Every person has some particular tikun [correction] they need to do. Some kind of action done on a daily basis that would turn everything wrong in their life into good.

) But how can you know what your tikun is? The one thing you need to do that would turn everything that is wrong in your life into good?



)  My own parents had an idea like this. A few basic principles that us kids should stick with,e.g. to be a "mench" a decent moral human being. But they were not think so much about the concept of a tikun. More like they were defining how one should live.

) It is along these lines that the Gaon from Vilna discovered the one tikun that if a person would do would in fact take him out  from the depth of hell--to learn Torah. The idea is that if one could just stick with learning Torah every day--even a tiny bit-the Torah has enough light in it to pull one out from all his problems.

) The caveat for this to work  is that it has to be real Torah, not pseudo Torah.
Real Torah is the Oral and Written Law. The Old Testament, the Two Talmuds, and the Halachic Midrashim and the Aggadic Midrashim. That means 99% of what is presented as Torah today is pseudo Torah.


) דרכ ציון אבלות מבלי באי מועד "The paths of Zion are in grief from lack of visitors." [From the book of Lamentations.]
That means the ציונים = the path markers on the way into holiness are gone. No one knows anymore what particular הנהגה [action preformed every day] which will lead either yourself or anyone else into holiness. Even though people do know they need to stick with a  short set of principles in order to make it and have success in this world and the next, still they don't know and can't find this set of principles.

And when they find something that seems to work [חבלים מפלו לי בנעימים] wreckers fall on it.
You get to Israel and out of no where comes some bad neighbor who is intent on making your life a living hell. For some reason he or she does not like Americans or Ashkenazim or thinks you are not religious enough or who know what? Any excuse will do fine.


) My own conclusion about this is that the Gra was right. Torah is the general tikun. It is because it is so important that the Sitra Achra makes it almost impossible to come to. Even when I try to learn Torah something always goes haywire. Always. It is like the Sitra Achra will stop at nothing to get me to stop learning Torah. And of course the מניעות המח obstacles places by the mind are there also. Questions like if Torah would be so great they why does it not make people better?
 Why are there jerks learning Torah? But the obstacles are much more than that. My approach to just to try to struggle through it.


When I first went to yeshiva my mother who was perfectly well got sick suddenly and died. My wife got married to me when I was a plain yeshiva student at the Mirrer yeshiva and then one day she decided that she did not want me learning Torah anymore. It was her or the Torah. Not both. And of course everyone agreed with her. I could go on but you get the idea that learning Torah I think only comes through great trials. You walk into a yeshiva you think is there for the specific purpose of learning Torah, and they throw you out from the top of the stairs. I think that to the degree that Torah is important, that the Dark Side will do everything it can to stop one  from learning Torah. Because I think that if one learns Torah then everything changes. Everything.
But if one learns Torah for money the same rule does not apply because the Sitra Achra likes that.
When Torah is used for personal needs, it becomes poison. סם חיים למימינים בה ובם מוות למשמאילים בה The sages said it is the elixir of life for those that learn it for its own sake and the elixir of death for those that learn it for money.

) Torah in this context means 10 books. Old Testament, the Two Talmuds, Tosephta, Sifra, Sifri, Mechlita, Torat Cohanim, Midrash Raba, Midrash Tanchuma.
direct commentaries on the above can also be included. But 99% of what is called Torah today is pseudo Torah

A music file for the glory of God. I am grateful to God for granting to me to write this and all the music he has ever or will ever grant to me. Also I am grateful to have not lost it like I thought I had.

B98  B98 in midi

Music for the glory the Lord God of Israel.

n89 n89 in midi format


k88 [k88 in midi]


k36 [k36 in midi]


k39 [k39 in midi]
Mathematics [mathematics in midi]

bar yochai [bar yochai in midi]

Black Hole [black hole in midi]

The best advice I can see at this point is to learn Torah and Mussar .
"Learning Torah" means to have set times for learning every day. At least two hours. One hour for fast learning to get through the Oral Law. The two Talmuds and the Halachic Midrashim and the Aggadic Midrashim. Another hour for in depth learning of Talmud.
Musar [Ethics] means mainly to me to be of the rational school of the Rambam. But Musar from the more Kabbalistic directions is also OK.


This does not mean to be a religious fanatic or a baal teshuva--God forbid.
It means to keep the Torah but not along with the many insane groups that compromise the insane religious world . Most of them have little to nothing to do with Torah except in appearance.

Torah is a balance between obligations between God and Man and obligations between Man and his fellow man

[Kiruv means turns Jews into religious fanatics. This is not a good thing.

We get some insight into idolatry by means of what looks at first glance as strange statement in th Talmud in Sanhedrin 63b and 64a.
The Talmud is arguing about the proper interpretation of some verse in the Bible about the general practices of idolaters. One interpretation is this:
The priests of idolatry would see some rich person and draw a picture of him with his colorful clothing and general appearance and then work their calves and animals of idolatry to the point of exhaustion and when they would give them something to eat they would put the picture of that rich person in front of them.
Then when the animals would see the rich person they would run towards him and the priest would say "You see the gods like you. come and sacrifice yourself to them."

Another interpretation of that same  verse is that it referred to the father. Some father would sacrifice his son and the priests would say come and kiss the idol.

