Excommunication was once used to great effect in one of the most dramatic moments of Western civilization--Henry IV. Henry had polices the pope did not agree with. He was excommunicated, then crossed the Alps into Italy in the middle of the freezing winter. [On foot and by wagons]. The pope ran away from Rome to not have to face him. The king found where he was and stood outside barefoot for three days until the pope gave in and absolved him.

Henry remained king.

Why the Catholic church does not do the same with the so called catholic politicians that have policies that oppose the teachings of the church like abortion? or socialism which is against the Ten Commandments "Thou shalt not steal". [Socialism in its essence means people have no right to their own money or property except what the government allows to them. That is legitimizing theft.]

[If only the signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication was adhered to to any degree at all! That would be the first step out of the mud.]

 It was pointed out to me by David Bronson my learning partner, that the censor caused great problems because now we never know when the Gemara refers to "Akum", [עכו''ם ר''ת עובד כוכבים ומזלות] "goy", "Kuti" כותי etc., to whom are they referring to? The censor by changing things around: "goy" to "akum" and visa verse along with many changes, now  we can never know. [Though I have found that it is possible to figure it out from the context.]

There are differences between these categories. For example "goy" refers to a gentile. "Akum" refers to an idolater who can be Jew or gentile. What makes an "Akum" into an akum is the fact of doing idolatry, not if they are Jewish or not. Kuti is a Samarian. So now when the Gemara says one category we never know if perhaps the original Gemara had a different category.

[So "Akum" will not be referring to a Muslim, and neither to a Christian to many Rishonim opinions like the Meiri and Abravanel, and Tosphot in tractate Avoda Zara. [That Tosphot deals with the famous issue of "joining" שיתוף which should be easy to find, but I admit I forgot the page number.]

One result of this ambiguity is that some people think when the gemara refers to idolaters that it means gentiles. That is a commonplace mistake. Idolater means an idolater. --that is one who does idolatry. 

Lashon hara against Judge Barrett is slander

Amy Barrett adopted a poor child.  But the Left is trying to  to turn her act of kindness into evil. That is the most disgusting thing the Left has come up with so far.

Besides that it is "lashon hara". That is slander. That is to disparage a person for sins between man and fellow man unless some conditions are fulfilled. The source of this is the Gates of Repentance of R. Yona who himself derived them from the Gemara. [That is the source of the famous seven conditions.]

(1) Truth, not to exaggerate, (2) no damage comes more than the law would require, (3) to see it oneself, (4) to give warning beforehand, (5) to judge on the scale of merit if possible, (6) to intend  a ("toelet" תועלת) benefit, (7) that benefit תועלת would not come in any other way.

The Left could not possibly know the intensions of Judge Barrett in doing an act of kindness. So it is lashon hara by definition.

I do not understand why the Left thinks that just because they can lie about someone that makes it OK. Do they think it is Ok according to the holy Torah? How is that possible? Have they never learned Leviticus "Though shalt not walk as a tale bearer among your people"? Or the Ten Commandments, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor"?

The only answer I can come up with is that they have not learned in the Mir Yeshiva. For if they had, they would know about lashon hara.

[Most Litvak yeshiva are aware of the problem with lashon hara (slander), but in the Mir there was a special emphasis on the issue.]

I noticed that President Trump was in a press conference in which he was insulted. He had discussed taxes. Then as he was walking out one of the reporters yelled and screamed at him at him, "Why did you not pay any taxes?!!!" Besides the fact  that that is an obvious lie, what was the most interesting thing was that President Trump did not answer. He just kept on walking.

The reminded me of the LeM of Rav Nahman of Breslov עיקר התשובה שישמע בזיונו יידום וישתוק "The main repentance is to hear your insult and to be quiet and not answer." 

I doubt if President Trump learns the LeM of Rav Nahman, but still it is interesting that he must understand this fact intuitively.

Good Midot

"Good character" is too amorphous. 

That is one reason I found being at the Mir in NY helpful for me in the emphasis on Musar. Not that they learned a lot of Musar. As compared to the five hour "seder" (session) in the morning of Gemara in depth and the four hour seder of gemara with "bekiut" [fast learning], the Musar was short. It was 20 minutes before mincha and 15 minutes before the evening prayer. That is just 3% of the time. Still that short time was enough to give me a good idea of what "good character" is as defined in Torah.

Maybe some examples might be helpful.

But I am not so sure I am one to be giving "musar". The best idea is to take the basic set of Musar of the Rishonim [אורחות צדיקים מסילת ישרים שערי תשובה חובות לבבות ספר היראה לר''ת מעלות המידות]

But I also should add that this does not work very well without being coupled to the Gemara. By itself Musar tends to go off into tangents. For that reason Rav Haim of Brisk did not want it introduced into the yeshivot. But to Rav Israel Salanter, Musar is importnat for everyone. So eventually a kind of sytheneis came about when there is now short sessions of Musra in Litvak yeshivas. Not too much. Not too little. Just right. [Goldilocks.]

 x31 F minor mp3

x31 midi file

x31 nwc file

 x33 G Major mp3 x33 midi  x33 nwc

 Rav Nahman in the end of the LeM brings this statement "This that tzadikim [saints] do tremendous sins is for such and such a reason." [In the השמטות]

.....זה שצדיקים עושים עבירות גדולות הוא בגלל וכולי

That is to say there is some point that a person works on himself. He does avodat hashem [the service of God] even sincerely. He learns and prays and is a "masmid" continually learning. Then reaches some spiritual level. Then the sitra achra  [Dark Side] spends a good deal of time and effort to subvert that person. 

That is with a region called "היכלי התמורות" palaces of delusion.

That is that it takes a lot of effort even to get to the palaces of delusions. But to come to the Light, it is necessary to go through that intermediate stage. And there people get ego inflation. Plus the Sitra Achra gives insights and miracles that  are traps.

I have to admit I owe great gratitude to many people in the Ukraine who showed me kindness when no one else would. But I also noticed some of the types that can be problematic. So I have not written much about it since there seems to impossible to generalize. 

The doctor the operated on my foot Sergey Alexivitch and his whole staff, showed not just competence but even something I would call "Mesirut nefesh" absolute determination to do a good job. But that is just one example. They wanted to be so careful that they only used local anesthesia. The nurse Irina held my hand the entire time and called me Avraham Philipovitch -a meaning of respect to call me by the name of my father. 

 So it is hard to make sense of things there.

 The test of men nowadays is divorce. When the woman he loved turns into a determined desperate enemy fixated on doing everything in her power to destroy him. This can wear down a person's mental state.

