10.3.22
Even though when I first got to Shar Yashuv [a great Litvak Yeshiva in NY], I did not have anything in mind except to learn Torah, once there and I got a taste of the greatness of Torah, I made it my goal to be sitting and learning Torah my whole life. Later events made that commitment to be difficult to keep. But I still believe in the greatness of that goal. [I had to go to NYU's Polytechnic Institute to learn Physics and thus the idea of sitting and learning Torah became impractical. But I imagine with enough commitment I might still have managed.] See the event with R. Yochanan and his friend that decided to leave off learning Torah to go and make a living. R Yochanan heard the angels. One said to the other: Let us knock this wall over them [and kill them], since thy have decided to leave off learning Torah. The other said, "No. Leave them alone, because one of them will stick with it." R Yochanan heard, his friend did not.
A powerful lesson to be learned for sure. Still, I just was not able to sit and learn. The best I can say is that I consider Physics to be part of Torah based on Ibn Pakuda, the Rambam, even though clearly many [or most] Rishonim disagree.]
9.3.22
I have been looking at music files to share and here are a few
[same piece in midi file form]
I hope to receive the energy to go back and edit these last two. But I thought to share them anyway.
I tried to defend the point of view of the Rambam concerning Aristotle.
I had a conversation [with Sarah Chaya] in which I tried to defend the point of view of the Rambam concerning Aristotle. My point was that even though the Rambam is Neo Platonic [Plato, Plotinus, and Aristotle} there is a reason to look for modifications of that based on Kant and Fries. Mainly my point was that this the real world, the world of ideas [not this world of shadows] is where real knowledge is. But to Kant that is where we have knowledge only within the conditions of possible experience. It is the idea of Fries that there is access even beyond that realm by means of immediate non intuitive knowledge. So we can have a relationship with God, but not by reason by by a different kind of knowledge not of reason, nor of feeling. A third kind. (The point is this is knowledge of God but not through reason nor any kind of sense perception or feelings.])
Of course we know that the Guide for the Perplexed was a scandal. No one liked the attitude of the Rambam towards a pagan philosopher. But the Ramban/Nahmanidess wrote an impassioned letter to the Baalai HaTosphot in France and Germany saying to leave the Rambam alone--even though the Ramban did not in fact agree with the Rambam about this issue.
No one I have ever tried to explain this to paid the slightest attention--but here I go again. The idea at the end of Laws of Shemita that, "when one who accepts on himself the yoke of Torah, the yoke of work is taken from him. " does not mean to make money by means of using Torah. It means that in some way God will provide. It is not a "heter" [license] to make Torah into a business.
8.3.22
There must become an iron wall between Torah and money.
When I first got to Shar Yashuv [a very important Litvak Yeshiva] I had seen a small booklet that was based on the Conversations of Rav Nahman perek 76 about learning fast. [It was emphasizing going through many pages of Gemara every day--But not just that bit having a few sessions also in the Midrashim, and the Yerushalmi and Rif and Rosh etc.] But when I mentioned this to Motti Friefeld, he was emphatic about depth learning with lots of review. Especially the idea of ten times review of everything one learns. [That idea he got from his father the Rosh Yeshiva Rav Freifeld. ]And I am beginning to see the wisdom in that idea of review.
If you are doing a few Tosphot or a long piece in Rav Haim of Brisk or Rav Shach, I have found that reading through them straight and then again the next day and so on and so forth for about a month is a good idea. But When it comes to Gemara, there I found just plowing through the whole tractate with Rashi Tosphot and Maharsha seems best for me. As for the natural sciences, ten times review seems to work best, but only after I have gone though the whole textbook first just saying the words and then going in until the end. Then going back and doing review
Sleep walking into WWIII. This is similar to how the world got into WWI. No one considered the damage. troops from the USA, the UK, and Germany are now involved. Everyone is thinking in terms of small moves. They imagine that their small moves will not be considered to be large threatening moves by the other side. They are turning a local war into a World War.
So the US has cut off Russian oil. So where will they get it? Already the Arab countries have not even bothered to answer the phone when the president calls to ask for a deal with their oil.
The USA is walking into the worst possible nightmare.
It is like the talk representatives of the USA to invite Ukraine to join NATO just a few weeks ago. Did they not think putting nuclear missiles on the doorstep of Russia would provoke a reaction?
Or sending fighter planes to Ukraine? That makes the USA at war with Russia.
The situation in most Ukrainian cities was such that after the USSR, and you asked people when was better, they almost always said things were better in the time of the USSR. But like the time of the civil war of the Whites against the Reds, neighbors would kill each other when they thought their neighbor was on the other side. {I knew the people this happened to.} So even if people would prefer to be back to the way things were during the USSR, they dare not say so openly. –Except to someone like me that they knew would not tell their neighbors about their feelings. There however were exceptions–people that told me if Russia would show up there, they would take a rifle and shoot them.
So what you have is a sort of Hidden Civil War–hidden because it is unknown and hidden from public view. And the Russians were well aware of this from at least back to around 2012.
There were somethings that were odd in Ukraine. Nazi battalions at the public level. There was a lot more than that under the surface. But I do not want to be critical since I knew people there that were angels. So the best thing I think is to lay off and not let a local war become a world war.
Here is a comment by Timmy on the blog of Michael Huemer:
7.3.22
Rav Nahman did not hold from looking for extra restrictions. It is possible to serve God with everything.
It is possible to serve God with everything. אפשר לעבוד השם יתברך בכל דבר This is an idea brought in the LeM of Rav Nahman in Vol II 44 (and circa 86). Rav Nahman did not hold from looking for extra restrictions.
