My impression is that Islam is trying to exterminate Christianity. Not so much in the Middle East but rather in Europe and in the USA.

I mean to say that I think killing Christians in the Middle East is small potatoes as far as Islam is concerned. It makes news but it is not their primary objective. Their intention I think is more directed towards making Christianity look ridiculous and to slowly achieve their goals by  a slower legal process.

Also I think that though getting rid of Israel is part of their goal but not in the same way as getting rid of Christianity.
The way they do this is in part by gaining confederates--allies in this goal or people that are not aware of their larger purpose.

But to understand this I think is hard for people that have grown up in the West and are not so aware of group dynamics. People in the USA and in Europe think more as individuals and are a little shocked when they encounter "group think." I know I was. I grew up in California and when I discovered people were deciding issues based on group identity alone--and not on the value of the arguments involved I was shocked.

I know some people think that this is a good goal. They imagine getting rid of Christianity and living under Islamic Rule would be Gan Eden. I know people like that.


And there are other people that are complicit in this goal. They don't actively support the extermination of Christianity but stand by and watch it happen with no concern as if it does not affect them. They are not as dumb as the first group but still not praiseworthy.

The best way to deal with this problem--I suggest is to face it head on and as directly as possible.
 That is to stop hiding in the sand.

And this is a problem not just for Christians, but for Jews also. Surely you must think that Jews would be aware of the problem with Islam. You would be wrong. Most think that Islam is our buddy. Civilization would flourish under Islamic rule. And plenty of books are written with this dangerous delusion in mind.

And I myself have been silent about this because after all by blog is visited by almost no one. So I ask myself why bother? However today I thought to break my silence about this and let people know that they are the target.


Now it might not be the place to discuss the positive aspects of Christianity on a Jewish blog. But let me just say that there are good reasons to defend Christianity.--The major principles of ethics are simply Jewish Principles in the first place. Plus there is some benefit in having a good example to follow. It is a good idea to have some tzadik to follow. Christians I admit might over do that last point a  little, but the basic idea is sound.

True tzadik. Is there is such a thing as a false tzadik?
But what could a false tzadik be? If he is false, then he is not a tzadik. Stay away from fraudulent tzadikim. מפורסמים של שקר [I should mention that  even if you have heard about miracles that is not much help because we know that not just Shabati Tzvi could do miracles but also average people could do miracles in his name. So we see there can be miracles of the Dark Side. That is spiritual powers do not tell us anything. \\

And this seems to apply to Torah also. He openly says there is such a thing as Torah of the Sitra Achra (the Dark Side).

I bring this up because I think it was the search for authenticity which brought me in the first place to the Mirrer Yeshiva in NY. And this is relevant today.  If you want authentic Torah today you pretty much are stuck. Because the kelipa of  "pseudo Torah" is everywhere.
However there are a few places that are left that I think realized this problem and have made it a point of getting back to the real thing-- Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot and Rishonim.


What I mean is that we know there are the general run of the mill Lithuanian yeshivas which have always been learning authentic Torah and emphasizing that. But Achronim were learnt to some degree. And nothing is really wrong with that. But there was always an awareness that Achronim are often flawed. But that was tolerated to some degree. Apparently some people finally got tired of it and decided to get back to learning real Torah. [That is learning any achronim tends to open the door to learning the tons of garbage that poses as real Torah].
I should add that I am not against all achronim. I am just pointing out that some people have decided that enough is enough and  even good achronim they don't want to learn because they are afraid of not being able to tell the difference.

mp3 folder


I am putting this here because my attempts to put other music into mp3 form have failed. I don't know if this is temporary or not. So at least these older files I think I ought to share.

I am gaining some clarity about work and Torah. To me it looks like an argument. Even though in most classical Musar books we have the preference for work with Torah, still you have things that indicate that it is best to just learn and depend on God to provide  a living.
You see this last opinion in the מדרגת האדם. [Navardok] But it is not his opinion alone.[See the Gra on Proverbs 26:3 בטח אל השם בכל לבך]

Depending on charity or when the Torah is made into a means of making money inspires a certain degree of rage in most people that are aware of the scam involved in that. But that does not mean that the second opinion is not valid. It just means that there are bad people out there that misuse the Torah.

What I mean to say is that I think there is a distinction between the opinion of the מדרגת האדם [Navardok] and how this question is approached in kollels.

What we have traditionally is the well known argument between the Duties of the Heart and Navardok which really boils down to the argument between R. Shimon Ben Yochai and R. Ishmael.
It is not clear how the Rambam decided here. As far as I can tell he might have been going  with R Shimon. But all this is simply whether it is best to simply sit and learn Torah and expect a miracle that manna will flow from heaven. Or is it better not to trust in this kind of miracle and learn and get involved in legitimate profession. Both have valid source in Torah thought.