This gives deep insight about Kiruv. The attempt to get  college students involved in the insane religious world .
The approach is the same. The main target is always some student with rich parents. the hidden message here is what the sages said that a poor person is considered dead. So these cults try to get the young students to give up their education and to join them and thereby to become forever dependent on the cult. The way they do this is by love bombing either them or their parents. They make this whole show of how much they love the students because supposedly he is Jewish. What they really love is his money.

I should mention that there is nothing wrong with learning and keeping Torah. But what is wrong with Kiruv  is that Torah is used as bait to catch fish and cut them open and cook them and eat them.

It was my good fortune that I went to a baal teshuva yeshiva that was in fact only about learning and keeping Torah and had no other agendas. But that is rare.

I have come to see Kiruv as extremely evil.

The yeshiva I went to was in NY, Shaar Yashuv, which was an amazing place. It probably still is.

Later I was at the Mir and then in Safed. Safed was great until baali teshuva [newly religious] started showing up in Meor Chaim.  You think making baali teshuva is a mitzvah. Ever try living next to one?

Baali teshuva [newly religious] tend to be the worst of religious fanatics.  Part of the problem I think is ignorance about what the Torah says. The tendency is because they have an internal desire to be part of the insane religious world -which is nowadays the only way they can see to get married and have  wholesome family--and they read a book about halacha they think they know enough to judge others. Or even recruit others. But newly religious people with this problem are not the only ones. Often families of what you think are people that have always been religious are actually of baali teshuva.
This accounts for almost all of the religious fanaticism you see today in Ultra Religious neighborhoods. It is not like they pretend that they have always been that way. rather the Ultra Religious are always the baali teshuva --just pushed back a few years.

A person steals an object and breaks it. He gives back double. Whole vessels, whole vessels or cash. or anything worth the amount he owes [Rashbam].

 It seems unclear what the Rambam hold here. He brings the law that when one steals and breaks a vessel we do not look at how much it was worth but rather he has to give back the whole mount. That is אין שמין. We don't evaluate the amount it was worth when he stole it. If we would he could give back teh broken vessel and pay the difference. We don't do that. But if we hold by the Rashbam he can give back the vessel anyway because of it monetary value. So the only consequence of "we don't evaluate"  is we look at how much such a vessel is worth at the time of judgment.

See Rambam laws of damages I: 14 and 15. Bava Kama 11a, 65a. Bava Metzia 96.

I wrote about this a few years ago on one of my blogs. But I wanted to go back and review.

Reb Chaim Soloveitchik has  a doubt how the Rambam holds. Rav Elazar Menachem Shach holds the Rambam is going like the middle opinion --i.e. whole objects or cash.
For some reason I seem to have concluded this same opinion in my notes. Happy am I that decided like Rav Shach even without having seen his opinion.



These are my notes that I wrote about this a few years ago.
בס"ד
) בבא מציעא צו. תוספות ד''ה זיל מביא את שיטת הרשב''ם שגנב יכול לשלם  מטלטלים. שווה כסף ככסף. יש ספק לרב חיים הלוי  אם הרמב''ם והראב''ד אוחזים מן השיטה הזאת. בתור הקדמה:  הרמב''ם כתב ( הלכות גנבה א:טו) "מי שגנב כלי ושברו וא פחתו או נשבר או נפחת מאליו אין שמין לו הפחת אלא רואין כמה היה שוה אותו הכלי ומשלם לבעלים שנים בדמיו והכלי השבור יהיה לגנב." וראב''ד כתב אף על פי שאמרו אין שמין לגנב, הני מילי בקרנא אבל בכפילא שמין לגנב דומיא דגזלן והשכל מורה כן." רב חיים מביא  את הדין של רב "קרן כעין שגנב וכפל כשעת העמדה בדין"  בתור מקור לראב''ד. [המגיד משנה הביא את הירושלמי כמקור לרמב''ם. הירושלמי אומר מניין שאין שמין לגנב? שנאמר "חיים שניים ישלם".] יש צד לומר שהרמב''ם אוחז כשיטת הרשב''ם שהגנב יכול לשלם במטלטלים. שווה כסף ככסף.
כדאי להזכיר כאן שאם הדין כמו הרשב''ם, משמעות של "אין שמין" היא שאין מעריכים את ערך החפץ בזמן הגנבה, אלא בזמן העמדה בדין. [ו"שמין" משמע שמעריכים את ערך החפץ בזמן הגנבה.]

השאלה כאן היא המקור שרב חיים מביא לראב''ד, "אמר רב קרן כעין שגנב וכפל כשעת העמדה בדין". (בבא קמא סה.) שאלה הראשונה היא שהגמרא שם מדברת בענין יוקרא וזולא, ולא במצב שהחפץ נשבר. שאלה השניה היא שאפילו אם הגמרא מדברת במצב כזה, הדין של הראב''ד הוא להפך מן הדין של רב. דהיינו אם בשלב הזה אנחנו הולכים לפי שיטת הרשב''ם, אם כן הדין "אין שמין" אומר שמעריכים את ערך החפץ בשעת העמדה בדין בשביל הקרן, ושעת הגנבה בשביל הכפל (לראב''ד). וזה להפך מן הדין של רב.
תירוץ לשאלה הראשונה: הגמרא ב''ק סה. אוחזת שמצב של שבירת החפץ שווה למצב של זולא. האופן לראות את זה הוא לראות שבלי זה, המשפט של רבה שם לא היה מציב קושיא לרב. [בגלל הקושיא הזאת, הגמרא מסכימה שהדין של רב הוא רק המצב שהחפץ היה שווה ארבעה והוזל לאחד.] אפשר לראות את זה על ידי דברי הטור, והבית יוסף והב''ח שאומרים שהדין של רב שייך גם במצב של שבירת החפץ. (אגב הרא''ש הוא בר פלוגתא של ברשב''ם פה, ואפשר שאין להביא ראיה ממנו לדברי הרשב''ם.)