There was in fact an incident in which Rav Natan [his disciple] was offered to be a rav in some city. He asked Rav Nahman about whether to accept the offer or not.
Rav Nahman asked, "Why not?"
Rav Natan said, "I am afraid of Hora הוראה." [Giving a legal decision.]
Rav Nahman said "As long as there is a posek [authority] to depend on, you can depend on him."
I am not quoting this story exactly but this is the best that I can recall.]
[At that time the word "Posek" referred to Rishonim, However Rav Nahman used the same word to refer to the Shulchan Aruch of Yoseph Karo with its commentaries Shach, Taz, etc.
Even so, carrying in a public domain seems problematic. I know that Some Rishonim hold you need 600,000 to be a public domain, still this seems hard to swallow. I should mention that the Eruv that people put up has nothing to do with a public domain. It helps only for a Carmalit.{ Carmalit is like a מקום פטור a space that is not a public domain nor a private domain.] But real public domain a string can not make into a private domain. The reason I say this is that in tractate Shabat you have lots of discussion about what constitutes carrying in a public domain and no where is it mentioned that the cities in Babylonia were small. The largest citiesz in the ancient world were like Rome with more than a million people. But Sura or Pumbdita or other cities where there were mostly Jews were not more than Athens at its peak of power and prosperity which was about 20,000 But the Gemara goes into the issues of a public domain without mentioning anywhere that that could not have applied to their very own cities. which were less than 600,000
[The issue here is much more important than meets the eye, for it goes to the very root of what is inane and insane about the religious world in their constant search for more and more things to forbid and then claim that it is all from the Torah.]
[This is the core of my critique about the religious world,--they make up restrictions that have no source in the gemara or poskim, and ignore real and actual prohibitions of the Torah or the words of the Scribes. and yet claim to be representing true Torah and want us shimazals to pay for their sitting around all day chatting and claim to be learning Torah.]
a mystic tradition
What is the status of the Ari [Rav Isaac Luria] or the Remak [Moshe Cordoba]-if we notice that the Zohar is not really from R. Shimon ben Yochai? (note 1) But there was a mystic tradition.
I think the closer we get to areas outside of conditions of possibility of experience, the easier it is to get into worlds of delusions. So while the Ari and Moshe Cordoba were great tzadikim, it is hard to distinguish. to get an idea of legitimate continuance of the Ari, it is too easy to get involved in pure delusion. [The best that are okay, are the Reshash (Sharabi), Rav Yakov Abuchazeira, the Ramchal.]
(note 1) the world "although" in the Zohar is always expressed as "with all of this" עם כל דא and that is the Aramaic translation of עם כל זה and that is an expression invented by the Ibn Tibon family of translators during the Middle Ages. Therefore it could not have been written by R. Shimon ben Yochai.
Bava Batra page 26
I know that most people are unclear about the issue of three trees. Or at least that is what I imagine to myself. After all I do not see anyone walking around at the sea that is worrying about that confusing issue in Bava Batra page 26. Or maybe they all have it clear so it does no bother them anymore. But at least for me I should say that in spite of my having written a few ideas on the Tosphot, still I am unclear. One thing that has helped is looking at Rav Shach's Avi Ezri on Laws First Fruits.
Just as an introduction let me just bring some basic facts. Ula said one who has owns a tree within 16 amot [circa yards] of the boundary of his friend, can not bring first fruits since he is a thief. [Thank God that someone noticed the problem. Rav Shach brings the Rashba on page 81 that asks this very question. There it says: one who buys tree owns around it כמלא אורה וסלו around it the width of one that plows and his basket. The Rashba asks the obvious question: That is not 16 amot!
Rav Shach himself brings this long and difficult subject and brings a few answers.
That does not look like the Mishna where there is an argument about how close to the boundary of his friend one can dig a pit or plant a tree. R.Yose says he can go right up until the edge, since one plants in hi own, and the other digs in his own.
6.3.22
I wanted to mention that my dad was nothing like the sort of nerdy scientist that people have the stereo type image of. I mean he was the exact opposite. But neither a macho he-man. He came across just as a regular guy. The only perceivable difference between him and the average Joe on the street was that he was a genius when it came to inventing Stuff that the USA government wanted. The Infrared Telescope, satellites using laser communication, the U-2 camera, plus tons of stuff that even to his family he could not say a word about.
I mean--he was not studying when he got home. As I knew him, he did his work at the lab at TRW and when he got home he did not think about it. But I knew that he and my mother were always thinking about how they were raising their children. That was their number one priority.
"Bitul Torah". I see myself obligated in learning Torah and the natural sciences -even when I can not do so.
I see that where my world view disagrees with that of everyone else I meet is concerning the issue of "Bitul Torah". [Note 1]
This does not mean that I learn Torah much at all. And I admit that my idea of what constitutes learning Torah is broader than what most people assume and much narrower also. I include the natural sciences as per the Rambam [in the Laws of Learning Torah Yad Hachazaka concerning what is included in learning Gemara.] And I exclude all the religious babble that is not Torah. [I.e. I only include in Oral Torah the exact books of the Mishna and Talmud and Midrashim. Plus on secondary level the commentaries. Nothing more. That is like the Rambam wrote in one of his letters "Just like one can not add or subtract from the written Torah so one can not add or subtract from the Oral Torah."] [I see all Divine Law as one. The difference is as it applies to different things. Divine Law as it applies to physical things is comes to e known as Physics. As it applies to human relationships and human affairs it is known as Torah.