But today kollels while pretending to be following the opinion of R Shimon are in fact using Torah as a means to make money, and at the same time are claiming to be trusting in God. This is not according to either legitimate opinion. If you are trusting in God then you are not coercing the Israeli government to give to you charity. The the insane religious world  considers the Israeli government evil for existing and also for not giving them enough money. It is not a world in which virtue, intelligence or hard work is rewarded. It is a world which is unjust. But so what? You don't have to join it. But if you do then be aware of what you are getting yourself into.
[But I admit they do try to make a show that the Rosh yeshiva is virtuous and hard working and a genius in order to continue this scam. But no Rosh Yeshiva is ever choose because of these virtues. Not nowadays at least.] Clearly in the past there were rosh yeshivas who had all these virtues like Chaim Soloveitchik etc.

My question is that we have according to Kant and area where reason can't go. That is uncondioned realities. And yet we also have knowledge of things that are not empirical.  And we know there is more to a priori knowledge more than definitions. So my question to Dr Kelly Ross in California is how to decide how far reason can go.







I wrote :Kant held that Reason applied to unconditioned realities would produce contradictions..

K.R.: In theoretical Reason, that is.

I wrote: "But that it is valid in the realm of a priori synthetic knowledge.The question is if these are really all that different? How do you tell the difference between unconditioned realities and  just plain regular a priori things?"

KR: " With unconditioned realities, we cannot determine between freedom and determinism.  However, practical Reason does determine, for freedom.

You tell the difference between unconditioned and conditioned realities where the series of applications of the categories (particularly causality and substance) has termination points or does not.  Thus, freedom is the beginning of an unconditioned causal series, and God (or, to an extent, the soul) is an unconditioned substance.  There is a similar idea in Buddhism, where all reality is conditioned but for certain "unconditioned dharmas," such as Nirvana.  This would fit in nicely with Kant.

These principles result in a nice meeting between physics and metaphysics.  Phenomenal space is all conditioned, but the whole of space is unconditioned, which is why physics cannot decide whether the universe if finite or infinite.  This problem is currently dishonestly evaded in discussions of physics.

Best wishes,
Kelley Ross"



After note: Kant really requires  a lot of work. And I admit to have not spent enough time on him.
At any rate we  here a classic example of Kelly Ross writing. It is jam packed with sub-layers, It is like each word requires a few semesters of study.

Rav Shach says that the fruit of the seventh year is not automatically הפקר [abandoned].

He is weaving together a complicated picture in order to solve a difficult Rambam. This Rambam is in the Laws of Maasar Sheni I: 5-6
For the general audience here let me just preface my remarks with the fact that years 1,2, 4,6 of the sabbatical cycle one gives the second Maasar. That is you give Truma to the priest every year. Then you take a tenth of your crop and give it to a Levi. Then you take another tenth and bring it to Jerusalem to the Temple. You give a basket there and the rest you eat in Jerusalem.  But in years 3 and 6 instead of the second tenth you give a tenth to the poor.

The Etrog [a  kind of fruit] you count the year by the time of picking. But still the Rambam says if it ripened in the 6th year you give truma and the tenth.

The Beit Yoseph says the Rambam is doubtful and so goes both ways to be strict. This is nonsense. The Rambam would have said so if he was doubtful. And also what about other years besides the seventh? Why not bring two tenths in the fourth year if he was doubtful?
The Gra says he is going by R. Yochanan that even though we go by the time of picking still in terms of the seventh year, if it ripened in the 6th we give truma.

The picture Rav Shach is painting  is built of several components. One is the question the Minchas Chinuch brings if the Torah makes the fruit abandoned of if one is required to abandon it. The other is the point the Or Sameach brings up of the fruit is the fruit of the seventh year even while attached or only after it is picked. The other is the point I started with that the Torah does not say it is abandoned rather the Torah gives it to all Israel.
 But I am still fumbling around trying to figure out how these points can answer the Rambam.
I mean if the fruit is not הפקר  then truma could apply. But why should it? We still have a verse that fruit of the seventh year is not obligated in Truma.

e17 edited

e63 edited  [e63 in midi] e63 nwc

e62 edited ''e62 in midi format  e62nwc

e61   [e61 in midi format]   e61 nwc

In terms of Trump, let me just say that not all menstrual blood is unclean.
First of all  there are five shades of red that are unclean and five that are clean.--And in spite of what you may think--these are possible to verify. And that is strict דין תורה--the law of the Bible.
When the question of blood comes up nowadays, what happens id  that any shade of red or black is considered unclean. But that is not because of the Torah. That is because people are too lazy to find out example what wavelengths constitute unclean and which ones constitute clean blood.