The test of women is talking neighbors. 

In all these cases Reason does little or nothing to protect one from the evil inclination.

For as Benjamin Franklin wrote making fun of the human condition: "How wonderful it is to be a reasonable person because then you can find reasons to do anything you want."

Or as Kelley Ross [The Kant Fries School] puts it. Be careful when people start talking about reason or as when Spock says "Logic dictates...". Reason does not tell us much.

That is the source of the idea of the Kant Fries school of "immediate non-intuitive knowledge." Or what Rav Nahman calls "faith".

 On the way to the sea I met someone who had been afflicted with the virus. From what he told me it seems that he was really sick from it, and it is not just a hoax. He had noticed me going into the sea, and doing a bit of exercise afterwards, and was telling me that he thought that would be good for him also.

Though  going into the sea, and doing a bit of exercise I  do just because of spiritual health, but he was suggesting that it has to do with physical health also.

I can imagine he must be right since I know there are little things in the blood which attack hostile viruses and so doing the ocean and then exercise I guess must boost that immune system.

Even at the founding of the American government, people found it hard to concentrate on anything else. I noticed this in the events surrounding the creation of the Constitution. From that you can see there is  a kind of collective consciousness. [That was an idea around I guess for a long time,-- but in particular I recall it was a subject of an argument between Ibn Rushd and Aquinas].

Nowadays it does seem hard to concentrate on anything else besides the coming election -even for people who have at all other times no interest in politics.

I am however not sure if perhaps it is possible to rise above that. I recall that during the time I was at the Mir in NY, I was  unaware of politics at all. And that was not just me, but rather because I was immersed in an atmosphere of people that were highly involved and dedicated to learning Torah.

 When Rav Nahman talks about Torah scholars that are demons (note 1) it is not possible to say that he means this as an allegory or just some way of putting them down. The reason is that you can see that he believed quite literally in the existence of demons. [As you can see in his 13 stories.] So he must be talking about possession.

The idea is  that as people grow older they change. So are they the whole time exactly the same person,-? Or is it that at some point they have changed so much, that they are no longer the same person? When a caterpillar changes into a butterfly, is it really the same thing? Or has it changed so much, that the very essence of the being has changed?

So is is possible that  Rav Nahman is saying about many Torah scholars that they have changed so much so from their human essence that they actually become תלמידי חכמים שדיים יהודאיים [Torah scholars that are demons.]

[I am pretty sure that most people can tell this type. It is no secret.]

This I must add does not refer to Litvak sages who are simply trying to learn and keep Torah. The difference is easy to tell since in the Litvak world there is no scamming or falsifying what the Torah says or means. 

(note 1) Lem I:12, LeM I:28 

 x28 mp3 file  

x28 midi  

x28 nwc [noteworthy composer file]

 It really ought to go without saying, but still I think it is worthwhile to mention that the ideas in Rav Nahman's LeM come within a certain context. Thus without a basic background in Gemara and Musar, things that he says often are taken out of context. Thus it is easy to see how when people get involved in the teachings of Rav Nahman, sometimes things go a bit onto some tangent which does not seem to be anywhere near the original intensions of Rav Nahman. 

So what I am thinking is that if one has merited to be in a straight Litvak yeshiva where the context and meaning of Torah is crystal clear then he ought to stay there. And learn the ideas and books of Rav Nahman as an addition to Musar. And if there is no Litvak yeshiva nearby, then to make one.

So what is straight Torah? That is not so easy to explain but more or less it is the kind of attitude that I saw in the Mir in NY which could be summed up as follows: "We have no opinions except what the Gemara says." It more or less is the idea that opinions expressed in the Gemara or Rishonim count as legitimate Torah, Anything that does not fit within that context is out of bounds.

Rav Nahman from Breslov did not hold from learning philosophy.

 Rav Nahman from Breslov did not hold from learning philosophy. That even includes the Guide and the Ibn Ezra or even other books of great sages of Israel. Rav Nahman held they were are all not very good since it is best to depend on faith, and go with simple faith. Thus when I became aware of the opinion of some geonim and rishonim about the importance of Physics and Metaphysics, I choose to go into Physics. Metaphysics might be worthwhile in my opinion, but that fact that Rav Nahman was against leaning it influenced my decision to look into it as an area of interest, but not to study it in an intense way.

[I mean that philosophy is more than just any old area or interest but still  I take it that Rav Nahman was probably right that it seems impossible to get it right. Dr Kelley Ross's web site on the Kant/Fries approach was certainly helpful for me to clear up some major issues and questions but I still think that Rav Nahman was right that philosophy is best avoided,

One reason to learn a bit of philosophy is what Steven Weinberg said--the main advantage of government for most of human history was to save one from other governments. Not to provide benefits. Same with philosophy. The main advantage of philosophy is to save one from other philosophies.

And that applies to people that imagine that they are immune because they do not learn philosophy at all. That simply makes them susceptible to half baked ideas that sound good at first with their poison hidden. 

 Psychology is pseudo science. How do you know? Because there is no conceivable observation that could refute it. [It is not falsifiable.] Therefore the entire thing is poisonous imaginations of sick minds. Verified by other sick minds. The whole thing is a farce.

Another fact about psychology  is that the targets keep moving according to the fashion of the times.

That is one observation. But there are many indications that the whole thing is a horrible scam based on the fact that people love to talk about sex and it is a way get them to pay money to do so,

 Heisenberg I believe tried to sabotage the Nazi effort to make an atom bomb. The proof is two fold. One is that in 1939 he was specifically asked to write a paper on the question if a chain reaction with Uranium is feasible, and if so how much Uranium would be needed. His entire paper side swiped the question, and dealt only with the question of using uranium as an energy source. But that is just one half of the issue. Later after the war he was interred with other physicists, and when they heard about the success of the USA is creating a atom bomb, they wondered how much uranium was needed. Heisenberg did not know, but set off to making the calculations. Then in a short time he came up with the right answer. That shows that five years before that when he was asked that exact question by Nazis, he did not even bother making the calculations at all, but on purpose sidelined the entire question. 

[But the Nazis did  have a few other secret bases where they were working on the same idea.]

Civil War. Truth always rises to the surface, no matter how long it takes.

The riots makes me wonder about the Civil War. I mean to say that the whole abolition thing seems a bit off because slavery is in the Torah. There are Jewish slaves and gentile slaves. So the question whether slavery is just or not seems settled. But I can also see the point of Abraham Lincoln in wanting to keep the Union together.   