But what I mean to say is that I see myself obligated in learning Torah and the natural sciences -even when I can not do so. That is to say, I am not looking for ways of having fun. I might need to relax in order to get energy up in order to learn. But my intension is to get up enough energy and enough mental energy to be able to learn.
However I know that most people do not see things in this way. Even those that are sitting and learning most of the day and getting paid to do so. They see themselves as obermenschen. The rest of us plebeians were created to give them money --not to be learning Torah.
So there is almost no point of intersection that I have with almost anyone else--except for those that do learn Torah Lishma.[for its own sake]. And I must add that there certainly are people that learn lishma even though they get a kollel check. But those are people that get the check in order to learn,.
[Note 1] Bitul Torah is the sin of not learning Torah when one has the time to do so. It is not the same thing as the minimum amount one is supposed to learn
5.3.22
4.3.22
there is a limit to how far any ideas in the spirit realm can be taken as accurate.
One should not get too impressed with spiritual ideas. That is the whole point of the Critique of Pure Reason. So while the ideas of Rav Nahman are great and important in terms of practical advice, there is a limit to how far any ideas in the spirit realm can be taken as accurate. They can only be accurate in the realm of conditions of possible experience. Outside of that we might have knowledge, but nothing like the religious babble.
The religious world is fraught with talk about spiritual ideas that they know nothing about.
Not that you can know nothing about spiritual reality. But that is immediate non intuitive knowledge that we know, but not through sense nor through reason [to Kelley Ross]. And to Hegel reason can reach even the Absolute. but that is not what religious babble is about.
The most important responsibility of parents is to make sure their children grow up in a wholesome, moral society.
The most important responsibility of parents is to make sure their children grow up in a wholesome, moral society. This is because the influence of parents is highly limited-even in a society of ancient times where the role of parents was highly respected. Nowadays, the role of parents is thought be negative.
הרבה שכנים עושים The priest says to the wayward woman "Confess your sin for neighbors (the general society) have a huge effect. "
\In a similar vein, one might be in a wholesome moral society like a Litvak yeshiva. The responsibility would be to stay within that context even if the parents think that for themselves a different context would be preferable. In fact, this fact alone shows how right the Gra was.
Parents might be highly motivated to do the best for their children, but if they do not know this principle, they are likely to believe what is good for them, is good for their kids. They do not stop and think what kind of group they are in already that is decent and wholesome.
28.2.22
weight to the approach of the Gra
Even if personal experience is not thought to be a proof of anything, for me it does some weight to the approach of the Gra. In the approach of the Gra, learning Torah, even one single word of Torah, is considered to be equal to all the other commandments of the Torah. [This is actually what it says in the Gemara Yerushalmi on that mishna in Peah.] Thus you would hope and expect that after learning Torah lishma [for its own sake] for some years, one would merit to some sort of "Devekut" attachment with God.
For me this actually happened in an instant as I decided to take my family with me to Israel. The second we got off the plane and the wind blew on me, this kind of Devekut began.
And during later times I began to see how the Gra was right in many other ways.
So even if it is desirable not to speak about the depth of one's experience in attachment with God by learning Torah, still if you do not mention it at all, it is kind of like the prohibition of כובש נבואתו.[I forget the actual verse, but the idea is a prophet is not allowed to hide his prophecy.] And one ought not to give the impression that the path of learning and keeping and understanding Torah is intellectual. The truth is the path of the Gra of learning Torah for its own sake is the highest level of spirituality that is possible. Or at least let me say that that is what I have seen.
z66 music file [in midi] z66 nwc format [This has just been sitting, and I have not figured out how to develop it, so I thought I should just share it as it is.] Here is another file from a few years ago. w42 [also in midi] [w42 in mp3][w42 in nwc] I hope to work some more on z66, but at this point I am not sure what to do.
27.2.22
why not go back to the way things were when Musar was first introduced in the Litvak yeshivot, two forty minute sessions?
Even though it it seems clear that the Musar movement (to learns the mediaeval books on Ethics)as thought of by Rav Israel Salanter is not all that possible, still I think that it could be given a new beginning with an extra emphasis on this in the great Litvak yeshivot. I suggest instead of the very short periods, 20 minutes before minha (afternoon prayer) and 15 minutes before arvit (evening prayer), why not go back to the way things were when Musar was first introduced in the Litvak yeshivot, two forty minute sessions?
Still i must add here, in the Torah there is a commandment not to add or subtract from the commandments. So the religious world which is constantly adding and subtracting can not be considered to be keeping the Torah even in the most farfetched sense. But they get away with it because most people are not familiar of what the Tora truly says.
שכל הנקנה Acquired Intellect
In one of the beginning chapters of the Le.M of Rav Nahman of Uman [I forget the number. I think it was around 14] is brought that what is left of a person in the next world is שכל הקנה Acquired Intellect. This concept he brings from The Guide for the Perplexed. What seems significant here is that not every subject that one studies contributes to his everlasting life. For example, how to become an expert at chess would not have anything to contribute to one's life in the World to Come. So just by simple reasoning we can see there is a difference between subjects. So study of how to become a decent person (Musar), we can understand contributes to one's everlasting salvation, since good character traits are not automatically acquired. One needs to pick up good character traits from parents or friends etc. There is no one that makes up their own value system out of thin air. They get it from TV, movies , Internet etc.