אבל אם זה נכון, יש קושיא על הרשב''ם כאן בב''מ צו.
התירוץ לזה הוא גם כן תירוץ לשאלה השניה. רב לא אמר שאין שמין לגנב. אם אוחזים כשיטת הרשב''ם, צריכים לומר שרב אוחז ששמין לגנב כמו רבי אלעזר בב''ק יא.  אפשר לומר שאין הדין כמו רב.
 והראיה לדעת הראב''ד היא שמאחר שרב אוחז ששמין, מזה לומדין שהדין של "אין שמין" הוא להפך, ולכן מעריכים את ערך החפץ לפי זמן העמדה בדין.

 ) ב''מ צו: תוספות ד''ה זיל שלים ליה. על הצד שרב חיים הלוי מציע שהרמב''ם והרשב''ם שווים בדין, אפשר לומר שהרמב''ם חשב כך: בההלכה שכתבתי שמשלמים קרן וכפל עם כסף (ושווה כסף מובן כהרשב''ם) לא כתבתי שמשלמים לפי זמן העמדה בדין, בשביל שכתבתי בסעיף הקודם שבמצב שהגנב שיבר את החפץ שהוא משלם לפי שעת העמדה בדין-- שזה הדין של "אין שמין" לגבי זמן הערך. שם כתוב, "היה שווה בשעת הגנבה שניים ובשעת העמדה בדין ארבעה אם שחט או מכר או שבר הכלי או אבדו משלם תשלומי כפל או דו''ה כשעת העמדה בדין." היינו שהרמב''ם אוחז שהדין של "אין שמין" הוא הדין של רבה שמעריכים הקרן והכפל לפי שעת העמדה בדין. [כוונתי שהרמב''ם דייק לכתוב שאם שיבר את הכלי משלם כפל לפי שעת העמדה בדין שמע מינה שמשלם  את הקרן לפי שעת גניבה.]

עכשיו נראה שיש אפשרות שהרמב''ם אוחז הדין של הרשב''ם שהדין של "אין שמין" אומר לנו שכשהגנב שבר את החפץ, אז מעריכים את ערכו לפי שעת העמדה בדין. הטעם שאפשר לומר את זה הוא שהמצב שהרמב''ם פסק שהולכים לפי שעת הגנבה הוא מצב אחר. הוא כשהגנבה ירדה בערך לא על ידי שבירה, אלא על ידי ירידת השער שבשוק. [זה הגמרא אומרת בירוש. רב הוא במצב של יוקרא וזולא.] ובמצב שהחפץ עלה בערך ואז הגנב שבר אותו, הרמב''ם כן פסק כהרשב''ם שהולכים לפי שעת העמדה בדין. והמצב שהכלי נשבר מאליו בלא שום מעשה של הגנב (שהולכים לפי שעת הגנבה) אינו שייך לדין "אין שמין". אין שמין שייך רק במצב שהגנב שבר את החפץ.

) אם אנחנו הולכים לפי הצד הזה שרב חיים מביא --שהרמב''ם אוחז כהרשב''ם, אז הההלכה כשהוזל ערך החפץ (שירד בערכו) היא אחרת משאם נשברה. בלי זה  הדין  כשהוזל היה קשה לרמב''ם. הדין הזה של רב היה מכריח את הרמב''ם לאחוז "אין שמין" לכפל (הולכים לפי זמן העמדה בדין), אבל כן שמין לקרן (היינו שבולכים לפי זמו הגניבה) שזה דינו של רב.  וזה בעיתי ביותר. הרמב''ם לא כתב כנגד זה אבל עם כל זה איך זה מסתדר עם הרשב''ם? אבל אם הדין של שבירה הוא שונה מן הדין של "הוזל", אז הכל בסדר. ברמב''ם כותב בסעיף שאחר זה שלא שמין במצב של שבירה, היינו שמעריכים את החפץ לפי זמן העמדה בדין. זאת אומרת אם יוקרא= שבירה אז אי אפשר שהרמב''ם= רשב''ם. אבל אם יוקר לא שווה לא שבירה אפשר שהרמב''ם=רשב''ם.

) נראה שיש מחלוקת בין הרמב''ם והטור לגבי הדין של רב- היינו הדין שהוזל  ערך החפץ. רב פסק "קרן כעין שגנב וכפל ודו''ה כשעת העמדה בדין."  והטור פסק שזה שייך גם במצב של שבירת חפץ. אבל בההלכה של הוזל (הלכה י''ד), הרמב''ם אינו מזכיר שבירת החפץ, וגם ענין הקרן הוא מדלג לגמרי. זה משמע שהחפץ לפנינו, רק שהוזל. [אפשר לומר שאם הרמב''ם אוחז כשיטת הרשב''ם זה גרם לו לפרש את הדין של רב רק לגבי זולא, ולא שבירה. זה בגלל שהדין של רב להפך הדין של "אין שמין" לפי פירוש הרשב''ם.] [שיטת הרא''ש היא שמשמעות אין שמין היא שצריך לשלם כלים שלמים, ואין בזה שום סתירה לדין של רב, אפילו אם מפרשים אותו לגבי שבירה.]