Another astounding fact is that nowadays there is almost never any kind of הרגשה [feeling] that the Talmud considers a problem. [Unless there is feeling there is nothing unclean.] I have not made a big deal about this because the Noda BeYehuda did in fact say that the feeling of some liquid moving inside is considered "feeling." So even if the Chatam Sofer and Natan Adler disagreed still I would rather not be the one be lenient in this matter.

In any case the comment of Trump was in no way demeaning unless people specifically want to take it that way. And then they are just being immature.

Normally I would not say anything unless I had something new to add. But I thought that Rav Shach has such an important point that it is worth mentioning. Laws of the Seventh Year and the Jubilee. 4:24.

I have not actually seen it inside but I think I know what he is getting at.

Just for a general introduction let me say a few basic points: (1) that the fruit called an Estrog can be on a tree for many years. (2) Vegetables you count by when they are picked. (3) Fruit goes by when they get ripe. (4) The Etrog goes by when it is picked.
That means for example you have an Estrog that is picked on the forth year of the seven year cycle before the 15th of the month Shevat, then you give tithes to the poor. If it is picked after the 15th of Shevat then you give the second tithe--which means  it has to be taken to Jerusalem.
This is all clear. But then the Rambam says something that seems at first glance very hard to understand. He says an Esrog [or Etrog in modern Hebrew] that grew to the size of an olive on the sixth year even though it is picked on the seventh year if obligated in Trumah and Maasar.
[The Beit Yoseph gives what can only be called a very flaky answer here.  And that is not unusual for him as that Shach and Taz have noticed. He says the Rambam is going like both ways in order to be strict. -both by the time of ripening and of picking.]
Now Rav Shach brings a question from the Minchas Chinuch if the fruit of the seventh year one must let go of and abandon (and if one did not an someone takes it it is stealing) or if we say the Torah has already declared it abandoned by law.

The Minchas Chinuch brings as a possible solution the Mishna where you have five women with a basket of fruit of the seventh year and someone walks up and takes  a fruit and gives it back to them and says you all are married to me by this fruit, they are married. [Obviously they have to agree to this, but we know women are so desperate to be married so things like this happen  every day.]

Without seeing  the details what I think Rav Elazar Menachem Shach is getting at is that the law of the seventh year requires a person to abandon his fruit but not that it is automatically abandoned.Therefore the Etrog that grew slightly in the sixth year but picked on the seventh year is in fact fruit of the seventh year but it is not abandoned until it is picked and so it is obligated in Trumah and Maasar.

The way to understand this is thus: When do the fruits become abandoned for all? When they grow or when they are picked? Well that is to some degree the whole idea when we say by normal fruit you go by when it is ripened and by the etrog when it is picked. So when it is picked it becomes a fruit of the seventh year. But that does mean it is abandoned. It still requires an act of abandonment. lacking that it is like what Rav Shach said about halacha 26 that fruits of areas of עולי מצרים  are obligated in the seventh year and maasar of the poor all at the same time.

Which makes me think that RaV Shach wrote his book in such a  way that the themes interconnect.

Two levels of reality is what we get with Plato. And this has a parallel in Kant.

There is a person with rulership over the whole generation in a hidden way but openly has no  one listening to him.There  is the idea of authority of the Sitra Achra. There is such a  thing as authority of the Dark Side which is hidden.

q23mp3  q23 midi  q23 nwc format

q22mp3 q22midi    q22 nwc

Fear of God is a good thing according to Isaac Blazer. I mean to say it is more than good--it is beneficial. It helps to solve human problems.  At least that is the idea I got from reading the first page of his book אור ישראל The Light of Israel.
The idea is that to work on fear of God solves at least some of the problems that people are looking for answers to.

That is it is not just a good thing but that it has practical benefits --even beyond what people would automatically think.

And it is a truism that reality is often different from what common sense dictates. When farmers are interested in fattening their pigs they fed them non fat milk. Who would have thought?


I could bring some further proofs for this but let me say that this is a theme that comes up in the Old Testament also. In the Old Testament it is mentioned a few times that all God wants from a  person is to fear him.

But we know that coming to fear of God  has lots of obstacles in front of it.


My suggestion is this to create something like Israel Salanter's Beit Musar. That is a study hall that is for learning Classical Musar only. Or even better to have a study hall that is for Musar and Gemara. Nothing else is allowed. Nor is anyone paid to learn. Paying people to learn makes Torah into a business. The worst kind of business because it is based on fraud.  We know learning Torah for money is a sin. So because try to pretend there is some mitzvah in this. If you have to pay someone to learn Torah then their Torah is not worth a penny. And not only that but then they will try to get rid of people that are learning Torah for its own sake and say they are not getting paid because they are not on their high level of learning. It is one big disaster. The main thing to know is by giving people money to learn Torah you are just making things worse. If on the other hand you see someone who is learning Torah for its own sake--to them it is  mitzvah to help.