Another point is we can see learning the objective knowledge, knowledge that can be easily seen to be of the way God created the world, this knowledge can called the works of God. This object knowledge can be Physics or Mathematics or other aspects of Creation that are not man made knowledge, even though they needed to be discovered by Man.
Defense of faith in the Torah. To have faith in the way of my parents--to have faith but not to be making money out of it like the religious do.
What can be a defense of faith in the Torah after that many questions are clear. Dr Michael Huemer brings this up and I have thought how to answer this. I have thought if there is some way to express my approach this. I mentioned there in a comment, the idea of the Kant-Fries school of thought. That means a commitment to non intuitive immediate knowledge,(which is similar to faith in that it holds of the categories by knowledge that is known but not known by reason nor experience) plus with the idea of Dr. Kelley Ross this means that the closer one gets to areas of value that are not within the area of conditions of possible experience [with space and time and causality], one gets to contradictions that can not be resolved except by faith. [However, I can not agree that this discounts Hegel. For I see Hegel as being correct that in essence even knowledge of God is possible and necessary as King David said to Solomon, "Know the God of your father, and serve Him."
Plus I ought to mention that I have great faith in God. It seems clear to me that this is a sort of knowledge that is not through the senses nor through reason.
But I do not try to overly strenuously defend faith for I realize lot and most of those with faith have a sort of different kind of problem.- i.e. they think they know that which they do not know. I.e. the religious tend to think they are better and smarter than everyone else, while the opposite is 99% of the time to be the case. [You can see this in the Torah itself. Who were the people that were against Moses? See the Rashi on the very first verse of Parshat Korah. They were the religious leaders- the very heads of the Sanhedrin and smaller sanhedrins. The religious leaders are the enemies of Torah. They have found away to gain power and money by seeming to be smart in Torah.]
It is better to have faith in the way of my parents--to have faith, but not to be making money out of it like the religious do.
26.2.22
God created the world from nothing, not from Himself.
Even though the Nefesh Hachaim [by Rav Chaim of Voloshin] is a great and important book, still I have to disagree with one aspect. He says that from the aspect, or point of view of God, there is nothing besides Him. But from our point of view, things are not Godliness.
The problem with this is it does not explain anything. Things are all God, or they are not.
The other problem is that the point of view of the Rishonim was that God created the world from nothing, not from Himself. [Not like a spider that makes its web from itself. God is not a spider. He made the world from nothing., not from himself.] Even the Ari brings this very idea that Creation was from nothing in the very beginning of the Eitz Chaim. The world is definitely not Godliness in the very beginning of the Eitz Chaim. [The reason all this is not clear nowadays is he religious leaders are stupid and do not understand what they are reading.]
Ex Nihilo is the view of Torah.
Slav is not interchangeable with WASP.
In the West the fall of the USSR was thought to be a liberating moment. And for many perhaps it was. But when I talked to people on the street the attitude was the opposite. They always said things were better during the time of the USSR. (But they could not say this aloud to others because of fear of being informed on, and often violently attacked. Only to me, a stranger, did they feel safe to express their real feelings.) )And my experience shows this to a large degree.
There was something that was hard to understand that was going on there. All I can say is: "People" is not a term that is interchangeable between one group and the other. Our DNA says a lot about how we act. Just like the chemical composition of water H2O says a lot about how it react to cold--as opposed to H2O2 boiling point.
Slav is not interchangeable with WASP. [What works in the USA or England in not the same thing that can work--over there.] WASP is not interchangeable with black.
[So my impression is not to interfere because in a city like the ones I was in, most people are not at all interested in fighting.] See the verse in Proverbs: כאוחז באזני כלב כן מתערב בריב לא לו "One who gets involved in a fight that is not his is like one who grabs the ears of a dog"
The simple explanation of Torah in the stories is mystic and in the laws-literal. That is the way I understood things. When reading the Ari Isaac Luria, I saw that he was understanding the the simple explanation of the seven days of Creation was that it was referring to the higher sepherot. The point of Torah is the commandments. Those are meant literally, But even the commandments are meant to bring to natural law as we see in the argument between R Simon ben Yochai and the sages about if we go by the reason for the commandments or the letter of the law. But to both the reason is known. So R Shimon says one can take the garment of a rich widow.
25.2.22
Not all secular learning is secular. Even though Rav Nahman and many others say to stay away from secular studies, still not all that is listed as secular is in fact so. On one hand, some are clearly man-made and not a part of Torah, however there are wisdoms that include the wisdom of God. So you find Rishonim (mediaeval authorities) that include Physics in the category of the things one is supposed to learn every day. And among those Rishonim are Ibn Pakuda. the author of the Duties of the Hearts.-
So while in the Mir in NY, one was not allowed to attend Brooklyn Collage while at the Mir, still when I asked the rosh yeshiva [Rav Shmuel Berenbaum] about this policy, he said one can learn Physics for the sake of making a living. But as deep a thinker he was, I think that this distinction he did not make.
The wonders of God hidden in the work of Creation
אזכור מעללי יה כי אזכרה ממקדם פלאיך "I will mention the wonders of God, for from ancient times I will mention your wonders. The wonders of God hidden in the work of Creation are no less wonderful that if they had been written in the Gemara/Oral Law
I should mention some of the many places in the LeM of Rav Nahman of Uman where learning Physics is thought to be learning the wisdom of God. And that is wisdom that does not depend on the opinion of any person to check and see if it is correct, but rather Nature. One place that comes to mind is טבעו בארץ שעריה "Her gates are buried in the ground." Her gates refers to the depth of understanding of the Torah. They are buried in the ground. This is in Lamentations. That means the depths of knowledge of Torah after the Destruction of the First Temple are buried in the dirt. That is in the very substance of physical matter- that is where to find the wisdom of Torah.