 למעשה יותר טוב לומר שהרמב''ם פוסק כרש''י והרא''ש שאין שמין משמע שצריך לשלם בכלים שלמים או בכסף, לא שווה כסף. הסיבה לזה היא שבהלכה י''ד איפה שהרמב''ם מביא את הדין של רב [קרן כעין שגנב וכפל כשעת העמדה בדין במצב של יוקרא וזולא], משמע שהמצב של כפל דומה למצב של דו''ה, דהיינו שמדברים במצב שהכלי נשבר. ואם זה נכון, אז אין הדין הזה מתאים להלכה ט''ו שהיא ההלכה של אין שמין. [זאת אומרת שההלכה של אין שמין בהלכה ט''ו מתאימה רק לשליש הלכה י''ד.] ולכן ההלכה של אין שמין אומרת לשלם בכלים שלמים ואינה מדברת בעיין זמן הערך.[בהלכה י''ד הולכים לפי שעת העמדה בדין רק בשביל הכפל, ובהלכה ט''ו בשביל הכפל והקרן.]

This last paragraph is the place I saw that the רמב''ם goes like רש''י. But it was not written very well. What I saw in the רמב''ם that makes me compelled to say he is like רש''י is that he puts כפל along with ד''וה and writes that then you go by the שעת גניבה. That means the object was broken and openly he says we do not go by the time of judgment. So אין שמין  can't mean to go by the time of judgment. I don't know from where Rav Shach made his deduction to come to the same conclusion but to me this looks compelling.








 אם אומרים שמקור הראב''ד הוא משפט של רב בב''ק סה. היה אפשרות לומר שהראב''ד אוחז כמו רש''י והרא''ש שאין שמין משמע שצריך לשלם כלים שלמים. ורב חיים סאלאווייציק מביא את משפטו של רב למקור לראב''ד. מזה יש אפשרות לתת שני שלבים להראות שהראב''ד אוחז כרש''י. שלב ראשון: הראב''ד אומר אין שמין שייך רק לקרן. לגבי כפל הדין הוא שמין. שלב שני: בדינו של רב [שהרמב''ם והראב''ד אוחזים בו] אנחנו מעריכים את הקרן לפי שעת הגנבה, ואת הכפל לפי שעת העמדה בדין. ולכן אם במצב של שמין אנחנו מעריכים את החפץ בזמן העמדה בדין, אם כן שמין או אין שמין לא יכול להיות שייך לזמן הערך. ולכן הוא שייך רק לכלים שלמים. ואי אפשר להשיב "שמין" משמעו זמן העמדה בדין, בגלל שמשמעות הדין "שמין" היא גם בנזיקים ששם שמין את ערך החפץ בזמן השבירה דווקא, ואז מחזירים את החפץ ומשלימים החסרון בדמים. ושמה מה שקובע את ערך החפץ היא שעת השבירה.
אבל למעשה, יש אפשרות לראב''ד לאחוז כשיטת הרשב''ם. וכדי להסביר את זאת, אני צריך להציג את ההקדמה הזאת להסביר איך רב חיים הלוי מבין את דעת הראב''ד. דבר ראשון: מצב של שבירה נחשב לגנבה אריכתא (גנבה ארוכה) עד זמן השבירה. ובמצב כזה רב אמר לשלם כשעת הגנבה היינו שעת השבירה. וכשרב אמר לשלם כפל לפי שעת העמדה בדין הכוונה היא לשעת העמדה בדין כפשוטו והחפץ צריך להיות מצוי כדי להעריך אותו. וזה האופן שהראב''ד מפרש את הדין של רב-- החפץ נשברה במקצת. ולפי הראב''ד הדין של רב הוא הדין של אין שמין לגנבה. וככה מפרש הראב''ד הדין של רב: אין שמין את הקרן וכן שמין לכפל. וכשהחפץ נשבר במקצת הוא עדיין נחשב להיות בעין ומצוי בכדי להעריך אותו בשעת העמדה בדין. רק שאי אפשר להחזיר אותו בתורת הרי שלך לפניך. [וראב''ד מפרש "שמין" "ואין שמין" להיות שייך לזמן הערך, אבל במובן להפך מן הרשב''ם. להראב''ד שמין משמע בזמן העמדה בדין, ואין שמין משמע שעת הגנבה.]

I see these notes are very cryptic. I think it would be a good idea to expand them to show exactly what I was saying.


It is astounding to me how mistaken I can be.This sometimes came up when I was learning with David Bronson. But it also came up when I was looking over my notes on Bava Metzia page 97a.

I was clearly trying to support an opinion of Reb Chaim Soloveitchik that says that the Rambam holds by Rashi and the Rosh in terms of what it means "One does not evaluate for a thief."  Of course that fact that I had neither the Ramba nor the Gemara nor the book of Reb Chaim might also have contributed to my mistake.I had no way of looking anything up {being in exile so so speak}.

But what occurred to me today is a fantastic new idea that came out of my mistake. The idea is this. I became aware at one point that Rav Elazar Shach says the Rambam holds with the Rashbam. So I saw that my forced reading on the Rambam laws of theft 1:14 was simply wrong and stupid and calculated to support Reb Chaim in spite of the obvious fact that I was reading it wrong.
But how to explain this properly I am not really sure of. Basically what I want to say is you have to read halacha 14 together with 15 almost as if they were one halacha.