The seventh year. Shemitah. The argument between Rav Shach and Rav Isaac Soloveitchik. Trumot I:5

I wanted to say over again the argument between Rav Shach and Rav Isaac Soloveitchik. What I want to make clear is the fact that Rav Soloveitchik has mainly two things in the Rambam which indicate that he is right.

The actual argument between them is about what is the area of the Land Of Israel obligated in in those areas that were not settled by Jews returning from the first exile in Babylonia. To Rav I.S. those areas are obligated in all obligations of the land of Israel. Rav Shach agrees with that but adds those areas are also obligated in tithes to the poor.

The proof of Rav I.S. is that the Rambam says Amon and Moav give tithes to the poor.  And he is clear that Amon and Moav are not the same thing as the area of the Land Of Israel  that was not settled by Jews returning from the first exile in Babylonia. [That means we can't use Rashi nor Tosphot to answer this Rambam. ] The other proof of Rav IS is when he says what obligations those areas of Israel are obligated in he says they did not "patur" (make not obligated) them from Trumot and maasrot. This is in clear relation to areas that they did "Patur". So from the straight reading of the Rambam it looks like Rav IS is right. But when you trace things back to the Gemara it looks like Rav Shach is right.

The Gemara brings the statement that is a halacha le'Moshe MiSinai that Amon and Moav give tithes to the poor on the seventh year. But then as a proof it brings this statement דאמר מר הרבה כרכים כיבשו עולי מצרים ולא כבשו עולי בבל שקדושה ראשונה קדשה לשעתה ולא קדשה לעתיד לבא והניחום כדי שיסמכו עליהם עניים בשביעית. To the way of Rav IS this does not seem to make any sense. How do you know Amon Moav give maasar ani? Because some cities in other areas give ספיחים. Not only is there no connection but the the sense of it is why is there a decree to give in place X? Because they did not make a  decree in place Y! To Rav Shach the connection is simple. In both place one gives tithes to the poor. 

I am getting more and more convinced about the idea of making a מקום תורה [place of Torah] and place of Torah in every city. The idea of learning Torah at home just does not seem practical.  I think there might be different reasons why the idea of making a place of Torah does not usually work. Yeshivas as we know are rarely places of Torah, and shuls never. But the reason for that is because they don't want to be. Kollels are just ways of making money by pretending to be a benefit to some community.

None of these things have anything to do with Torah. Not because it is hard to make a makom Torah--[place of Torah] but because people don't want to learn.
 If people would want to learn Torah for its own sake [not for pay] then it would be the simplest thing in the world to make a makom Torah.

A nice picture I found on the internet

Islam does not want to be reformed

The most serious sin in regard to Torah is to attempt to redefine Torah according to one's preference.
It matters if one keeps Torah also. But even if one does not keep all or any of the commandments, the worst sin to to try to change Torah according to ones tastes. This was the reason that Gra  signed the  excommunication.
This also makes clear what is so wrong with the the insane religious world  today which consists of many groups that have subverted the Torah to their own whims and have now tried to represent themselves as traditional.

Since it is hard to get a good idea of what Torah is about nowadays I recommend going into what is called "Rishonim." Rishonim  are people that lived in a period before all the falsification of Torah began and spent their time and efforts in trying to verify and clarify what the actual approach of Torah is.

You could start also with the Geonim.

But in any case what I suggest to begin is what is called Musar. That is a generic term for medieval books of classical Jewish ethics. What makes them interesting is not the time period they were written in but the fact that their efforts were to understand what the ethics of the Written and Oral Law is without trying to falsify the subject to make it conform to their own tastes.

Where Rav Elazar Menachem Shach and Rav Isaac Zev Soloveitchik disagree about the seventh year in Israel seems to be in this: Rav Soloveitchik  holds land that was conquered by Jews coming out of Egypt but left by Jews coming back from Babylonia is obligated in all obligations of the land of Israel. And when it says They did not sanctify the land that means so the poor could have the fruits and vegetables that grow by themselves on the seventh year. Rav Shach does not like this. To him those lands are obligated also in tithes to the poor --not just ספיחים things that grow wild.