Another place in the LeM is that the hidden Torah in the work of Creation which is the highest Torah.
Another place is that to reveal open Torah to a wicked person would make him worse. So Torah must be revealed to him through secular things.-things that do not seem holy.
The point is there s hidden Torah in mundane things and that one can reveal the hidden Torah inside of secular things. It is possible to serve God through what seem to be secular but in fact in hidden holiness.
_______________________________________________________________________
ויתר מהמה בני הזהר עשות ספרים הרבה אין קץ ולהג הרבה יגיעת בשר קהלת י''ב פסוק י''ב This is verse in the Book of Ecclesiastes, "And more so my son be careful. To making many books there is no end and they are a joke and tiring out of flesh."
As my learning partner once told me, "There are too many books." The point is brought out by Rav Shach. He explains books that go into the details of the Gemara -this is a great and important thing. But books that supposedly are about the foundations of faith are a waste of time.
The Midrash Kohelet on this verse says the word "מהמה" is an unusual construction. (It could have said, "מהם.")The reason is to hint to the idea that it refers to מהומה (confusion). Making many books that you see in the religious world just brings more confusion, not clarity.
This is especially so in light of the Rif and Rosh on the Mishna in Sanhedrin (perek Chelek) that explain "outside books" means books that explain the Torah but not based on midrashei Chazal==the explanations of the sages of the Mishna and Gemara.
So outside books does not refer to books on natural science but rather to the vast majority of the stuff the religious are always putting out which all explain the Torah, but never according to any midrash of the sages.
I admit I got tired of the mind tricks the religious are always playing, and decided instead to learn straight Gemara, with the natural sciences, especially Physics and Mathematics. Better to find out what the Torah really says instead of depending on the insane religious world.
The reason to learn Physics is that it does not depend on people's opinions. Thus it connects you what is real. To what is really real, not to people's opinions about what is real. [Besides that there is the point of the Gra that any lack of knowledge in the seven wisdoms results in a hundred times fold lack of knowledge of Torah.]
That is to say, it can be tested. Reality can prove or disprove a theory.
Thus it is objective knowledge not knowledge about what other people think--which is not knowledge at all.
And I should add that I have started with doing the ten times of review of every paragraph. I keep fast learning in reserve, but for now I feel I need to get the idea before going on.]
24.2.22
I do not think people should be paid to learn Torah.
I do not think people should be paid to learn Torah. See the Gemara Taanit pg 7 side a where the verse is brought יערוף כמטר לקחי מלשון הריגה על הלומד תורה שלא לשמה שנעשית לו סם מוות [My teaching will flow like rain--from the same word root as to break a neck--to kill. That is my teaching will kill like rain. This refers to one whole learns Torah for the sake of making a living. The Torah become for him poison.]
But it is not that I am looking to be extra strict. Rather it seems to me that the mixture of Torah with money is what ruins it.
Rav Nahman of Uman brings a midrash
Rav Nahman of Uman brings a midrash that says after the event of the Golden Calf God says to Israel, "You have lost the 'we will do,' so now at least hold onto 'we will hear.'" אבדתם את הנעשה עכשיו תאחזו בנשמע [note 1] And he brings a proof from that that hearing is even more important than self learning--
I have not mentioned this in this blog before because it is hard to get to hear a true Torah scholar give over Torah lessons. But I know that it was by listening to the son in law of Rav Friefeld in Shar Yashuv, and Rav Shmuel Berenbaum (Mir) and David Bronson in Uman that opened the door for me to any degree of understanding of Torah-- what so ever.
And in fact I found the same thing in my STEM studies. Listening does a lot more than reading the text yourself, even you learn by saying the words and going on for the fast session --or doing lots of review. Listening to is better.
[note 1]At Mount Sinai, Israel had said, "We will do and hear all the words of the Covenant."
Even if I recommend the greatness of the Litvak yeshivot that are based on the Gra, I was never really able to find my place in such institutions. But Rav Nahman held from this principle that even though I might not be a "איש כשר" decent person, that does not mean that I ought not to desire that my friend should not be an decent person. In all books of Muar that I know about, it is suggested that by helping others come to Fear of God, I might also merit to fear of God. כל המזכה את הרבים, אין חטא בא על ידוץ
However I do admit that I am reluctant to recommend anything "frum"[religious], since the Dark Side has so deeply penetrated into every aspect of the religious world.
But if you would have a place that would be following the Gra and Rav Israel Salanter [Musar], then I would have no problem with giving that my highest recommendation, and support. But as we all know, there is nothing in the religious world that follows the Gra except a few place few and far in between.
And I really loved the whole experience of learning Torah within the context of the Litvak world. But I was derailed, and my own lack of commitment to sitting and learning Torah might have contributed to that lack of being able to do do so. It takes a certain degree of commitment to learn Torah--no matter what-in order to succeed in this.[Like the event with R. Yochanan and his friend. The had no food, They and their families were in dire straits. They thought to leave sitting and learning Torah and to go and do business. Then R Yohanan heard behind the wall they were sitting at-The angels: "Let's push this wall over them since they are thinking of leaving learning Torah." R Yochanan heard them, The other did not,
So what seems to me is that the Gra was right and the fact that the religious world ignores his signature on the letter of the herem is what has caused to religious world to fall into idolatry and extreme wickedness.
