I did meet in the Ukraine some people that would have objected to Russian rule from Moscow. One was a very good friend that used to be a KGB agent. But even though he worked for the KGB, he was very much against Communism. And I used to discuss this with him at length. The other was my own landlord  who said is the Russian would ever show up he would shoot them. [He is a Tartar-very nice person, but still he recalled the transfer of the Tartars. That is why he was in Uman instead of his homeland. Stalin had seen in the Tartars a threat and so moved them to new areas.] (This explains also why Russians would shoot at civilians that are shooting at them.) The third person was a very nice girl I knew in the Student Dormitory where I was staying for about 7 years. She recalled to state induced famine of the 1930's. Another was a soldier who prided himself on having burned alive the Russian soldiers in Odessa. [That was a famous incident. He was staying in the dorm a few days before he returned to his hometown.]

I mention these exceptions because they are to my recollection the only four people that objected to the government being from Moscow instead of Kiev. 

Other than these, everyone I met thought things were better under Moscow rather than Kiev.

The idea of Rav Nahman not to be מחמיר חומרות יתירות [not to seek extra restrictions] shows what it is about the religious world tat is "off". For the religious world is always seeking new restrictions.

 If people ae not familiar with the Gemara, this might seems to in accord with Torah. But the extra restrictions of the religious are very often not necessary and sometimes made up fanaticisms. However the world of the Litvak yeshiva is much better in thus regard. 

 z52 music file 

 When I would discuss political issues with my learning partner, David Bronson, his answer was always along these lines: כל המקבל על עצמו עול תורה, מעבירים ממנו עול מלכות ועול דרך ארץ [When one accepts on himself the yoke of Torah, the yoke of the government an of work is removed from him.]Maybe at first it seemed e was just pushing me off but then I realized that he meant it. No one really cares what I think about any of the burning political issues that so much occupy pubic debate. The best I can do for myself and for others is to sit and learn Torah. In fact, I  noticed how easy it is to get all excited about issues that have nothing to do with me and no one cares what I think. Like it says in the verse: כאוחז באזני כלב כן המתערב בריב לא לו [Like one who grabs the ears of a dog, so is he who gets mixed up in a argument that is not his.]

 The West has been thinking of Russia as a nobody ever since the end of the Cold War. But by constantly poking at the Bear, the bear will eventually react. A wise policy would be to notice that the Ukraine has never been an independent state--ever. Not when the area was owned by Poland, nor under the  Romanovs. All you have is a population that feels and thinks Russian, and that other unfortunate part of Ukraine that has always been addicted to murder and crime. Without the firm rule of Russia, they have always been a terror even to Ukrainians. Even now they force the common people to acquiesce to the false profile  that is presented as freedom fighters. Ukraine is divided between the bullies and the bullied. And if the bullied speak up they lose their lives.

 I recall the Cuban Missile Crisis. My mom and dad took us kids along with them to look at buying some underground shelter. [Even though we lived on the West Coast.] And all through the 60's, 70'sand 80's the power and ability of the USSR was never in doubt. No one thought starting a war with the USSR was a good idea. Everyone thought peace and cooperation with Russia was the most important thing.

Why is it that now people think that they can keep on poking the bear without worry? One reason is the fact that Russian advance into Ukraine has been slow. But that does not signal weakness but rather the desire to reincorporate the Ukraine back into the orbit of Russia. There is no desire to ruin things, but to keep everything intact, but just have rule from Moscow.

And for years I asked people what they thought about how things were in the Ukraine as different from the time of the USSR.  This I asked from the women at the markets, from the owners of stores. From random people where ever I went in the Ukraine. And the answer was always the same. "Things were better then than now." [I.e. better under the USSR than the more recent governments.]]

I have been thinking about a a certain problem in the Rambam Laws of Lender and Borrower perek/chapter 19 law 8 for a while but have not come to any clarity.