So with that it all becomes clear. If the stolen object went down in value from 4 shekalim to 2 then the theif pays 4. That is the beginning of halacha 14. That is to say that the beginning of halacha 14 says nothing about the object being broken. It is clear the Rambam means he gives back the object and pays the extra 2 shekalim that it went down in value from the time of the theft until the day the case comes to court. But it might be broken also and then the same law would apply,that the thief give back the whole four shekalim. Then halacha 15 is just a continuation of halacha 14 which is "one does not evaluate for a thief." It is the case when the object was broken and all it says is the thief can not say "Your object is before you." It has nothing to do with the time at which you evaluate the object. Therefore the astounding result is that even the Rambam holds one can pay back with objects that are worth the same amount of money that he owes. But also that that law has nothing to do with the time one evaluates the object.

Music written for the honor of God.
n56   [n56 in midi]

 That the Torah is everywhere and in everything. In particular  the letters of the Torah are in everything. Not that everything is Divine. But that there is Divinity in things. Even in Evil there is divinity. For without God making everything exist nothing could exist. But the Divinity in Evil is hidden. But if it would be open Torah inside of Evil the the Dark Side would have nourishment from open Torah. So instead in evil is hidden Torah.
The Torah as a whole is in principle contained in the Ten Commandments. These were hidden in the world until they were revealed at Mount Sinai. These commandments are thus contained in a hidden way in the ten statements of creation. The hidden Torah inside of evil is in the first hidden statement of creation, the מאמר הסתום. So one can find God even if he has fallen  from holiness. One can return to God even from the lowest depths of Hell.

dumbing down of the USA



This is a link to  a nice youtube.

 I must admit the USA was quite different than I remembered it. I have not dealt with it on this blog much but it is my opinion that people should vote Republican no matter who the candidate is. There was a Libertarian vote in the 90s that arguably  gave the election to Clinton by siphoning off enough votes from the Republicans.
I should not have to say it, but the Republicans are much closer to Torah values than the Democrats.
For example the Talmud Bava Metzia (and in fact most of  Seder Nezikin) deals with laws of private property. There is no concept in Torah that the government can take what it wants.
This is just one example. But anyone with any knowledge in Talmud can tell you that Torah and the basic principles of the Republican part are very close to each other.

Music for the glory of God

n59

exodus 4aa 

n58

 That the Torah is everywhere and in everything. In particular  the letters of the Torah are in everything. Not that everything is Divine. But that there is Divinity in things. Even in Evil there is divinity. For without God making everything exist nothing could exist. But the Divinity in Evil is hidden. But if it would be open Torah inside of Evil the the Dark Side would have nourishment from open Torah. So instead in evil is hidden Torah.
The Torah as a whole is in principle contained in the Ten Commandments. These were hidden in the world until they were revealed at Mount Sinai. These commandments are thus contained in a hidden way in the ten statements of creation. The hidden Torah inside of evil is in the first hidden statement of creation, the מאמר הסתום. So one can find God even if he has fallen  from holiness. One can return to God even from the lowest depths of Hell.

[IV] Not to be stubborn about anything. I think this is related to his idea that one should learn Torah fast. We know that when you lean fast there remain things you do not understand. But He thought going back and reviewing these things is not necessary and not even desirable. What you got, you got. What you did not get, .. don't worry about it.

[V] The Will. I have not be looking at Philosophy for a long time so I can't write much about this. But mainly we know about the Dinge An Sich of Kant. The thing in itself. There are two aspects of this. Material things and ideas. It is complicated. But Schopenhauer took this idea in a direction different than Kant. He though there is only one Thing in Itself, the Dinge An Sich. The Will. And the whole world is just a representation of that Will.

Music for the glory of God

n5
     n5 midi format
j1


i89

I still hold that Scientology is the archetype example of a cult and is still very important to study from that aspect. It is the secular aspect of it that also provides a good subject of study. After seeing it in detail it is easy to see the cultic aspects of one's own group that he thinks is unique in its claims.



I mean, you can't study the cult one is involved in,-- because he is involved in it. And as far as he can tell, there might be some aspects of it that are good. After all why else would he have gotten involved in it? That makes it very important to study Scientology as a pristine example of a cult, and how it recruits and develops, even when it is based on a ridiculous idea.

Elazar Menachem Shach the Rosh Yeshiva of Ponovitch explained what is the essence of idolatry. It is  the thought, "This can help." At least as a necessary condition, but maybe not sufficient.  That comes directly from the Talmud itself. An idol that fell and broke is nullified because people say if it could not save itself how could it save me. We see from that the essence of idolatry is the thought "This can save." [That is unless the "this" is God.]




And what we learn from Professor Huemer Why are people irrational about politics?  is that people can choose to believe irrational things because of the desire for sex, or to fit into a group where they expect to get sex, etc.
This all boils down to the vacuum of knowledge. That is what idolatry and a cult is. The statue is a vacuum of knowledge. It is like something hollow that one can put into it all his imaginations and delusions and he wants to do that because he wants to fit into the group that is following that vacuum of knowledge.

Appendix: Torah differs from idolatry in that the central thought is that God can help. Idolatry is that some other being or mitzvah can help.

Why people are irrational about politics

This is very relevant to the subject of idolatry that I am learning right now.

Idolatry comes up in Sanhedrin pages 60-63 and in Avoda Zara 41.

Rav Shach says we see the essence of idolatry is the thinking that it has power to save.
Is that the only condition? I think it is clear it needs some kind of invisible power to affect things at a distance.  Otherwise why is it any different than walking into a store and asking for a loaf of bread.

