Heidegger and Kierkegaard

Heidegger and Kierkegaard make a point that philosophy became too interested in  what faculties people  have in common. How the Mind works? How do we know a priori knowledge? But what is really interesting is not what a great saint and an evil criminal have in common, but rather what makes them different?


The answer is to Heidegger--Dasein. Being. That is there is something inside the great saint that strives to be revealed--to come out from darkness into the light. That is not the same as Kierkegaard who focused on how one is. To Heidegger what is essential is "who one is", not what one is or how one is.

The insight that this gives to me is that it helps me understand a bit of my decisions in life. I think I was not at all interested in the secular life style. Something in the Shar Yashuv yeshiva resonated with me.--the idea of sitting and learning Torah a way--as the way--of serving God.

This still resonates inside-but the actual religious world for some reason seems to have gotten out of sync with authentic Torah.

I am still trying to get back into authentic Torah by learning Rav Shach's Avi Ezri. But this goes only with great difficulty. Once I left the authentic Torah world of the Litvak's  it seems impossible to get back in.

USA system

One person who has a link to my blog said a few years ago that the USA system was indebted to John Calvin --in terms of representative government. In Geneva Calvin had set up representative government. There was a large group (200) that was voted in directly and they voted for two smaller consuls(60 and 20). But I am wondering was there not already a House of Commons in England?

In fact I have been looking at the government of England during the period from 1688 --the glorious revolution -and it seems to me the entire English system was more or less simply transplanted into the USA Constitution.--with some significant differences--for example separation of church and state.


[The fellow that links to my blog might have been thinking that the House of Commons was not actually elected when it first started in the 1200's. And I am not sure when it got to be elected. But with John Calvin we know the consul of 600 was elected by every church member in Geneva..

Rav Nahman of Breslov

There are a few things Rav Nahman of Breslov said that I think are related to how one goes about learning. He said them as general principles in life but to me they seem to apply very much to the way he said to learn-. That is to say the words fast and go on.

For example he said one does not need "hard services." That is to make things hard. 

Also he said as אין להתעקש על שום דבר--not to be stubborn about anything in the world.

The way this applies to learning seem to me to be that one should learn learn simply by saying the words and go on and not be overly concerned if you understand everything.



The way i do this is even with the Avi Ezri I just go over the whole piece one day and the next time I can get to the study hall to so the same thing again.
But I ought to add that my learning partner learns in that slow and tedious way, and it seems by that he comes to great insights that I do not get to.

Uman for Rosh Hashana?

My learning partner David noted that things tend to fall apart when one is not in Uman for Rosh Hashana. This year I did not take his advice and in fact right after Rosh Hashana things fell apart. But I am still not thinking of being in Uman since it has become dangerous. Very dangerous. So the best overall idea I think would be to bring the grave to Israel. The problem with that though it it is not known exactly where the actual grave is. One fellow who paints portraits there told me that a WWII survivor told him that she knew the actual site is not where people think but rather North West about ten yards. from the grave site that is marked. [Actually West but slightly north]

Lithuanian Study hall.

I am very thankful that I am in an area where there is a Lithuanian Study hall. So even though I still do not have the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, I have been able to do a little bit of study in his book.
Once I was going to the ocean and I asked a young fellow who looked a bit like a Litvak if there is a study hall on the name of the Gra in this area. He said No, but he did suggest this other place that is close enough.

Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications

As you can imagine after my arrest my mind has not been settled that much. But because of this I have been thinking along the lines of Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications. While he was more into the idea in order to come to to attachment with God, I have been thinking along the lines of  finding the particular verses in Torah and the prophets that relate to my problems and finding the unifications that come out of each verse.

One of the most important aspects of Rav Abulafia is his claim that Jesus was a true tzadik saint even though that certainly was not very politically correct in the Middle Ages.

But he also is quoted by Rav Haim Vital as presenting the unifications that brings one to attachment with God. This was not known since Rav Vital only brings this in the last volume of his Musar book, Gates of Holiness. And that volume was not even printed until recently.

I still have no computer but a friend is letting me write on his. Finally I have access to Rav Shach's Avi Ezri and I have been looking at it along with a drop of string theory and math. {I still learn these mainly by the method of גירסה  just saying the words and going on  as the Gemara brings.}
One thing I noticed in Rav Shach is that he says the argument between R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish about קנין פירות כקנין הגוף דמי [''Possession of the fruit is like possession of the thing''] is not like it sounds. He says [in laws of renting] that the issue is if renting in itself is like possession of the thing.

That is how he answers the question that I brought up in my booklet on Bava Metzia that the Gemara seems to say that the person that is renting owns the fertilizer in the courtyard, while the Rambam [Maimonides] says not.
I would like to delve more deeply into this but in short Rav Shach says the cases that you find in Shas where the renter owes the stuff that is left in the courtyard is where the intention of the renting was for that specific purpose.--in the view of the Rambam. Clearly the Raavad disagrees. Also I might mention that Rav Shach at the end of that chapter leaves off with a question on Tosphot. To me that is a clear invitation to try and answer for Tosphot.







I am still hoping to get a hold of the books of Rav Avraham Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic that I have mentioned a few times] to get a better idea of his approach. But so far things are going with difficulty in Israel. In any case, it is clear to me that Rav Abulafia is much more interested in unifications than the Ari. I lost interest in unifications for a while but recent events have rekindled my interest. That is to find the right unifications that are applicable to my recent problems.







Also since Professor Moshe Idel has done a lot of research into Rav Abulafia I would like to get his books also.[It was in fact looking at Moshe Ideal's Ph.D thesis that gave me a degree of clarity about Rav Abulafia's opinions about Christianity.






[I have also been looking at Heidegger who I find to have a some important points. While philosophers tend to look at what is common to all people, Heidegger brings the idea that that is not as interesting as what makes people different.