The basic subject is this: You have a lender and borrower. The borrower sells  a field to a buyer. Then the lender writs to that buyer "דין ודברים אין לי עמך" "You have no obligations to me." Then that buyer sells the field to a second buyer.  Then if the if borrower does not pay the debt, the lender can go to the second buyer and take the field as a repayment of the debt. [This is the regular law of שיעבוד that any property owned by a person at the time of a loan is obligated to pay that loan even if he sells that property or gives it away. The lender can always go after it if there is nothing owned by the borrower.]  

The problem that I have is that then the first buyer can go and collect the field from the lender because he will have lost the money that he had to pay to the second buyer  because of the loss of the field to the lender. I do not see why the first buyer can go and collect the field from the lender, for the lender did not collect the field from him. All he wrote was, "I will not collect the field from you," and he didn't..

I noticed this subject in the Avi Ezri and it is also brought in the Chidushei HaRambam of Rav Chaim of Brisk but how they explain this is not clear to me. I was hoping that thinking about this while at the sea shore would help but so far I have zero ideas.

Baali Teshuva have discovered that the religious enticement by a show of family values is false.

 The age of disappointment. The religious world has made an impression that they are for family values. But this false. They are for power over secular Jews.. They might try to give this impression because the Conservatives have in fat tried to support family values in the face of the left trying to destroy the family. But that is the definition of cult--trying to bring in people to support their power structure by means of a lie and false claim if moral superiority.

In the West the family collapsed. So it made sense for the religious world to pretend to fill the gap. What I discovered was that the claim of the religious as being for family vales is a borrowed value from the Republicans..When they have a chance to destroy the families baali teshuva they do so.

The religious found it useful to use the fiction of support of family values by means of Shabat Table Judaism, the whole thing is Potemkin façade. They are trying to show a value they have borrowed from the Conservatives and Republicans.

 After high school, I went to Shar Yashuv in NY and then the Mir. I learned a lot from both the great rosh yeshiva in Shar Yashuv, Rav Naphtali Yeager and the rosh yeshiva of the Mir, Rav Shmuel Berenbaum.

But I was a wild card sort,  and could not stay put. So even when I tried to get back to the straight Torah path of the Litvak Yeshiva World, I did not manage to reinsert myself into learning Torah.

So I went instead to the Polytechnic Institute of NYU to major in Physics. Yet, I always have a tinge of regret that I did not just stick with the straight Litvak approach. And this actually reminds me of the events that led up to R. Yochanan [of the Gemara] becoming the great sage that he was. When a young man he was learning with his learning partner, and they were in extreme poverty. So they thought perhaps it was time to get up and find a job. They were at that time sitting by a wall. R. Yochanan heard the angels saying one to the other, "Let us knock this wall over them, because they are thinking of leaving off learning Torah to find work."   The other angel said, "No. Let's leave them alone because one of them will stick with it no matter what." R Yochanan heard this exchange, His learning partner did not. So R Yochanan stuck with learning while the other went out and became a business man.

 There is a lot of sort of dumb stuff going on, like many that think war with Russia is a good idea  but I think it is better not to comment on it because Rav Nahman said אף על פי שתוכחה היא דבר גדול ומוטל על כל אחד להוכיח את חברו כשרואה בו דבר שאינו הגון, אם כל זה לאו כל אדם ראוי להוכיח  Even though rebuke is a great thing and it is an obligation on everyone to rebuke their fellow man when they see in him something not proper, still, not everyone is fit to rebuke.

[This seems to be a difference between Rav Nahman and the Gra. To Rav Nahman the emphasis is to say nothing unless one is sure to help the situation by means of rebuke. To the Gra one at least has to say one time his or her opinion that what the other s doing is wrong.

 The very first Litvak Yeshiva I was at [Shar Yashuv in N.Y.] emphasized learning in depth along with lots of review. And recently I have noticed that this seems to be a  correct approach for me. I might go through a Tosphot or a piece in the Avi Ezri or the Chidushim of Rav Haim of Brisk and not understand a word even if I do it lots of times. The only way that I seem to be able to get the idea is when I go through it from beginning to end, and the next day I do it again and so on and so forth the next day--- and this might go on for weeks or a month.  I know this is not how anyone else learns, but this seems to work for me. 