The way he gets to this  like this: We have a Halacha to Moshe from Mount Sinai that Amon and Moav have to give tithes to the poor on the seventh year. This Rav Shach understands to be relevant to a time that those lands will be part of Israel from the Torah. That means to say that even in the future when that land will be part of Israel  and obligated in all obligations that Israel is obligated in Trumah and Maasar etc still they will be required to give tithes to the poor in the seventh year. And also when such land is not part of Israel, still they have to give tithes to the poor because of a decree. From this we can understand the Gemara in Yevamot 16a. עמון ומואב מעשרים מעשר עני   בשביעית דאמר מר הרבה כרכים כבשו עולי מצרים ולא כבשו עולי בבל דקדושה ראשונה קדשה לשעתה לא קדשה לעתיד לבא והניחום כדי שיסמכו עליהם עניים בשביעית

Amon and Moav gives tithes to the poor on the seventh year because many cities were conquered by those coming up from Egypt, but not by those coming up from Babylonia, and they left them so the poor would be able to depend on them in the seventh year.

That is the areas of עולי מצרים are  required to give tithes to the poor on the seventh year. That is a proof that Amon and Moav also do so.




I wanted to point out that according to this way of understanding the Rambam Trumah I:5 you don't need the land to be obligated from the Torah. And we know that that is good because if we would need that that would conflict with what the Rambam says in the end of the  chapter. This way we have the basic step of a halacha le'Moshe MiSinai and then a decree כעין התורה like the Torah that just like Amon and Moav would be liable in all obligation but added to that would be tithes to the poor so land of Israel proper but not conquered by עולי בבל  has the same law because of a decree.




The main point that Rav Soloveitchik has I think is the fact that in מתנות עניים  we doing find that the land of עולי מצרים is obligated in tithes to the poor. He only mentions Amon and Moav. On the other hand there are a few points that bring support to Rav Shach. One is the Gemara itself in Yevamot 16a. If we read it like Rav Soloveitchik it is a bit strained: "Amon and Moav give the tithe of the poor. How do we know this? Because the Jews coming up from Babylonia did not sanctify many cities so the poor would have support from them on the seventh year." According to Rav Soloveitchik what support do the poor have on the seventh year? Only the ספיחים what grows by itself. And when they returned there was no decree on the ספיחים anyway!
The wording of the Rambam is ולא פטרום.  The idea in itself seems to be relevant to the next Halacha in the Rambam where we have that Beit Sh'an and Ashkelon were פטרed- left to be not obligated. So here the Rambam is saying in opposition to that that the area of עולי מצרים  they did  not פטר.

mp3 music folder

It is hard to create a place of Torah. I have gained a certain amount of respect for people that were able to make authentic yeshivas after seeing how the whole concept of a yeshiva is so easily derailed and most of them are cults. I can see also why Rav Chaim Solveitchik  was against the Musar Movement after seeing how easily Musar itself can be sidetracked into all kinds of lunacies.
 I certainly can't create a place of Torah where I am. But I think if there are people that can get together to make something real like this it is  good idea to do so.


What is a place of Torah? Mainly it looks like Brisk.  That is you are learning the Babylonian Talmud in the morning from around 10 A.M. until 1:30 P.M. in depth. Then from 4 P.M. until 8 P.M. fast.

There was a considerable debate whether to introduce Musar [Jewish Ethics] into this. Reb Chaim said not to. But others did so. Today most Lithuanian yeshivas have introduced a very small amount of Musar into the program. But one way of the other, the day is spent on the Talmud.

Something so simple should be relatively simple to make. Why it is hard? It is that people prefer to make money of the back of the Torah. Their major effort is to look as if they are learning Torah and use that image to scam and defraud secular Jews into giving money. The amount of scammers makes doing the real thing very difficult.

In order to be able to tell the difference between the frauds and the real thing you almost have to be a Torah scholar yourself.

What you mainly need to start with is someone who has learned how to learn by spending the proper amount of time in Ponovitch, Brisk, or the three great NY yeshivas Mir, Chaim Berlin, Torah Vedaath. That is the foundation stone.  And it is in this first step that most yeshivas fail. The rosh yeshiva is usually a charismatic Am Haartz [ignorant fraud] who simply know how to act the part of the real thing.