In any case we see idolatry is not the same as a mistaken world view. These are different subjects.
Michael Huemer's essay deal with why people choose irrational world views. and if we are to understand idolatry we need to understand this phenomenon.



So what we have here is two things: (1) A simple definition of idolatry from Rav Shach. Ability to save. [Based on the Talmud in Avoda Zara that an idol that fell and broke does not need nullification because those that worship it say, "It could not save itself so how could it save me?"]
(2) The idea of Michael Huemer and Bryan Caplan that people can will themselves to believe things that they know are wrong in order to fit in with a group that want to be  a part of.

I brought this up in my learning Talmud session yesterday. We were getting to teh end of teh subject of idolatry in Sanhedrin 63. The next mishna is a different subject. So I was trying to sum up some of what we had learned.

He brought up the fact that I had studied Scientology as a very important example of a cult and asked about some of the aspects of it that I had learned about. And also brought up another cult in the USA.

I still hold that Scientology is the archetype example of a cult and is still very important to study from that aspect.

I mean you can't study the cult you are involved in because you are involved in it. And as far as you can tell there might be some aspects of it that are good. After all why else would you have gotten involved in it? That makes it very important to study scientology as a pristine example of cult and how it recruits and develops even when it is based on a ridiculous idea.

And this is the connection between Michael Huemer and Rav Shach. Rav Shach showed us what is the essence of idolatry: the thought, "This can help." At least as a necessary condition but maybe not sufficient.  That comes directly from the Talmud itself. And what we learn from professor Huemer is that people can choose to believe irrational things because of the desire for sex or to fit into a group where they expect to get sex etc.
This all boils down to the vacuum of knowledge. That is what idolatry and a cult is. The statue is a vacuum of knowledge. It is like something hollow that one can put into it all his imaginations and delusions and he wants to do that because he wants to fit into the group that is following that vacuum of knowledge.

Music for the glory of God

j49

Fake yeshivas. Pseudo Torah

How can you tell if someone's Torah lesson (homily)  comes from the Sitra Achra (the Dark Side)?
You can tell if you see the person is arrogant.  If they are arrogant, they receive their Torah lessons and ideas from the side of the demons.

This seems to me to be very relevant nowadays  that there are very few teachers of Torah who are not arrogant.  At least that is among the teachers of "hashkafa [frum world views]." 

Arrogance is in manner, but it also refers to thinking one knows a subject without the proper preparation.  World view issues have the odd trait that people without knowing much about Torah can have opinions about Torah issues.

So you don't get many frauds being Math professors. This is the same reason you don't get many frauds in those that teach Gemara, Rashi, and Tosphot. The subject is inherently hard. But world view issues of Torah is different in that people can fake it easily. [It is easy to pretend that kabalah is hard and to pretend to know it. It is hard to pretend the same kind of thing with Math or Physics. The subject matter itself weeds out the phonies, and then they go to yeshiva to pretend to be smart.]

The problem is there are too many fake yeshivas. Now some people ought to be sitting  and learning Torah that is Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot. But most can't. It is too hard. But they can't work either. They have no skills. So you get fake yeshivas where people are not learning Torah but pseudo Torah.
The truth be told very few people after the age of eighteen should be learning anything at all. Not Torah and not humanities. They should be flipping hamburgers. Maybe 5% of the people that can be doing STEM or Torah should be. But I know of very few people like that. The rest of the garbage they are teaching is not worth it for the people learning it teaching it or supporting it.

I think that to come to Torah is a highly difficult task being that the basic organizations that are supposedly there to help one in this direction are in fact are obstacles. What one ought to do is to learn Torah at home or at a legitimate Lithuanian yeshiva. Shuls and synagogues tend to be highly problematic.
If you want to learn Torah you have to do it on your own, or find a place that is devoted to the Torah without any side agenda or hidden agenda.
I am trying to be polite and not offensive. But if I could say over just the basic facts of what I know surely you would be shocked. Because many times people and places that makes the greatest show of keeping the Torah are doing secretly just the opposite. Count on it. [The groups that consider it of primary importance to seem Jewish, are not.]

Take for example the school I was planning on going to. They would go through about 5 books per week. Why I ask can't the same be done with Torah. Take one week to finish the Old Testament in Hebrew. The go through the Babylonian Talmud. Just an hour a day would get you through about seven pages at least if you read slow. That way you finish it in a year. I would like to add Rashi and Tosphot but the first time just the basic Gemara is enough.


But this is not meant to be an all day long project. Not everyone was meant to be reading books all day long. At least not me. Though 4 years in a Litvak yeshiva is important but after that people ought to work.

I think learning each day should be short and sweet. A hour with a learning partner in Talmud in depth. Then one hour of fast learning the Oral and Written Law. An hour of Physics and Math. Then work. [And kollels I should mention I think tend to support people that ought to be working. Not everyone but most. I think supporting kollels is mainly the same as throwing away money down the drain.]

For the glory of God -a music link to an l file

l59 

l63 

j97


l99

j50

In terms of learning Torah I mentioned about the Oral Law which is not Kabalah. And there are plenty of reasons to frown on kabbalah. But today I heard one person who was all excited about the Ari.  I was surprised [pleasantly]. There is something so remarkable about Isaac Luria that it always astounded me how people might not be excited by him.  It is not Oral Law, but it personal revelation that also has validity.