22.2.22
Learning fast depends on self confidence that even if you do not think you understand, still the learning gets absorbed. This is certainly the point of Rav Nahman in his Conversation of Rav Nahman number 76.
This is well understood in Litvak Yeshivot where the afternoon session is devoted to learning fast. [The morning hours from 10:00 A.M. until 2:00 P.M. are for in depth learning.]
All this is well known. The only thing I wanted to add is that this applies to STEM learning also.
That is to review the whole Physics text from start to end, word by word a few times before going back to do in depth review. [And the different session of in depth learning should be like I heard in Shar Yashuv--to review each sub section ten times.] That could be for a paragraph or a chapter.]
I have not been reviewing the LeM of Rav Nahman recently, but if you look you will see many places in his book where he indicates that the hidden wisdom of God is contained in his works of Creation. I count not even count how many times Rav Nahman hints to this idea. So when you learn Math and Physics, you are learning God's wonders.
Now I think for the sake of clarity, the Rishonim who hold by this approach [who are certainly not the majority][That is mainly Ibn Pakuda and others that followed the approach of Saadia Geon. ] , still those that do hold from this also hold from MetaPhysics. But I have been reluctant to mention this part of their approach for the same reason, I never went into Philosophy myself (even though it interested me)--that is this: for the last 2500 years, Philosophy has not come up with one single solved problem. Zilch. And especially 20th Century philosophy was in total free-fall.
Why the Gemara does not use the opinion of Raba to answer the difficulty between the two gemarot Avoda Zara 23b and Rosh Hashana 13a
I was walking by the sea shore and it occurred to me why the Gemara does not use the opinion of Raba to answer the difficulty between the two gemarot avoda zara 23b and rosh hashana 13a.
The Gemara in Avoda Zara asks why did Israel have to burn the trees that were worshipped when they entered the Land of Canaan? After all the land was given to Abraham and אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו.["A person can not cause to be forbidden that which doesn't belong to him."]
Well, you might have answered like Raba that an idolater has acquisition in terms of money. So he does own the trees. [And the Gemara does not answer that. Why not?] אין לעכו''ם קניין בארץ כדי להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשר אבל יש לו קניין לגבי דיני ממונות--כגון לחפור בורות
And the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 13a asks, "How could Israel bring the offering from the grain they found in the Land of Canaan after they first entered. Did not that grain belong to the Canaanites?"
Well the simple answer might have been like Raba--that an idolater does not have acquisition in the land in terms truma and tithe!
The answer is this: If you hold an idolater has acquisition in Israel in terms of laws of money, but in terms of truma and tithe, then we have one more issue. There is an argument about this but one opinion is that if he has acquisition, then the land becomes not Israel and thus the truma is not truma anyway. [So you could not use this opinion of Raba. After all the grain does belong to the idolater--because the actual land is his unless bought back by a Israeli.]
___________________________________________________________________________________
I was walking by the sea shore and it occurred to me why the Gemara does not use the opinion of Raba to answer the difficulty between the two gemarot avoda zara 23b and rosh hashana 13a.
The גמרא in עבודה זרה asks why did Israel have to burn the trees that were worshipped when they entered the Land of Canaan? After all the land was given to Abraham and אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. Well you might have answered like רבה that an עכו''ם has קניין in terms of money. So he does own the trees. And the גמרא does not answer that. Why not? And the גמרא in ראש השנה י''ג ע''א asks, "How could Israel bring the offering from the grain they found in the Land of Canaan after they first entered. Did not that grain belong to the Canaanites?"Well the simple answer might have been like רבה that an עכו''ם does not have acquisition in the land in terms תרומה and tithe! The answer is this: If you hold an עכו''ם has acquisition in Israel in terms of laws of money, but in terms of תרומה and tithe, then we have one more issue. There is an argument about this, but one opinion is that if he has acquisition, then the land becomes not Israel and thus the תרומה is not תרומה anyway. So you could not have used that opinion of רבה to answer the question how could Israel use the grain to bring the עומר?
שואלת הגמרא בעבודה זרה מדוע נאלצו ישראל לשרוף את העצים שסגדו להם כשנכנסו לארץ כנען? אחרי הכל ניתנה הארץ לאברהם ואין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו. ובכן אולי ענית כמו רבה שלעכו''ם יש קניין מבחינת כסף. אז הוא הבעלים של העצים. והגמרא לא עונה על זה. למה לא? ושואל הגמרא בראש השנה י''ג ע''א איך יכלו ישראל להביא את המנחה מהתבואה שמצאו בארץ כנען לאחר שנכנסו לראשונה. האם התבואה הזאת לא הייתה שייכת לכנענים? תשובה פשוטה אולי הייתה כמו רבה שאין לעכו''ם רכישה בארץ בתרומה ומעשר! התשובה היא כזו: אם אתה מחזיק עכו''ם יש רכישה בישראל מבחינת דיני כסף, אבל מבחינת תרומה ומעשר, אז יש לנו עוד סוגיה. יש על זה ויכוח, אבל דעה אחת היא שאם יש לו רכישה, אז הקרקע הופכת להיות לא ישראל ולכן התרומה היא ממילא לא תרומה. אז לא יכולת להשתמש בדעה זו של רבה כדי לענות על השאלה איך יכלו ישראל להשתמש בתבואה כדי להביא את העומר?
All I am saying here is that the Gemara in both places is going like R. Elazar. And at least we know now why.
