing us how to do things ourselves. And also in not accepting help for anything that you can do on your own. In those days there were no computers so I was only allowed to use a slide rule when I could do the calculations by hand. When we went skiing as a family I was allowed to use the ski lift until I could climb the mountain and ski down on my own with no help. This meant mastering outdoor skills and also plain house keeping skills like sewing. Maybe he called this "self reliance." In any case this must have been the most important principle which he tried to instill in me and my brothers.
It was the exact opposite of communities that teach their children to rely on charity.
Thus while learning Torah is important, he did not agree with being in a situation in which one would end up having to relay on people's charity and be using the holy Torah to make a living as in done in kollels.
He held strongly of learning a vocation.
[I do not hold support of kollel's is a good thing because it is doing kindness for people that would never reciprocate. I do not know why this is but the facts are the facts. Te Sages said one that does kindness for one that does not recognize it is as if he worshiped idolatry.]
This manifested itself in many ways. Mainly it was in showing us how to do things ourselves. And also in not accepting help for anything that you can do on your own. In those days there were no computers so I was only allowed to use a slide rule when I could do the calculations by hand. When we went skiing as a family I was allowed to use the ski lift until I could climb the mountain and ski down on my own with no help. This meant mastering outdoor skills and also plain house keeping skills like sewing. Maybe he called this "self reliance." In any case this must have been the most important principle which he tried to instill in me and my brothers.
It was the exact opposite of communities that teach their children to rely on charity.
Thus while learning Torah is important, he did not agree with being in a situation in which one would end up having to relay on people's charity and be using the holy Torah to make a living as in done in kollels.
He held strongly of learning a vocation.
[I do not hold support of kollel's is a good thing because it is doing kindness for people that would never reciprocate. I do not know why this is but the facts are the facts. Te Sages said one that does kindness for one that does not recognize it is as if he worshiped idolatry.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)