If possible I would love to finish the writings of the Ari. For some reason I got interrupted in the middle and never could get back to it. I was at the Mirrer Yeshiva in NY and when I did not have to be at the yeshiva doing Gemara, I learned the Eitz Chaim at home.

I think it was the most astounding book I had ever read, and it affected me indelibly. But I am very happy that I learned it only after I had gone through a lot of Talmud first as the Ari himself says is required. I have seen plenty of people that get involved in Kabbalah and get sucked into the Dark Side. Not just one or two. But if you can approach the Ari properly there is no question that it is an amazing help. That is: finish the Talmud a few times and then get all the set of the writings of the Ari from the Kabalah institute [--the Ashlag edition is great.] And plow through it.
There is just as much danger as being against kabbalah as there is being for it. What I have seen is frauds and phonies that pretend that they have the proper Talmudic background to qualify and to disparage those who they think are their inferiors. There is not much I can say about this but that it as much a delusion as those who learn it without in fact the proper requirements.



In spite of all this I think that I gained a great deal by learning the Ari. The major dangers that one should avoid are thinking that on comes to some kind of holiness by learning kabbalah. Or that one comes to some kind of spiritual powers. These two things seem to be the major source of problems because when  one approach the Ari with these attitudes there is created  a world of illusion around the person to delude him and others around him.

We need to keep what the Torah says. And that is what matters.

I tend to do better in discernment by means of negative results. That is by making mistakes I tend to learn more than by any kind of inherent intuition. That is the reason that I hold by a small set of things that I concentrate on. I tend to see that by deviating from this set that things go haywire.

Not everyone I know is like that. My learning partner seems to have an inherent compass. He tends to see fallacies in different groups even before getting involved in them.  Not me. I need to jump into the boiling water to find out how hot it is.
So this explains why my priorities are things that my parents told me and I did not listen to. I learned eventually that they knew a lot more about the world and the way things are that I ever could.
This also makes me see the importance of the State of Israel, and also learning Torah. It is not that I have such  great appreciation for any of the above. It is just that when I see when either I or others abandon any of these things that highly negative results follow.



My parents were very much into the idea of being a mensch--a decent moral person with all that implies.The Ten commandments.  Working for a living and never asking for and never accepting charity. Going to university [and not to be a rabbi under any circumstance]. Never to use the Torah for money. But to learn Torah and keep it in every last detail. Learning Physics and Math also was very high on their list of priorities. And also Mozart. and general classical music.
They sent me to Beverly Hills High School and they chose that kind of secular education on purpose.
 We were Beverly Hills that reason alone. My Dad had to work on satellite communication for NASA and SDI in a place that was far away from Beverly Hills. He had to commute every day for an hour and a half, [i.e.each direction].   Beverly Hill was chosen only because of the high school.
And this path they certainly thought was the Torah path. Religious Fanaticism was  very far away from their idea of what Torah is about.

But within that framework, I would like to suggest: 1) finishing the Oral and Written Law. Tenach [Old Testament], the Two Talmuds, Sifra, Sifi, Tosephta, Mechilta, Torat Kohanim,  Midrash Raba, Midrash Tanchuma. That is one session for the oral law and the other for the written law. Also one small session for halacha--Rambam, Tur, Beit Yoseph and the basic commentaries on the Rambam the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, and Reb Chaim Soloveitchik's Chidushei HaRambam.--from the first word to the last.
This is really not a big deal. There was one school I applied to that was into  having the students read and finish about five books per week.  I never went there but this shows that what I am saying ehr is not a big deal. It just sounds like a big project because of the evil inclination that wants to stop people from learning and keeping Torah. In one hour per day alone you can finish the whole Talmud in one year and still have time to surf in Malibu or become and astronaut.

The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man,

Hush money

Music for the glory of God [Normally, I would not bother with this. This music was written for God, not for people. But I figure music should be shared.]

l57 


n75

I was looking at some older n files and it looks that this was not finished but I am not sure so I am putting it here.
l88 


e5

b36


b28 edited


b32   

I tend to do better in discernment by means of negative results. That is by making mistakes I tend to learn more than by any kind of inherent intuition. That is the reason that I hold by a small set of things that I concentrate on. I tend to see that by deviating from this set that things go haywire.

Not everyone I know is like that. My learning partner seems to have an inherent compass. He tends to see fallacies  in different groups even before getting involved in them.  Not me. I need to jump into the boiling water to find out how hot it is.
So this explains why my priorities are things that my parents told me and I did not listen to. I learned eventually that they knew a lot more about the world and the way things are that I ever could.

 This also makes me see the importance of the State of Israel, and also learning Torah. It is not that I have such  great appreciation for any of the above. It is just that when I see when either I or others abandon any of these things that highly negative results follow.



My parents were very much into the idea of being a mensch--a decent moral person with all that implies.The Ten commandments.  Working for a living and never asking for and never accepting charity. Going to university [and not to be a rabbi under any circumstance]. Never to use the Torah for money. But to learn Torah and keep it in every last detail. Learning Physics and Math also was very high on their list of priorities. And also Mozart. and general classical music.

Music for the glory of God

e69 

e68 

e files were written in Uman,
[some early e files were written in Israel.]

n76

b104

b files were written in Israel. 