21.2.22
I mainly hope to walk in the path of my parents
I should make clear that I mainly hope to walk in the path of my parents, not just because of the commandment of, "Honor your father and mother," but because they were in fact great people. And the sages, in fact, deal with the [more common] issue when one finds that his or her parents are somewhat less than admirable.[See the Tur.] They hold that, "Honor your father and mother" is not a blank check. It just so happens, in my case that I had every reason to walk in my parents path, and to hold that that is what the Torah required of me.
But I was thinking about this the other day, and it occurred to me that just because one can not run a four minute mile, does not mean the one who does 4.5 is not also great. So even though the exact path of my dad was not really open to me, I think I could have still tried my best. [I imagine that I really could have gone to Cal Tech as he did if I had had the understanding of this being desirable. But in those days long ago, there was a general mood of specially going against one's parents as being the admirable thing.]
And even with all of that, I still believe that going to Shar Yashuv in NY, and then the Mir were great choices-- where I did learn authentic Torah. The only Torah that is worth learning. After all, one needs the real thing. Only later did it occur to me to make up for my deficit and go to Polytechnic Institute of NYU.
I want to add here a note about Musar. Though my parents had a clear idea of what it means "to be a mensch" [decent person], that is not obvious to most people like myself. That is why we all should learn Musar--the books on ethics from the Middle Ages. Otherwise we get it into our heads that our own obsessions constitute morality. The basic set of Musar is known but here I want to bring the basic titles שערי תשובה, חובות לבבות, מסילת ישרים,אורחות צדיקים [Gates of Repentance, Obligations of the Hearts, Paths of the Righteous, Ways of the Just]That is the basic group. There is always added a fifth but it is not clear what that fifth is. Some add the Sefer HaYira that is attributed to Rabbainu Tam. Some add the Sefer HaMidot. I would like to add the books of the Gra, the Geon of Villna, and of the disciples of Rav Israel Salanter.] (Altogether these give a clear idea of what it means to be a decent human being.)
The heart knows things that the head does not know. Rav Nahman pointed this out in the Le.M where he says what the heart says is the very word of God. [He brings a verse that shows this but I forget the verse.] I point this out because in my own case, my head has often deceived me about many important things that my heart knew much better and was screaming at me not to listen to my own ideas. [Rav Nachman says going after one's חכמות wisdoms is a very negative thing.]
20.2.22
q30 midi file [q30 nwc] [q30 mp3]This is not recent. It was written in 2015.I have decided to go back and look at old files to share. [I have not been writing anything new. Regrettably] r77 midi file [r77 nwc]
Gemara in Nida4side b. I was at the sea yesterday and there were a whole bunch of people that seemed to me to have that sense and aroma of Torah to be Litvaks
I was at the sea yesterday and there were a whole bunch of people that seemed to me to have that sense and aroma of Torah to be Litvaks and so I asked. They said they were. We got into a discussion and I said I often think about some difficult sugia/subject in Rav Shach while at the sea --but that I was ready to give up on that one I was thinking about for a while laws of what makes a bed and chair unclean 3:7 and laws of forbidden relations 9:3. Then somehow today it suddenly hit me.
It is this the Gemara in Nida4 side b says a stain is unclean retroactively because when she has a cycle sees actual blood not at the time of her cycle, she is unclean retro actively 24 hours. Rav Shach asked "what is the connection". I repeated this question on my blog without mentioning Rav Shach because at that time I had no idea what Rav Shach was saying at all. Now I not only see that this was in fact his question but I see his answer also. And here it is: There are two decrees. One is for a stain. Without a decree this would not even indicate anything because blood does not make a woman unclean unless it come with sensation. So just finding a stain would be nothing. So now we have a decree. But that is a decree that a stain is like seeing. And now we understand the Gemara in nida that ties seeing not at the time of her cycle with a stain. The reasoning is this: when she sees not at the regular time she is unclean back in time 24 hours and now that there is such a thing as being retroactively unclean by seeing actual blood it is therefore possible t make a decree that a stain also should have a law of being unclean retro actively. And that is 24 hours if she sees the stain not at the time of her cycle, and furthermore it goes back to the last time she checked even more than 24 hours if she has no cycle at all.
What got me confused was this last point, When is the stain a 24 hour thing and when does it go back further until the last time she checked.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are two תקנות. One is for a stain. Without a decree this would not even indicate anything because blood does not make a woman unclean unless it come with sensation. So just finding a stain would be nothing. So now we have a decree. But that is a decree that a stain is like seeing. And now we understand the גמרא נידה that ties seeing not at the time of her cycle with a stain. The reasoning is this: when she sees not at the regular time she is unclean back in time 24 hours and now that there is such a thing as being retroactively unclean by seeing actual blood it is therefore possible make a decree that a stain also should have a law of being unclean retroactively. And that is 24 hours if she sees the stain not at the time of her cycle, and furthermore it goes back to the last time she checked even more than 24 hours if she has no cycle at all.
יש שתי תקנות. אחת היא עבור כתם. בלי גזירה זה אפילו לא היה מעיד על שום דבר כי דם אינו מטמא אישה אלא אם כן בא בתחושה. אז רק למצוא כתם לא יהיה כלום. אז עכשיו יש לנו גזירה. אבל זו גזירה שכתם הוא כמו לראות. ועתה אנו מבינים את הגמרא נידה שקושרת לראות שלא בשעת מחזורה בכתם. הנימוק הוא כזה: כשהיא לא רואה בזמן הקבוע היא טמאה אחורה בזמן 24 שעות ועכשיו כשיש דבר כזה שטמאה רטרואקטיבית בראיית דם ממש אפשר אפוא לגזור שגם לכתם צריך להיות דין טמא למפרע. וזה 24 שעות אם היא רואה את הכתם לא בזמן המחזור, ועוד זה חוזר לפעם האחרונה שהיא בדקה אפילו יותר מ-24 שעות אם אין לה מחזור בכלל.