Jewish Slaves go free after six years. Gentile slaves go free only with money, a document, or injury. כסף שטר או ראשי אברים.

This would settle once and for all the question about the Civil War. It was wrong. And modern events prove it. Truth always rises to the surface, no matter how long it takes. 

 The problem that the new idea of marriage presents is that one can not be married to one's sister or any of the עריות (the sexual relations brought is Leviticus). Man lying with a man is one of them. In fact, the death penalty is attached to that act if done on purpose,- and if by accident, then a sin offering.

I mean to say that even if one would actual try to marry one's sister or mother, the marriage is not valid. People might call it "marriage" but that does not make it so.

 There is a sort of deep learning that got to be associated with the world of Litvak Talmud learning. It is easy to see. Just compare the achronim after the Rav Yoseph Karo until the world of Litvak yeshiva centered on the sort of learning done by Rav Haim of Brisk.

It is hard to know of see from where all that began. Even though the Litvak world is based on the Gra, you do not actually see this kind of learning in the Gra himself. It is implicit in his commentaries but nothing that is open and plain to see. This kind of learning it seems developed in the Litvak world slowly. You can see it in Rav Haim of Voloshin and the son of Rav Haim, the Netziv in his rarely printed writings of his  ideas in Gemara. It was like it was just under the surface like a seed developing and germinating until one day it spouts. Then around the time of Rav Haim and Rav Israel Salanter this kind of deep learning came to the surface.

The best example is Rav Haim's Hidushim and also the Steipler  and Rav Shach.

 The world of Talmud does have a few centres. The top are Ponovitch in Bnei Brak and Brisk. But Brisk has the best students because it only accepts the best. Not that the teachers are all that better than anywhere else. That leaves Ponovitch where the teachers get to that position by means of excellence, not because of family connections. And that is what tends to make the situation in which whom so ever is the top teachers at Ponovitch is considered the top of the world of Talmud. 

So what I suggest is to create a kind of Ponovitch yeshiva in every city by taking any student bachur of Ponovitch and bring him to that city.] 

There are offshoots of Ponovitch that come from people that learned there.

 I have found in learning Tosphot and Mathematics that often there is a kind of way of learning that is a bit difficult to explain. That is to say I would learn Tosphot one day and by repeating it that same day even many times would not help to understand it at all. But if I would just go through it word by word, and then the next day do the same thing again, and then the next day do that again, then after some time it would become clear. It is like at night when sleeping somehow the subject would become clear on some deeper level. But then if the next day I would just go on, then it gets forgotten. So that is why there is this need to repeat the same tosphot day after day

 In one of the stories of Rav Nahman of Uman you find the idea that at one time all the higher lights were together and then separated. The process of bring the world to a higher plane consists of bring together these lights again. [Each light or Divine trait is embodied in some "tzadik" saint.

So when we find problems in Breslov or the Litvak world, there should be no question why. It is after the whirlwind that caused the lights or Divine traits to become separated. So even if people are following the Gra, that does not mean there are not problems in the Litvak world. Similarly with Breslov.

The main thing is to identify who exactly is representing one of the Divine traits and if possible to join the paths of these different tsaddikim together. And even more important to separate out the phonies and false teachers that are so common in the religious world. 

x26 A Minor mp3 file 

X26 MIDI FILE

x26 nwc file

  If someone does by Mitasek [מתעסק] [fooling around] a type of sin that requires a sin offering, do they need to bring a sin offering? That is not the same thing as accident. For all sin offerings come only because of accident, never because of doing something on purpose. Accident here means doing one thing and something else results.

But Mitasek is different. To Tosphot he is not obligated to bring a sin offering except for when there is pleasure involved like sexual sin or eating forbidden fat. [That is all the fact that is on the stomach of the animal.]  (The statement of Shmuel is המתעסק בחלבים ועריות חייב משום שנהנה) 

Rav Shach brings down that the Rambam is a bit different. It could be he holds like Tosphot. And the reason that for Shabat he brings only the "Ptur" ["Ptur" means a reason not to be obligated in something] of מלאכת מחשבת ["thought out work"] is that receiving pleasure is possible also for a work on Shabat and so it is needed to have  a special ptur even in such a case. Tosphot brings this idea in Sanhedrin page 62 which I was doing with my learning partner David Bronson. [That is why this subject came up in my little booklet  Ideas is Shas. That was because David had some ideas here.]

But still it is curious that in laws of sin offerings nothing about gaining pleasure is mentioned. So it looks like the only ptur for shabat is thought out work.

So then what about laws of forbidden food 14: law 12? There the Rambam does say one who eats forbidden food by mitasek is obligated because he derived pleasure? Rav Shach answers that that place is talking not about a sin offering but rather an case of doing something on purpose and doing on purpose is possible even for mitasek since one can be mitasek "fooling around" on purpose and then the sin comes about because of the fooling around.

What comes out from all this is that is general mitasek to the Rambam is not a ptur for a sin offering except for Shabat when to be obligated one needs thought out work מלאכת מחשבת

 A lot of learning Torah depends on where you are starting from. sometimes being in Ponovitch is not possible.

So what you do is to first realize there is an obligation get through the Written and Oral Law. That is brought in the Gra. Plus there is te importance of what the Rambam wrote "Just like there is not adding or subtracting from the written Trah so there is not adding or subtracting from the Oral Torah. So that means the obligation of getting through Torah is the two Talmuds and the midrashie halacha and midrashi hagada."

Then there is the Seder HaLimud of Rav Nahman-which really comes from the Gemara but rav nahman spells it out clearly. Say the words and go on.

This is not to diminish in depth learning. Rather everyone needs an in depth session and a fast session. This idea of Rav Nahman relates to the fast session. 

There is also the importance of knowing about Bitul Torah. Bot anything you want to learn should you learn. Rather what you are required that you must do. That which does not come into the category of obligation is bitul Torah.

Then there is the fact that the basic idea of learning fast essentially applies to the first time. That is this: the first time just the Gemara with no commentary. Second time you add rashi, Third time Tosphot  fourth time maharsha and maharam 

This really depends on the situation. For if you have the merit to be in a litvak yeshiva then the best idea is just follow the regular sessions. But it occurred today that someone asked me the approach to take in their situation in which they are slightly older to be in a yeshiva,

Even though the basic approach of Litvak yeshivas is based on the Gra, it seems to me that that is  a bit too undefined. It would be better if there was a straight commitment to follow the Gra.

This way there is also a sort of protection against the Sitra Achra.

סביב רשעים יתהלכון "The wicked walk around the holiness". That is,-- the Dark Side is always going around places of holiness to see if they can find a crack to slip into the place.