And I noted this idea of review also in Mathematics and Physics. It seems to help if I do one whole section many times over a long period of time.

Later I was at the Mir for a few years and there the emphasis was a bit different with the afternoon being devoted to fast learning. There that was not just saying the words and going on, but it was fast in that one would do Tosphot a few times and then go on.

 z-53 music file

 I have been looking at the situation in the USA with woke-ism and it occurred to me at first thought to blame Paul. The reason is that he first introduced "no Torah law" [anti-nomianism] into Christianity  But then I took note of the Catholic Church which did try to keep Natural Law for centuries. And that is not so far in principle from Torah Law which also has this idea that the commandments are given with a purpose. Only in Torah Law there is an argument whether you go by the reason for the law דורש טעמה דקרא or by the law as stated [I recall this from Bava Metzia page 119 but it is a famous argument found all over the place.]

Still it is hard to imagine that things could have gotten so wrong without Paul introducing the idea of  no law anti-nomianism in the first place

The Torah and the religious world are opposites. This can be known by experience. But it is hard to know why? But if I can express the question clearly, perhaps that might go a long way towards gaining an understanding of the issue.  

The first thing to note is that there is an complicated process by which people people accept certain belief system, and it rarely has anything to do with their stated motives for it.

And these belief system interact. They do not exist in isolation. If the USA would  have been destroyed by wokw-ism, then other systems would not have a foot to stand on.

So to express the problem properly I would like to say what are the major principles of Torah. These are Fear of God, good character, learning Torah. Attachment with God  the Land of Israel. What does good character mean? The Torah goes into detail about this. For we know to desire the money of another is a terrible trait. Yet people still do it  and excuse themselves because they do not know the laws of Torah concerning what truly belongs to one and what does not.

The religious world on the other hand hand is tribal religion with group identity being the prime directive. But in that is the trap. For the Sitra Achra (Dark Side) disguises itself in mitzvot as Rav Nahman brings in the first chapter of the LeM. היצר הרי מתלבש במצוות The Evil Inclination is dressed in mitzvot. But it is all in order to destroy one. Thus we find that many times the very teachers of religion themselves are demons as we also see in the LeM of Rav Nahman concerning תלמידי חכמים שדיים יהודים 

 Torah scholars that are demons. The idea is this: there are people that want to serve God but do not know how. But because of their previous sins, even when they want to serve God, the Satan sets up religious teachers from the Dark Side

 z-54 midi file music file

I have a few principles that I try to stick with at all cost.  Part is because I think these are important in themselves, but also I believe that sticking with these basic principles  protects me from all pit-falls and unforeseen traps that life is full of. (1) Speaking the truth at all cost. (2) Not to touch that which does not belong to me. Not just not to steal, but not to have in my possession anything which does not belong tome according to "din Torah" the law of the Torah.  (3) To learn Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, The reason for his last one i that is somehow how things have worked out for me. If I would have a Gemara Bava Metzia or Bava Batra, then I would be doing that. Whatever comes under the category of authentic Torah is the main thing. The emphasis is on the word "authentic".

 A lot of my dad's career was spent trying to avoid WWIII with Russia. First there was the U-2 project which was commissioned by Eisenhauer specifically because we did not know what was going on in the USSR. After they had the A Bomb, and then the H-Bomb, some people in the Eisenhauer administration [e.g sec. of the Navy] thought to strike a pre-emptive strike first. Thank God, Eisenhauer thought that was a dumb idea. But we still did not know what was going on there. Maybe they were preparing a first strike against the West? No one knew. The only way to find out was to go and look. ,We could not just ask them. Thus was born the U-2 project. [After my dad's creation of the camera, he went to invent a super sharp copy machine and marketed that for 5 years.] Then the USA needed his expertise in making infrared satellites -mainly for the same reason--to see what was going on there after the U-2 flights over the USSR were impossible.