(1) The Sitra Achra [the Dark Side ] can be and often is dressed  what looks like mitzvot. The Sitra Achra dresses and hides itself in Sitra DeKedusha the side of holiness. And holiness is hidden everywhere--even in secular things. Even in bad stuff.
(2) Reb Chaim from Voloshin thought that the only Divine service is learning Torah and everything else is to bring to the level of numinosity that comes into the world by means of learning Torah.
He thought that before the giving of the Torah one could serve God through and with anything. But after the giving of the Torah it is upon us simply to keep the Torah to the best of our ability.
But in the Rambam we see the mitzvot themselves are dependent on their reasons. This indicates that the reasons for the mitzvot are the things to aim for and the mitzvot themselves are to bring to these hidden purposes. (Also Reb Chaim is not taken seriously. Before you give money to a yeshiva ask what they would do if you would show up at their door and all you would want would be to sit and learn Torah and not ask for a penny what would they do? You know what they would do. They would throw you out on your nose. They don't believe in learning Torah. They believe in using Torah to get your money. )
(3)  the Torah is hidden in everything and one can serve God though and with everything.
(4) But the Sitra Achra is dressed and hidden in the side of holiness. When you walk into a synagogue you are going to encounter the Dark Side.
(5) There is such a thing as Torah of the Sitra Achra. Torah of the Dark Side. You go to hear a Torah lesson from a rabbi. The probability is you will be hearing the Torah of the Sitra Achra.
(6) So we see the idea is to find the purpose of your life from the side of holiness. And to avoid the purpose that the dark side has in mind for you.
(7) So we have that in your life there is a meaning that comes from the side of holiness. But there is danger of finding and cleaving to the meaning that comes from the side of evil.
To give a few examples might be helpful. Shmuel Berenbaum you would have no trouble in discerning what was the meaning of his life. Right. Learning and teaching Torah. We don't expect that it would have been better of had becomes a mechanical engineer. As far as we can see in this case he found the meaning and numinous aspect of his life from teh side of holiness.
Albert Einstein would be another example of a person that found the proper meaning and purpose of his life--also from the side of holiness--but in a different way than Reb Shmuel.
(8) On the surface they look like two disparate purposes. But they are not. They both found the aspect of numinous aspect that applies to them from the side of holiness. Just in Physics the numinous aspect of holiness is hidden
(9) Last but not least I might mention my parents. They were not like Reb Shmuel. They did not see learning Torah as the one purpose of life though they had great faith in Torah. My Dad though a scientist was not like Albert Einstein either --not just the genius part but also he did not see science as his one and only purpose. His major meaning and the meaning of life for my mother also was in being good parents. That might not be so obvious to many people what that means. And I would have a hard time explaining it.

Man searches for meaning. Sometimes he finds it in some kind of numinous value [some religious value]. Sometimes he finds it in politics or global warming, or some kind of vendetta he or she has towards someone. I have seen all kinds of varieties. The existentialists  borrowing from Thomas Aquinas thought existence comes before essence. That left them free to find their own values or to deny the existence of value.

Liberal Arts colleges are to some degree appealing to this aspect. They are hoping to find meaning in Shakespeare or more modern novels.

During the Middle Ages it value was for Jews in Torah [the Oral and Written Law--not in Jewish identity nor in Jewish nationalism.] For Christians it was in the church.

The Rambam in the Middle Ages and Saadia Gaon in the early Middle Ages wanted to expand the area of numinosity in Torah to include Physics and Metaphysics or Aristotle.



I think there is such a thing as bad numinous value; the Sitra Achra. The Dark Side. And I think all good values receive their values from Torah. But all good values can be subverted into the Sitra Achra.  The point is how to avoid that difficulty? And how to detect if a group that is on the face of it supporting Torah values but in fact has become  tool of the Sitra Achra?
True holy numinous value is deeply hidden in everything ---even in the Sitra Achra. הסתרה שבתוך הסתרה. He brings that from a verse in Deuteronomy ואנכי הסתר אסתיר פני ביום ההוא That is where God says to the Jews that after they will turn from him he will hide his face. But in the Hebrew you have the infinitive and then the verb. That means He is saying he will hide the hiding. That means people will be so far from God that they will not even know that he is hidden.

Then what can one do in such a case?

My advice is to talk with God as you talk with your father and mother . That is not just to pray to God, but to talk with Him in an informal way. Prayer tends to be formal. And when prayer is formal, then it loses its energy.  It is best to find time with God alone. The best place is a forest, but any place will do as long as there are no people around. Even your own room before you go to sleep at night. Under your covers is a good place to talk with God.
\
I would suggest other things, but almost anything I would suggest could be subverted into a tool of the Sitra Achra. Learning Torah, Kabalah. Nothing is immune. But if you talk with God sincerely and ask to be saved from the Dark Side, I think nothing can subvert a sincere prayer.
In fact, it is a rule that what ever organisation claims to be able to save one from the Sitra Achra is itself a tool of the Sitra Achra. That is money in the bank. You can count on this.

There is such a thing as a parallel to Ivy League/MIT/Stanford in the world of yeshivas.

But it is hard to know what are the parallels because without standards of testing, every yeshiva claims to be Ivy League. And in every yeshiva you walk into they will point to this "yougerman" and that one and claim that he is a genius. It is sad because it puts big dent on the whole idea of yeshiva in the first place when downright lies are sold as Divine truth. The same used car salesman that sold to you a lemon is unlikely to be able to regain your confidence a second time.