[Of course, you can imagine I was thrilled to see people following the Gra and Rav Shach. Their yeshiva is on that path because the rosh yeshiva is a student from Ponovitch. [And maybe a direct student of Rav Shach also. I did not get that part clear.]]
נפשו קשורה בנפשו that one person's soul can be connected to the soul of another person. This is a verse by Yaakov and Joseph. The fault is in that we have not valued this connection. Our mind have gotten in the way of our hearts.
In the West, this spiritual connection between fathers and sons is disparaged to the degree that ever father is portrayed in movies as evil.
I asked my learning partner what I can do for my children.
I asked my learning partner what I can do for my children. He suggested a Torah lesson in the book of Rav Nahman that says when the father repents on his sins, that sends thoughts of repentance into his children. And I am a sure that is true. But I would like to make a different suggestion that is based on the idea that the environment is important. This was an idea I saw --I forget where, but I think it was Socrates. The best thing one can do for his children is to make sure they grow in a decent society.
[I can see now that my leaving Mir [one of the greatest Litvak Yeshivot] was in a decision that was somewhat irresponsible. I might have been enthusiastic about Breslov, but I guess it never occurred to me that the straight wholesome Torah path of the Mir [or any Litvak Yeshiva] would have been better. Could I not see the difference? This of course does not imply any disparagement of Rav Nahman himself, but Breslov is quite different.
Normal white people are blamed for all the world's troubles
You can see that the South was right now that the blacks are taking revenge by trying to destroy the white race. This is exactly what the South predicted would happen. And I saw this a long time ago. The way things are in the USA, normal white people are blamed for all the world's troubles. How long will it take to then decide to get rid of them?
Still I must add here that the South must follow Robert E. Lee to the letter of what he said after the war: "We are all Americans." A woman who had lost her husband during the war had brought her two sons to the College where RE Lee was the president. He told he she must not instill a spirit of grievance towards the government of the USA,-- because, "We are all Americans."
I should mention that I understand one important idea of Robert E. Lee. It was if one is retreating, always make sure that your flank is stronger than at the actual battle. You see this at Gettysburg. Even at the retreat, General Meade knew not to attack Lee when he was retreating because he could see that Lee already had strong defensive positions in the hills sides to cover the retreat. At Antietam you see the same thing. Though McClellan was sacked because of not stopping the Confederate retreat, the fact is the north did attack and was welcomed by a hail of bullets that one Northern writer said that he had never seen the likes of. The air was thick with bullets. The South was even more dangerous in retreat than in battle.
19.2.22
Nixon said Americans believe what they see on TV. [Not what they see with their own eyes.]This might be compared to philosophers who spend a lot of time reading. They tend to get absorbed in that world of ideas and forget about the actual world.
But when I say in psalms "to speak of the wonders of God" I always think that the way God created the world -the amazing depths of Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, etc. are all part of God's wisdom.
In Physics you learn that no matter how logical a theory is, if it does not match reality, then it is wrong. Philosophers do not have to worry about that.
his war actually began in 2014 when the US State department backed a coup d’etat in the Ukraine to overthrow the democratically elected pro Russian leader Viktor Yanukovych and installed a pro-west leader in his place. The new pro-west Ukrainian leadership immediately began shelling and killing ethnic Russian separatists in the eastern part of Ukraine. The US immediately began sending arms (6 billion worth) to the new pro-west Ukrainian leadership to help them with their bombing campaign against their fellow citizens. They used these US weapons to kill 14000 ethnic Russians over the course of the last 8 years. Oh yeah, they also used a literal Nazi militia called the Azov battalion and officially incorporated them into their military. The US has literally armed and trained this literal Nazi militia which literally killed thousands of ethnic Russians.This is all known verifiable true information that professor Huemer somehow thought irrelevant.
Even Henry Kissinger has long warned that these actions by the US would lead to a Russian invasion of the Ukraine. This was all predicted. So why did the US do the thing that everyone with a brain knew would lead to a Russian invasion of the Ukraine? Follow the money. War is a racket.
Those $6 billion worth of weapons shipped to the Ukraine during the last 8 years were paid for by you, the US tax payer, and that 6 billion of your money lined the pockets of the American oligarchs (military industrial complex) who profit from war. Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Boeing, along with the banks and the energy companies.
The expansion of NATO is all about selling more arms. To join NATO, countries need to have a minimum level of military capability which none of the last 10 countries to join NATO had. They all had to buy the prerequisite NATO war equipment from the above mentioned war profiteers and the tax payers got the bill.
War is a racket. It is the quickest possible upward transfer of wealth known to man. This theory predicted this war and it also predicts how this will all play out and how it is already playing out. This war will be dragged on and on so as to expend the most possible war machine money. Western aligned countries will all buy arms from the private war profiteer companies using tax payer money and ship those arms to the “so brave” Ukrainian people to be used in a long drawn-out hopeless and un-winnable war.
This war could easily have been stopped before it started and it could easily be stopped now by diplomacy. Russia’s pre-war demands were extremely reasonable and easy to accommodate. The opposite happened because the military industrial complex wanted this war. This war is brought to you by capitalism. Don’t take my word for it. You can look all of this up for yourself. This is not some super secret hidden conspiracy theory. It’s all being done in broad daylight. Watch.