[I should admit here that I am no where near following the straight path of Torah of the Gra. But I feel words of advice that might help others to walk on the straight and narrow are good-- even if I am not able to follow that path myself.]

 x23 F Major mp3 file

x23 midi file

x23 nwc file

 x22

"Warn the people not to come up onto Mount Sinai, least God attacks them."

 There is a sort of aspect of the religious world that is kind of like ריבוי אור excess light. Aspects that make it like Adi Da or Scientology.  Rav Nahman brings this idea in terms of individuals אל יעלו בהר פן יפרוץ בם This is what God told Moses, "Warn the people not to come up onto Mount Sinai, least  God attacks them."

But this applies as well and even more so the the superorganism of the religious world. Even when there is an attempt to pay attention to great tzadikim like the Gra or Rav Shach, there still enters this aspect of insanity that comes in. It is hard to know what to make of this.

But even with this danger, still I think there ought to be  a beit midrash on the name of the Gra in every city. Plus a branch of Ponovitch.

The new moon. The day of the Molad [conjunction] is Rosh Hodesh

 It is one of those odd kinds of years that got me wondering wondering about the new moon. The molad [conjunction of moon and sun] was yesterday. Today is when a court could have seen it. But tomorrow is when everyone is doing rosh hashanah.

To know the exact time of the molad is not hard. Hipparchus brings it in his book that he got it from the ancient Babylonians. But that is not the same thing as getting the lunar and solar time to correspond at least to some degree. 

The first time the calendar that is used was recorded was by Meton in Athens. That was considerably before the first mention of  a Hebrew Calendar which was by Saadia Gaon. The Gemara never mentions any calendar at all. and it just says the sages knew when the molad was קביעא דירחא. But that has nothing to do with the calendar.

Nor is there any mention of Hillel II setting up any kind of calendar. And during the time of the geonim we have letters bringing dates that do not correspond to the calendar.

What clearly happened was after the troubles that occurred in Babylon when the yeshivas were closed that there was no central authority and people needed to know when to celebrate the festivals. The calendar that was already widely used to made a reasonable correspondence between the solar and lunar years was Meton's calendar.

So the best idea is to depend on Tosphot in Sanhedrin [10b] that says that the day of the Molad is Rosh Hodesh

Saadia Gaon says the calendar is from the "shamua" but writing in Arabic uses the word that he uses elsewhere to refer to the general body of tradition. Not Halacha to Moses from Sinai.  Later people misunderstood Rav Saadia and thought he meant Halacha to Moshe from Sinai. But that not at all what Saadai wrote.

 There is an amazing wealth of advice in the books of Rav Nahman of Breslov and Uman. But also there was for me a certain kind of blessing that came to me when I got to his ziun in Uman. 

One of the most significant bits of advice is the path of learning--which is that of "girsa" say the words and going on.

By itself it does not seem to work very well, but together with the deep kind of learning that you have in Litvak yeshivas that seems to work well.

This certainly helped me in learning Gemara. In Shar Yashuv there was a tremendous emphasis on deep learning, but I felt kind of lost spending two weeks on one page of Gemara before I had even finished the tractate even once. But the deep learning combined with the girsa helped me a lot.

[Besides that after I took note of the opinion of some rishonim about the importance of Physics, this path of learning of Rav Nahman has been a great help for me. But I do have my little  addition I would like to make. Yes on one hand to get through the book, like Sting Theory or something like that, but then when you get to the end then instead of starting again at the beginning, you go back page by page from the end to the beginning.]\

A lot depends on whom you marry.

 A lot depends on whom you marry. This was conventional wisdom in the Litvak yeshiva world. 

When it comes down to choosing a wife, you need to find one that is a bat talmid chacham (daughter of a authentic Torah scholar from the realm of holiness). The reason is that if you want to continue learning Torah after you marry you need to find a wife that wants you to be sitting and learning.

It was said that, "If she wants you to learn, you will learn. If she does not want you to learn then you will not."

You can see this even in the wider world. It is know that one of the major mistakes that caused the downfall of the Confederacy was John Bell Hood [known as Sam Hood]. He had an amazing steak of victories  up until he fell in love with Sally Preston. She was so well know as a flirt  that one soldier who was thought to be interested in her was asked about this. He answered, "I would rather face a charge of Yankees. I do not want to end upon the casualty list."

Yet John Bell Hood did fall in love with her, and not just lost battle after battle, but in one of the most crucial aspects of the war, he was put in charge of an entire army, and really messed up so much so that it caused the loss of the entire war.  

[He thought to attack Sherman's supply lines. Sherman could not have been more happy. He said he soldiers ate and sleep better living off the land.]

evolution

Racism is simply evolution. Every species changes and diverges in different directions. There is nothing wrong or evil about that. It is just the way things change.And every group has to find some way to fit into their niche and to do so means it changes to fit its niche.

Talking with God as one talks with a good friend- Hitbodadut

Talking with God as one talks with a good friend is not mentioned much in the LeM of Rav Nahman. The first place is vol. 2. And even there not anything more than saying it is a great thing.

Then at the very end it is brought up as the main thing to be doing all the time.

You can say that it simply was not known to Rav Nahman how important it is until the end of his life.

And in fact that seems clear from the Conversations of Rav Nahman.

The emphasis  comes from a very short two paragraphs in LeM vol II section 96 that the greatest Avodat Hashem ("service towards God") is to do hitbodadut. "And since most people are not able to do this much, at least it is necessary to command them to do it at least an hour a day. But for one who really wants to serve God, it is the best thing to spend the whole day talking with God as one talks with a friend."

But I have had mixed feeling about this. At first, when I started taking the ideas of Rav Nahman more seriously I went in for the Hitbodadut thing also. So instead of learning Torah I would go out into the fields and forest around Safed to spend the whole day "doing Hitbodadut."

Then I noticed that in Breslov, that is people that were consciously following the path of Rav Nahman, there seemed to be a need to be spending more time on learning Torah. And on the other hand I noticed that "learning Torah" also did not seem to bring people to a higher moral and spiritual level.

It was hard to put it all together. Another thing that made it hard to figure out was that in fact the beginning of this period in Safed when I was concentrating on Hitbodadut, I felt a tremendous surge of energy, what then I would refer to as אור אין סוף ("the infinite light of God"). So after all is said and done, I have to agree that the Hitbodadut thing is just as important and even more so that Rav Nahman said it is. 

So it is the best thing to have a balance between Hitbodadut and learning Torah.  