The path of Torah is hard to figure out. I have a basic approach that is this learn and do the whole Written Torah and the whole Oral tradition. Now the Oral tradition is admitted not the same level as prophecy. But it is a vigorous and rigorous attempt at understanding the Torah. The oral tradition it something that is a kind of grey area. But at least we know what was actually given in tradition.
There is no doubt about what the Talmud is or how it came to be written. It was written by flawed men but contains the basic tradition of how the Jewish people understood the word of God, It is not some mysterious book that some person claimed was revealed to him.
So while it can be hard to figure out how to apply the Talmud to our daily lives still we know what it is and basically what it says.

The Zohar is not that. But that does not mean I think there is no validity in Isaac Luria. It is just that the Zohar I see as problematic.



Musar I think got way too much influenced by Kabalah. I would suggest a modification of the Musar movement based on the school of thought of the son of the Rambam and the whole geonic school. before kabalah confused everything.

All books of Jewish Ethics after the the Zohar accept the paradigm of the Zohar. This I am not happy about. Kabalah is a mixed bag. On one hand you have Isaac Luria,  Shalom Sharabi, and Yaakov Abuchatzeira , who were amazing and great people that served God and received true revelations.
On the hand (--and what makes it all confusing) is that the Zohar is not what it claims to be. It is not from Shimon Bar Yochai as Rav Yaakov Emden made all too clear in his book showing that the Zohar cant be from the Rashbi.

On one hand you can have mystics. That is a kind of personal revelation type of thing. On the other hand you have text based mysticism--based on Zohar. And in the later I see very little good. I think it is what caused the insane religious world  to fall into the Sitra Achra.

Music link from the n series

n47 mp3 n47 midi n47 nwc format

mathematics 



n54 [n54 midi] [n54 nwc]

black hole [black hole in midi] [black hole nwc]


 hs   
Written in Borispol Airport [Kiev] while  waiting for a plane to NY.


p120 


orchestra piece 

from the music from the e series. From Uman in around 2004

e37

A music link from the n series

n92

n78 n78 in midi  [n78 in nwc]

a music link from the l series [i.e. the "L" not capitalized]

l13

all music files go from a to z with about a hundred in each file. Recently a "za" file was started.

l9

Here is an idea on why there must be questions on the Torah.

 I think is that there have to be questions on the Torah. Not questions in Torah but questions on the Torah.

\
The idea is the the Torah is the wisdom of God and if we would understand the Torah perfectly and there would be no questions on it then His wisdom and our wisdom would be the same.
And what are the questions of Torah? It is this: "I see there are jerks learning Torah, and so how can it be holy?" The answer to this is even if there would not be jerks, they would have to be created in order to make questions on the Torah. The only thing you can do is to learn and keep Torah yourself and don't think about others.
זה מעשה שלו וזה המעשה שלי
That is his business and this is my business.
And the way I see it, all we have is Torah. I don't think there is anything else.


My idea here is that Torah is hard to come to. And after one has come to it it is hard to stick with. And even after one tries to stick with it it is all too easy to get seduced by the Torah of the Dark Side which looks and sounds exactly the same as real Torah.

Real Torah if you want to be as exact as possible is fairly easy to define. It is  a closed set, and you can enumerate exactly what are the members if the set. Torah= {The Old Testament, Babylonian Talmud, Jerusalem Talmud, Tosephta, Sifra, Sifri, Torat Kohanim, Mechilta, Midrash Raba.} This is a closed set. And things that came later that claim to be part of the set can't   be included because they are not the actual Oral Law. But you can have commentary on the Oral Law that can in some way be considered as a "bechina" of the Oral Law,= partaking of the essence in some lesser form.

What is the essence of idolatry?

The essence of idolatry is the ability to save.
This we can see in tractate idolatry [Avoda Zara] 41 side b.
An idol broke by itself. R Yochanan says the worshiper still has to nullify it.
Reish Lakish said it is automatically nullified because its worshiper= says "It could not save itself, so how could it save me?" So he does not even have to nullify it.
And you can see on page 42 that R. Yochanan does not disagree with that basic idea, but he still needs the worshiper to make an act of nullification.
From this we see the entire essence of idolatry is the ability to save. If one thinks the object or person that he is worshiping can save, then that is idolatry. He he thinks it can't save, then it is not idolatry.


Where you see in the Torah that Avimelech was told to go to Abraham and ask him to pray for him, I think is not a question, because I don't think the Torah was meant to be the definition of Monotheism. I think it is meant to take people away from idolatry. [See the Guide for the Perplexed of Maimonides who says exactly that.] So allowances are made for human weakness. But these allowances should not be taken as preferable options. You can ask a saint to pray for you. But what you ought to do is pray to God yourself. If that does not work, then take a weekend off, and go up into the mountains and spend a few days wandering in the forest and talking with God about your problem.

This idea that the essence of idolatry is the ability to save is from Rav Shach. [Elazar Menachem Shach the rosh yeshiva of Ponovicth.]
The idea is from the fact that on page 42 the Gemara asks on Reish Lakish from the Mishna that R Yose said one takes the idol and crushes it and scatters it, and the sages asked on him that even that is not enough because the dust is forbidden. From that sugia we see R Yochanan agrees with the basic idea but requires an actual statement of nullification.

This Gemara has serious implications. For we find people attributing to some people they consider to be holy as having the power to save. This is very common nowadays.

I don't mean to be critical of any particular group. Every group has some leader they are getting some kind of inspiration from. It says in the Talmud that there was a conversation between an idolater and a Talmudic sage  the idolater asked if God does not like idolatry then why doe he not destroy it? The sage answered they worship sun and the moon and the stars. Should God destroy his world because of idiots?