If you want my observations I can tell you easily what is Ivy League. Ponovitch [Bnei Brak], Brisk [Jerusalem], and the three big names in N.Y. the Mirrer, Chaim Berlin and Torah Vedaath.

Do you give truma from cherries?

Rav Elazar Menachem Shach and Rav Isaac Zev Soloveitchik seem to be having an argument about the Rambam in Laws of Truma ch 1 halacha 5.
[That Soloveitchik was the son of Reb Chaim. I think he is the one who founded the Yeshivat Brisk in Jerusalem.]

I have mentioned before today some of the main points in this subject and I might try to go over them again. But right now I wanted just to focus on this argument. I am not sure how to organize this also so bear with me.
The basic Gemara from where this all starts is in Yevamot 16 side a. עמון ומואב מעשרים מעשר עני בשביעית. (Amon and Moav give tithes to the poor on the seventh year.) And down a few lines is says דאמר מר הרבה כרכים כבשו עולי מצרים ולא עולי בבל דקדושה ראשונה קדשה לשעתה ולא לעתיד לבא והניחום כדי שיסמכו עליהם עניים בשביעית (for the master said many cities were conquered by the Jews coming out of Egypt but were not settled by the exiles returning from Babylonia because the First sanctification sanctified the land only for the time when Jews would be living there, but the second sanctification sanctified the land permanently, and they left those cities in order that the poor would have access to the tithes for the poor on the seventh year.)

Rashi is perfectly clear. The areas of עולי מצרים are not sanctified at all and there is simply a rabbinical decree to give the tithes to the poor and לקט שכחה ופאה. No Truma or any other maasar.

The Rambam writes this same thing as the Gemara but adds a few words. הרבה כרכים כבשו עולי מצרים ולא עולי בבל דקדושה ראשונה קדשה לשעתה ולא לעתיד לבא והניחום כשהיו ולא פטרום מן התרומה ומעשרות כדי שיסמכו עליהם עניים בשביעית

"They did not פטר (absolve) them." There is only one way to understand these words as far as I can see. That those areas were obligated and when people returned from the exile in Babylonia they left them in their original state of obligation. And that is exactly how Rav Shach understands this Rambam [I think.] That that land is obligated in Truma and Maasar from the Torah and the whole idea of קדושה ראשונה קדשה לשעתה ולא לעתיד ךבא is relevant only to sheviit.

That is as far as I can get right now.

Let me just add that Rav Soloveitchik holds that the land conquered by Jews coming out of Egypt but left by the exiles returning from Babylonia has all the regular laws of the land of Israel according to the Rambam. This is from what I can see what Rav Shach is about to disagree with. To me it seems at this minute that he is going to say that it has all the laws of the land of Israel only in reference to the laws of truma and maasar but not sheviit.

You can see already where all this is going. Rav Shach is probably going to be saying that those lands were not obligated in Sheviit--but the Chazal [sages] could have made those lands obligated in shevviit if they had wanted to. But they decided not to, and so the only obligation they have is truma and maasar. That explains the language of the Rambam here. And I am guessing that even without reading further that this will end up explains a good many of the other questions that this subject has in it.
I mean what is the most obvious question here. It is the fact that the Rambam holds קדושה ראשונה לא קדשה לעתיד לבא  and yet still holds from  כזיב until Amon is נאכל אינו נעבד and he explains in that very halacha that נאכל  refers to the ספיחים which means he hold the land has the holiness of  שביעית. So that would probably mean it has a law of Sheviit by decree of the Sages until the people of Israel return a third time at which time the full holiness of teh Torah will apply.

 I think you should learn Musar and Torah. Musar means classical books of Jewish Ethics and also books from the disciples of Israel Salanter like Isaac Blazzer. His book Or Israel is very good if you can find it.  Also there is a book חובות לבבות   and the אורחות צדיקים.

That is when you learn Torah, people like you more.
And from doing it not for the sake of Heaven one will come to do it for the sake of Heaven.

e33  [e33 in midi]  [e33 in nwc format] [the notes you can see in midi or nwc]

Israel Salanter was not the person that started the path of Musar. {medieval Books of Jewish Ethics} Rather it was Shmuel from Salant.

Israel was a young kid that saw that Shmuel was a tzadik, and he also saw how he became a tzadik-- by learning Musar. Israel Salanter put two and two together to conclude the way to become a tzadik is by learning Musar.

There were yeshivas and synagogues in those days, but his idea was to create what he called a "Beit Musar" a building devoted only to one thing alone the study of Musar. What I suggest here is to rekindle this idea. Instead of wasting money on things the Torah says not to, why not build a house of Musar in every city and hamlet?