At any rate, in Torah thought, Learning Torah is what one must do if he can. Taking away any time from learning Torah is forbidden except for doing a commandment that can not be done by anyone else.

In fact I sometimes would hear the old Yidish expression: "Abi Nisht zu learning" [anything but learning]. That is one ought to sit and learn Torah and trust in God for parnasah. But if parnasah doesnot come, then one ought to work. But the idea is that learning Torah iswhat one ought to spend his tome and energy on. 

[However in my case I have an expanded idea and a contracted idea of what learning Torah means: I.e. it includes Mathematics and Physics as per the Rishonim like the Inb Pakuda and Rambam. But also a contracted idea because the Oral Law mean the actual books handed down to us by the sages of the Mishna and Gemara. Everything after that is not, "The Oral Torah."

  

If a Israeli marries, and finds his wife is not a virgin, she is still permitted to him because of doubt of a doubt. ספק ספקא. Ketuboth page 9 side B

 A priest [Kohen from the male descendants of Aaron the brother of Moses] has more restrictions on who he can marry than a regular Israeli. As you can see in the verses in Leviticus the section of "Emor" "Speak to the priests", he can not marry  a "Zona" which is any woman who has had sex with someone that was forbidden to her (by a prohibition from the Torah.). It matters not if it was rape or not.

This is different than a Israeli. If his wife was raped, then she is still permitted to him. But if it was with her agreement, then she is forbidden to her husband from then on.

This is a bit of an introduction. Next between betrothal and marriage there used to be a long time period. But betrothal was done in such a way that she became a married woman. [That is called Kidushin.]

So if a Israeli marries, [that is did kidushin betrothal and much later does nisuin that is the actual bringing her into his home] and finds his wife is not a virgin, she is still permitted to him because of  doubt of a doubt. ספק ספקא. Maybe the sex was before she got married [betrothal] . And even if it was after, maybe it was rape. So because a doubt of a doubt ספק ספקא is permitted, she is permitted to her husband. [The rule is in a case of a doubt about a prohibition of the Torah, the law is to forbid. But if the case is a doubt of a doubt, the law is to permit. ]

The Shita Mekubetzet asks why is this not a case of טומאה ברשות היחיד uncleanliness in a private domain-which we learn from "sota" [a married woman who has strayed] is forbidden? He answers that is when there is a prior status that there can at least begin a doubt. [Like in the case of Sota when there are reasons to believe she strayed. Here there is nothing like that.

Another answer that Rav Shach gives is  this is not really a case of טומאה uncleanliness. but of prohibition. Only if we already know that she is forbidden, then it becomes a case of טומאה uncleanliness, but here we do not know in the first place if she is forbidden. 

Orchestra and piano from around 1994]

 x21 mp3 recent

x21 midi

x21 nwc

mathematics Orchestra and piano from around 1994]

mathematics midi file  mathematics nwc format

 Some people are inherently ambiguous. It is like Kant noticed about some areas in which Reason can not enter and if it tries it ends up with self contradictions "antinomies". So there are people like that..For Example General McClellan. The general that defeated Robert E Lee at Antietam you would imagine there could not possibly anything ambiguous about. The person that defeated one of the smartest and best generals in history has to be clearly a winner. But no. Right after that battle--immediately he was fired by President Lincoln. There are so many sides to this issue that the best of the historians can do is treat different sides of him. Never getting one consistent picture.

Other people are clear. They stand for one thing and pursue that consistently. [Like Winston Churchill.]

A confession--I am more like the first type. The only reason I tend to be consistent in my views is that that is something I learned in Musar books. [Starting from the Chovot Levavot (Obligations of the Hearts). But I also saw that in Orchot Tzadikim.] 

slander even refers to truth.

 Actually slander even refers to truth. There are times that one must say negative things but that is to warn someone. Otherwise even true fact are slander. [There are a few verses that refer to this subject. from different angles. One thing is "Rekilut" saying true things [even positive things] that can bring hatred between one person and another. [Like praising General Grant in front of General Lee.] Another thing is "Lashon Hara" which is saying negative things--even if true unless to warn someone.

[So why is true lashon hara forbidden? To R. Yona of Grondi [author of Shaarai Teshuva] is because of collateral damage. That is: the person might be subject to punishment that otherwise he would not get according to the Law of Moses. An example from the Gemara itself is testifying alone in a court of law. Since he is alone his testimony can not be accepted and so it is lashon hara. Some Rishonim disagree and hold that true lashon hara is forbidden in and of itself. Only in specific cases of the need to warn others is it permitted

[It is somewhat of a shock to me to see that most people do not even know that lashon hara is forbidden. 

 People that think Marxism was meant to bring prosperity and happiness to people have never read the poetry of Marx. But the actual way the Communists Manifesto is stated it sounds as if it is meant for happiness. Marx openly acknowledges the tremendous power of capitalism to create an abundance of good. But he also claims that that is just one last stage before communism in which the middle man the owner of the factory will be eliminated and the workers will have the full share of their labor. To him the factory owner is extracting excess value from the workers. [Based on the labor Theory of Value that the value something has is a result of how much labor went into making it. But that is simply not the case. The value something has is how much you want it. Air has lots of value to me even though no one put any effort into making it.]

That is a cleaver way of getting people to imagine that they have been victimized and the best solution is to kill the rich.

But the real intent I think is contained in the poetry of Marx -that is to destroy everything.

 x20 F Minor

x20 midi  

x20 nwc

So natural law is not the same thing as according to natural desire.

 Without Aristotle or Saadia, or Aquinas mentioning it in those particular passages that deal with specific sins, I believe they are all fitting natural law with their larger system of things having a goal or purpose. So what would not be natural law would be what does not go towards that purpose of being human. [They explain that as being basically what we would say is attachment with God.]

So natural law is not the same thing as according to natural desire.

[I am mentioning this because it is the source of John Locke's "Natural rights" which is a different way of stating the Ten Commandments. That is Thou Shalt Not Steal is the same thing stated in a different way of the fact that people have a right to their own property.

peaceful protesters".

 "Mostly" peaceful protesters". The Titanic was "mostly" unsinkable. How about giving a ride to the protesters on an airplane that "mostly" flies? Or a boat that "mostly" floats?

attachment with God [Devekut] is in fact a major goal of the Torah.

I think that the essence of Torah is clear from the context. If you look at the Torah itself it has a structure like a Mozart Symphony.  It has the first climax [which is is sometimes repeated depending on the conductor]. The first climax of the Torah --that everything is leading up to is the Ten Commandments. [I might note  that the minor climax --the Ten Commandments is in fact repeated later, but not in the same way as in a Mozart symphony. Another difference is the Torah has five movements, not four.] 

Then the final climax is of course the entrance of Israel into the Land of Canaan.

Also there is fear, love and attachment with God which is the purpose of the commandments.

This is stated openly in the verses. "You should do the commandments in order to love and fear and be attached to God." (Paraphrasing) [This is stated in many verses in Deuteronomy.]

So my contention is that attachment with God [Devekut] is in fact a major goal of the Torah. The Torah itself says that the commandments themselves are meant to bring one to attachment with God.

So what do you do with many places where it is said that learning Torah is worth more than all teh other commandments put together? [The mishna from Peah that everyone says right away in the morning right after the blessing on the Torah.]

You have to say that learning Torah is the major way of coming to become attached with God but the learning it in itself is not the final goal. The goal is the attachment.

[But as Rav Nahman pointed out there can be "Ribui Or" ("too much light"). So it is hard to know clearly how to limit oneself in this regard.]

The way to understand this "devakut" I think is only through the idea of Kelley Ross [the Kant Friesian School] of non intuitive immediate knowledge. It is a type of knowledge that is not emotion, not sense perception and not reason. A kind of knowledge the type that Plato describes--.\

I am not trying to avoid the question of how to come to true Devakut. It seems that it is a combination of good midot, learning Torah and Rav Nahman's idea of speaking with God as one talks with a friend, and being in Israel.

The forbidden relations of Leviticus [18 and 20]

 The forbidden relations of Leviticus [18 and  20] are among the most serious things in the Bible. They get up there with murder and idolatry. Together they make up the list of three things one must give up his life in order not to transgress. [I.e. in such a situation where one is given a choice]. There are plenty of other forbidden relations in Deuteronomy, but they are mere prohibitions. Not laws with the death penalty attached to them.

[There are exceptions which I ought to mention. My note above was just meant to give a general idea. Some exceptions are a menstruating woman. That is there is Leviticus, but without the death penalty. ]

[Maybe if people would learn the Bible, there would not be so much confusion about these issues.]

 In spite of the fact that Rav Nahman of Uman and Breslov had amazing insights into human life and Torah I would not recommend joining any Breslov group. Rather to get to understand authentic straight Torah, there is no where are great as pretty much any Litvak yeshiva based on the path of the Gra and Rav Shach. Only within the context of authentic Torah do the insights of Rav Nahman add depth and understanding. But his path does not stand alone;-- and also when it is taken alone, it tends to open the door to negative things.

JORDAN PETERSON

 

 I gained a lot by being in Uman for Rosh Hashanah with Rav Nahman of Uman and Breslov in terms of learning Torah and music. But that is not to say that this is automatic that everyone ought to be there. To me it seems at this point that it is better to be in Israel.  [עיקר הגלות הוא בגלל חסרון אמונה. LeM volume I section 7. The main exile is because of lack of faith.] And I ought to add that there was a period that I was trying to follow everything Rav Nahman said quite literally-- and that included coming to Israel. And in fact there was a sort of inspiration that I felt during that period which lasted seven years.

Nowadays I am not at all working on that program. Still I can see the great benefit in following the advice and ideas of Rav Nahman.  

the problem of Torah shelo Lishma (--Torah not for its own sake, but rather for the sake of power or a shiduch or money).

 The problems of the religious no one seems to associate with the problem of Torah shelo Lishma (--Torah not for its own sake, but rather for the sake of power or a shiduch or money).

The Ari means to say that the Talmud is mixed with good and evil like the tree of knowledge of good and evil was. See the Introduction of the Eitz Chaim. R. Zeira came to Israel and fasted forty days in order to forget the Babylonian Talmud and to start learning the Talmud Yerushalmi.

The reason is there is an aspect of holiness  and entry into holiness in Gemara. Like the Gemara says about one who has Torah but not Fear of God: "Woe to him who has the door but not the house."  It is a door for holiness if learned for its own sake. But when learned or taught for money, it changes its character into something negative.

When people see the general kinds of insanity and evil in the religious world, they almost never associate the problems with Torah not for its own sake,- but rather find flaws in the Torah itself.

But to me the answer seems to lay in the intention. סם חיים למימינים בה סם מוות למשמאילים בה 

x19 F Major     x19 midi

[x19 in nwc format]

The problem in the USA now is that the Marxists are trying to take it down. But it was not always that way. Before this started so suddenly, the educational system in the pseudo social studies, very much Marxist as Allan Bloom noted in The Closing of the American Mind.  He was saying back 30 years ago that the universities were the problem.

I suggest simply closing the social pseudo studies departments. Once and for all. [However a lot of the studies in USA universities are great, STEM, Music, Arts. Plus the technical schools are great.] 

And as for reparations for slavery, maybe people ought to pay back the trillions of welfare dollars they have collected from the Federal government since LBJ's welfare state began in the 1960's. Plus give up all the jobs they have gotten from Affirmative Action, and take tests and show competence like everyone else.

 x18 F Major   x18 midi format  x18 in nwc format

 

The idea that leaning Physics and Metaphysics as being even more important than learning Torah per se is an opinion that I had to depend on since "sitting and learning Torah" somehow or other was not working out for me. 

Perhaps for lack of trying hard enough. Perhaps reasons that are still unknown or not understood by me. Still if I had had enough commitment I think I would have just sat and learned Torah.

Part of the reason is that while seeing the importance of Physics and Metaphysics (that many Rishonim hold), still there is the numinous aspect of Torah that apparently you do not find in these subjects where the holiness is hidden.

The word "Numinous" comes from Otto based on the the idea of non intuitive immediate knowledge. The idea is the is an perception of holiness that does not depend on reason. [See the Kant Fries school.]

it is important to have a good idea of what real authentic Torah is

There is a kind of continuity of groups or super-organisms {as Howard Bloom would call them}. In the recent world wars, no one from England would say they are fighting for Englishmen. No. Rather they would say they are, "Fighting for England." 

Similarly you can notice  a kind of continuity of the Mir Yeshiva over generations. A kind of DNA of an institution- rather that of the individuals that are a part of it. A kind of modesty, a commitment to whatever the Torah says -not to any doctrines per se, strictness about laws of money  and not to speak lashon hara (slander).

But this, I think, can apply to almost all yeshivas built on the vision of the Gaon of Villna -the Gra.

Even for those of us that are not as strict in every detail that we ought to be , still it is important to have a good idea of what real, authentic Torah is-- as opposed to Torah of the Sitra Acha [Dark Side] which too often poses as the real thing.