Kollels are country clubs so it is  a waste of time and money to donate anything to them. Besides the  fact that the very existence of any kollel is against halacha. [See the Rambam in Hilchot Talmud Torah.]
Synagogues are generally sectarian, and so not worth giving money to. The best synagogues are Reform and Conservative, but they have not enough emphasis on learning Musar and Torah. [And from ignorance of Torah, they sometimes choose values that are highly destructive towards Jews and the USA. They tend to embrace people that want to eliminate the Jewish people and the State of Israel.] the insane religious world  are satanic cults as a rule. The idea of keeping Torah is right, but that is just the cloak they hide under. They generally follow some satanic leader who pretends to be a tzadik.

So it seems to me that making a house of Musar is the best idea.



I should mention in a way of התנצלות apology that Rav Shach was once asked about the fact that he was critical. But he stuck with his guns. And my impression is everyone word he said was accurate.

Part of the problem is there is no where to go to learn the Ari.  Every place which advertises Kabalah is a cult. And they certainly don't teach the Ari anyway, except a couple of Kabalah yeshivas in Jerusalem which do teach straight authentic Ari and the Mechon HaKabalah or Kabalah Center which in fact do teach the authentic Ari.

In any case, my idea of how to go about learning the Ari is based on two separate periods in my own life. One period I concentrated a lot of the Ari--specifically the Eitz Chaim. That period was at the Mirrer Yeshiva in NY and I was married at the time and  devoted every spare second to learning the Ari. That is one approach. And I think it was effective because I was at the time in a place of serous Torah study.
The other approach was when I was in Israel in Safed. There I was not able to concentrate of the Ari as much as I had been doing in NY and instead I was doing what is called "שיעורים כסדרם" sessions in order.

The great thing about homosexual-ism is you know who to avoid.
No longer is it any option to send your children to public school where you know that they are being homosexuals have launched an evangelical movement to turn your children into sick people.



The only option I see is something like the Mirrer Yeshiva High school in NY, or something similar.

[For Christians, one could send his children to a Jesuit school. But if possible a Mirrer Yeshiva kind of thing is preferable. [Because at the Mir you get the Oral and Written Torah - both.]


If the mother is at home, then the best of all worlds is home schooling.
.


Universities at this point are also no much to look at unless you are in a STEM program. [STEM is the modern way of describing what used to be called natural sciences.]


And race also tells you who to avoid.
Race makes  some difference. At least as far as I can see. I heard from one fellow in Ukraine about a mutual acquaintance   that he had married unknowingly a gypsy woman. There are white Gypsies that you would not be able to tell that they are Gypsies. She only told him after they were married. And low and behold his children with her turned out to be thieves. I have seen this same theme played out many times. Race determines a lot. And even though any person can rise above the fate of his or her genes but that does not necessarily apply to their children.

e37 e37 midi  e37 nwc

 e39 e39 midi   e39 nwc

e36  e36 midi  e36 nwc 
Mathematics   mathematics midi  mathematics nwc

e29   e29 midi  e29 nwc



e47  e47 midi  e47 nwc

The way to go about learning and keeping Torah--really depends on your level of education.
In my first year in yeshiva they were doing Chulin and the basic approach was to take a small section of the Gemara and show how you go from the Gemara to the Tur Beit Yoseph and then the Shulchan Aruch with the Taz. This was the beginning level and at the second year and after that we started getting more into Tosphot. Personally I did a lot of Maharsha  and Shita Mekubetzet also but that was because I was really not sure how to do "Iyun." [study in depth.] Ever since then I had a tendency to look up achronim.
And that fault of mine stayed with me for all my days in yeshiva. Getting to "how to learn" beyond just freshman looking up achronim took me  a very long time and I never would have graduated to real learning if not for having a learning partner that has the kind of analytical mind required for this kind of work.

My recommendation is to find a  person that knows how to learn. But this is very rare. A rule of thumb is don't bother looking outside of NY Lithuanian Yeshivas or Ponovitch in Israel. Jerusalem has lots of yeshivas but they can't learn worth a dime.
To get a big picture approach to learning it is good to study Reb Chaim Soloveitchik's Chidushei HaRambam and  Rav Shach's Avi Ezri. The Avi Ezri is in fact much better than Reb Chaim. Reb Chaim opened up the door to that kind of deep understanding of the Rambam but his book has flaws.  Rav Shach's Avi Ezri is much more  deep and clear and as far as I can see is without any flaws. There is no fault in this. Even the first attempt to build a bridge with no previous example is likely to fail. Rav Shach saw farther and clearer than Reb Chaim. But his book is ignored for the simple reason that he was not politically correct. He insulted everyone. And on purpose also. There would be fault in this if not for the fact that everything he said was right.