 Dr Kelley Ross suggested that the reason the Left is rioting and burning American cities is the same kind of reasoning that led to the Tet Offense in the Vietnam War. That is, the Left feels if they can bring enough violence and chaos to American cities then people will vote for them just in order to stop the violence.

But my question is if this can work in the USA in the same way that it worked in Vietnam? After all Americans might resent being used in that kind of way. They might vote for President Trump just to show they are not afraid of the riots. This has happened before. People have sometimes attacked the USA thinking people would just give up. But after being attacked that American DNA was awakened that holds freedom dear. 

[The Tet Offensive was an attack on South  Vietnam that was meant to weaken support of American troops and the S. Vietnam government. And this strategy worked in the USA also. Immediately after the rioting stated, support for President Trump went down to  ziltch. But the question is that now American might  be getting tired of the violence and want to return to stability. So support for Trump has risen again. That is in the hope that he can bring stability and prosperity.]

 

 Ketuboth page 9. A priest comes to court and says he found his newly wed wife was not a virgin. She is not saying anything. She is forbidden to him because of a doubt when were the relations before or after kidushin? Since there is only one doubt she is forbidden. Tosphot says there are two hazakot [prior state] here. Hezkat she is OK and hezkat of the body. That is she is assumed to have stayed  a virgin until you know otherwise. That puts the act of sex later. R Akiva Eigger says hezkat hashta [the state of things now] does not help her here because you would need it to join with hezkat OK and it can not because it says something different than hezkat OK.  Hezkat OK says there was no sex. Hezkat hashta says you push the act of sex back in time as far as possible and that means the sex was before kidushin.

I have two questions here. One is Hezzkat OK can say either the sex was before kidushin or there was no sex. That that has an intersection with hezkat hashata which says the sex was before kidushin. The other question is no one has even brought up the possibility she did not have sex. So all that hezkat OK says is that the sex was before kidushin. And therefore both hazakot are saying the exact same thing.

Rav Shach asks that Shmuel holds there is no state of now that pushes things back in time (Hezkat Hashta) and Rav who does hold from it holds hazakot [status plural] do not need to join. He answers that is only to tell us a state of being. But in a case like in Nida page 2 where an event happened to change the status, there you need the two hazakot to join.

[There is a time period between betrothal [kidushin] and the marriage. But she is a married woman after the betrothal. [In ancient times, the betrothal was done in the way that makes it actually marriage. Nowadays it is just a promise to marry so it is not the same thing.]] So if she had sex after, then she is forbidden to her husband who is a priest even if it was rape. That not the case of a Israeli, only a priest. This is clear in the verses in the Torah that a Kohen priest can not marry a "zona" that is a woman who has had sex that was forbidden].

The whole idea of  

________________________________________________

 כתובות page 9. A כהן comes to court and says he found his newly wed wife was not a virgin. She is not saying anything. She is forbidden to him because of a doubt when were the relations before or after קידושין? Since there is only one doubt she is forbidden. תוספות says there are two חזקות  here. חזקת כשרות and חזקת הגוף. That is she is assumed to have stayed  a virgin until you know otherwise. That puts the act of sex later. ר' עקיבא איגר says חזקת השתא does not help her here because you would need it to join with חזקת כשרות and it can not because it says something different than חזקת כושר. That is חזקת כשרות says there was no sex. חזקת השתא says you push the act of sex back in time as far as possible and that means the sex was before קידושין. I have two questions here. One is חזקת כשרות can say either the sex was before קידושין or there was no sex. That that has an intersection with חזקת השתא which says the sex was before קידושין. The other question is no one has even brought up the possibility she did not have sex. So all that חזקת כשרות says is that the sex was before קידושין. And therefore both hazakot are saying the exact same thing. רב שך asks that שמואל holds there is no חזקת השתא and רב who does hold from it holds חזקות do not need to join. He answers that is only to tell us a state of being. But in a case like in נידה page 2 where an event happened to change the status, there you need the two חזקות to join.

 כתובות עמוד 9. כהן מגיע לבית המשפט ואומר שמצא שאשתו הטרייה לא הייתה בתולה. היא לא אומרת כלום. היא אסורה עליו בגלל ספק מתי היו היחסים לפני קידושין או אחריהם? מכיוון שיש רק ספק אחד היא אסורה. תוספות אומר שיש כאן שתי חזקות. חזקת כשרות וחזקת הגוף. משערים שהיא נשארה בתולה עד שתדע אחרת. זה מציב את מעשה המין מאוחר יותר. ר 'עקיבא איגר אומר חזקת השתא לא עוזר לה כאן כי היית צריך את זה כדי להצטרף עם חזקת כשרות וזה לא יכול כי זה אומר משהו אחר מאשר חזקת כושר. היינו חזקת כשרות אומרת שלא היה שום יחסי מין. חזקת השתא אומרת שאתה דוחף את מעשה המין לאחור בזמן ככל האפשר וזה אומר שהמין היה לפני קידושין. יש לי שתי שאלות כאן. האחת היא חזקת כשרות יכולה לומר שהמין היה לפני קידושין או שלא היה יחסי מין. זה שיש לו צומת עם חזקת השתא שאומרת שהמין היה לפני קידושין. השאלה השנייה היא שאף אחד אפילו לא העלה את האפשרות שהיא לא קיימה יחסי מין. אז כל מה שאומר חזקת כשרות הוא שהמין היה לפני קידושין. ולכן שתי החזקות אומרות את אותו הדבר בדיוק. רב שך שאל ששמואל מחזיק שאין חזקת השתא ורב שאוחז ממנו מחזיק חזקות לא צריכות להצטרף. הוא עונה שזה רק כדי לומר לנו מצב של הוויה. אבל במקרה כמו בנידה עמוד 2 שבו אירוע קרה כדי לשנות את הסטטוס, שם אתה זקוק לשני החזקות כדי להצטרף

 Communism actually had its beginning in the French Revolution with Babeuf and it is at least indicative of where things are going in the USA. It might even be helpful to learn about the source and history of Communism before recommending it. It is like if a doctor prescribes some compound, and for the last two hundred years it has killed every person that tried it. Before recommending it to others, you might take a few minutes to see if it has ever tried before, and what the results were.

Marx did not simply copy Babeuf, but used ideas of Adam Smith and Hegel to make a more unified structure.

I was aware of Marx when I was much younger, and read the Communist Manifesto and other works by Leftists. The reason none of it impressed me was I had ingrained in me from my earliest youth the idea that no matter how rigorously, logical and scientific and ingenious a theory is, if experiment shows its predictions are wrong, then it is wrong. 

The constant attempts of East Germans to get to West Germany or to West Berlin was plenty of evidence for me to show not all was well in Communist East Germany. That same story has been repeated ad infinitum: the USSR, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, all African countries--anywhere that takes a socialistic model the result is always mass murder, mass starvation, zero freedom. etc.

War is not necessarily a good thing. Why do people think that starting a civil war in the USA is desirable.

It reminds me of what General Sherman before the war between the states [North and South] began: "You people have no idea what you are getting yourselves into."

 Rav Avraham Abulafia's approach to Jesus is important because it establishes a certain amount of legitimacy to him within the context of Torah.

I mean, people can think of lots of things, but those things are not necessarily with the context or borders of Authentic Torah.  In fact, most of what passes today as authentic Torah is anything but that. 

For something to be within the context of authentic Torah, it needs to be accepted by the Rishonim. Without that condition, nothing can even start.

[Rishonim means "first ones" [After Rav Hai Gaon until Rav Joseph Karo as opposed to Ahronim ["later ones"--after Rav Joseph Karo.]

 Slander is a prohibition in the Torah. There are exceptions like when you need to warn someone about a dangerous person. But as a starting point, one needs very urgent and good reason to be able to disparage another person. [I mean the starting position is never to say something negative about another person. Then based on circumstances, there might be a need and even a requirement to say something.]

One of the secrets of success I always thought that the Mir Yeshiva in NY had was the morning session where people would learn the laws of slander after the morning prayers. So there was a great awareness of the issues involved in speaking slander.

Just for clarity:

Lashon Hara can be just saying something negative --but is worse if it is with intention to cause damage or even can cause damage.  It is divided into בין אדם למקום ובין אדם לחבירו and the laws are different. For between man and God issues it is enough if the person is on that path in a constant way. Just just an accidental sin. Then one can say lashon hara and warn others. For issues between man and his fellow man, that is where you need some conditions to be able to say anything negative: for benefit, to see it oneself, rebuke, no other way to get that benefit, to be clear that what one think happened really did happen, it will not cause more damage that would come to the person if he was tried in court, that it really is clear according to the laws of the Torah.

Some examples: it would be forbidden for a woman to lie about her husband in court in order to get more money out of an alimony case. There are lot of reasons for that. One is that Lashon Hara even on true things still needs lots of conditions. All the more so lying about something is worse. And here it is with intention to cause damage.

x17 B Flat Major

 x17 B Flat Major

x17 Midi

x17 nwc file

the kind of wisdom that Rav Nahman says comes from the Empty Space is Philosophy.

 I would assume that the kind of wisdom that Rav Nahman says comes from the Empty Space is Philosophy. I mean to say that there is something odd about philosophy in the first place that seems to retract common sense away from people, and yet does not qualify as simply  a false or man made wisdom with no connection to reality. What I mean is that something like psychology is simply pseudo science and a result of its practitioners delusions and their own childhood experiences. There is nothing real or objective about psychology in the first place. But philosophy is not like that. It deal with real questions, but questions that seem to have contradictory answers and which leads into some kind of mental traps. 

Psychology is insane people pretending to be doctors. But philosophy takes sane people and makes them insane.

[That is in its effect. On the other hand, it does appear that philosophy can help to limit or cancel other kinds of delusions. Particularity religious delusions. So is it possible to find some kind of balance? We see Robert Hanna in fact demolished 20th century analytic philosophy in its entirety--simply by pointing out its circular reasoning and other logical fallacies. But his suggestion of "Forward to Kant" seems difficult  to accept since Kant him is open to many schools of thought, particularity Neo-Kant [Marburg], Leonard Nelson, Hegel. 

 The main magic of the Litvak yeshiva is based on trust in God. When Torah is learned for its own sake, and not for the sake of making  a living, there is a sort of settling of the Divine presence.

But that magic disappears when the intention becomes for the sake of making money.

But ordination programs got introduced (even in the Mir yeshiva of NY itself). That seems to have been a mistake.

 But not the only one. Even the idea of  "kollel" itself to me seems to be a problem. I just do not think people ought to be paid for learning Torah. Religions just to be too much of a business. 

 

Slave revenge

 Slave revenge has nothing to do with bettering the living conditions of the slave as in the incident with the Nat Turner rebellion. It is simply a way of  "getting back"at former masters.

This is what is going on in the USA right now. Slave Revenge. An attempt to destroy the whites. Not better the blacks.

 The lesson to learn from the civil war is rhetoric. 20 years of rhetoric created the situation when young teenagers of both the North and South were anxious to kill the other. This same situation has existed in the USA from the 1960's until today when colleges  and high schools have been overwhelmed by teachers all too ready to demonize the USA, and lionize Communism and Socialism.

And now, as back then in 1861, this can not end peacefully. 

 In America the basic argument between the Right and the Marxists is from tractate Ketuboth page 9. That is do you go by חזקת השתא או חזקה מעיקרא the state of things now or the state of things before. That is do you assume conditions now always existed until you reach the point where you know they did not. I.e. prosperity, freedom, etc all the markers of Western Civilization. Until you reach the point of despair and poverty when you know these conditions did not apply.  

Or do you assume the state of mankind was poor and desperate short and brutal until something like the USA came along to make it different. [Even the age of Mozart does not count since it was only capitalism that made conditions of prosperity and freedom apply to everyone, not just the monarch.] 

Well clearly the Gemara holds that we go by the state of things before and you push that forwards as far as possible until something you know changed it. That is the Constitution of the USA.

Certainly Marxism did not make things prosperous or make people free in any country that has ever tried it. The long lines in Russia just to get a few groceries shows that.

So we know it was capitalism that changed the original conditions of mankind.

[The basic issue in Ketuboth is that a priest marries and then comes to court and says he found his new bride not to be a virgin. [i.e. no hymen]. So she is forbidden to him. But if a Israeli comes and says the same thing she is permitted to him because it is a ספק ספקא doubt of a doubt. Maybe she had sexual relations before Kidushin. Then she is permitted. But even if she had relations after Kidushin, it might have been against her will. So she is still permitted. 

Tosphot asks why not go by חזקת כשרות that every person starts out with. That is--they are Ok util you know otherwise. Tosphot answers because of חזקה מעיקרא the original state of things. That is..you assume she was a virgin until the very second you found out otherwise. That means after the Kidushin and so she is forbidden to the Koken,

So we see we go by the original state of things even when there is a present state of things against it.

[That is from Rav Akiva Eigger and Rav Shach.]