After those satellites were launched, they got him to create a system of laser beam communication between satellites. Even though this last one is a major achievement, the reason for it was mundane--simply it was so the Soviets could not eavesdrop on our communications.  All this took the major portion of my dad's professional life.

Here is my dad working on the U-2 project

 I wish I could remember the page in Tractate Avoda Zara where the issue of "joining" comes up. I just recall that the issue had to do with the fact that gentiles are not commanded concerning joining [i.e  joining the name of Heaven with another.] An example is brought in the Gemara there of Gideon "A sword to God and to Gideon". There you see Gideon himself joining the name of Heaven with his own name This the Gemara concludes is forbidden to a Israeli but allowed for gentiles.

Why is that page important? Because of the Tosphot there that brings up the issue of Christianity   and I thought it is such an important Tophot that I asked my learning partner to skip what we were doing at the time and instead concentrate on that Tosphot.

From what I recall Tosphot seems to have three different approaches there.

 On one hand I can see the point of the South. We see in Exodus that there are certain laws that apply to Jewish slaves.  Later on in Deuteronomy we find other kinds of laws that apply to gentile slaves. As for Jewish slaves, they must be let go after 6 years. Gentile slaves are not to be let go of, but they can be if their master wants to set them free. But some of the most interesting points are made later in the books of Solomon. אי ארץ כשעבד ימלוך "Woe to the land when a slave rules." 

 It so happens I was outside and met on the street a Na Nach fellow. I mentioned during our conversation an idea that I thought to bring here.- that I see the path of the Gra as the backbone while Rav Nahman I see as filling in the flesh and bones of Torah thought. For to get to the authentic drive and intensity of Torah one needs the Gra. You can see this in any Litvak yeshiva where the love of Torah hits you in the face the second you walk in the door. But Rav Nahman fills in a lot of what is missing in that approach..  

 "Rule of law" I think is shorthand for England where there is this long standing tradition of listening to pieces of paper [or parchment] like the Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford.  I mean to say that countries that derive from England tend to take the law as written very seriously.  In most other countries without English influence, the laws are laws as long as they are convenient.

Many Western Values [Principles of morality] are different from principles of morality of Torah. So what is the relationship?  What makes this question difficult is Western Values change constantly. People think their values are those of Reason but if they change every ten years, then they are not.

Now "Torah values"  are manipulated constantly also. So unless you can come to some bedrock layer, of certainty, that also does not provide a solid basis.  

In the two great Litvak yeshivot which I attended, it was thought that the one important principle is to "learn Torah"  [meaning the Old Testament and the Gemara] because Torah itself will correct false opinions. 

However to me Musar [the mediaeval books of Morality] seems to be the best approach--a synthesis of Faith a Reason that was worked out in painstaking detail during the Middle Ages. 

I was at the sea again and it occurred to me to mention that you see this approach of deriving morality by faith and by reason in the Obligations of the Hearts, Saadia Gaon, Rambam. The first to do this was Philo but you can see that his efforts were somewhat naive. The later Mediaeval approach makes a lot more sense. Now I should add that later people like Kant, Hegel, Jacob Fries, Leonard Nelson Michael Huemer    do not look towards faith to discover morality at all but only towards reason.

But I can not see reason as being such a great guide alone. Try that and you can end up with sophisticated systems like Marxism.

[Just one well known example is slavery. But while I tend to see the point of the North to some degree I think the woke movement shows that the South was right.] 

  

 There are people that routinely cause damage to others without deriving any benefit to themselves.  They do not even consciously think they are causing harm. They are much worse than thieves or similar criminal types. 

You might be vaguely aware of these types but you forget about it. 

And you might even pride yourself that you do not mind hanging out with lowliness. But you forget this very important principle. For these people consistently cause damage to others without gaining any benefit to themselves. It is not an accident, but a pattern.

Slowly imperceptibly you lose what ever good traits you have by hanging out with these types.

There is a sort of "evil inclination" that says to you you do not want to be a "baal gaava" [person with pride] so you hang out with low lives thinking you will bring them up or at least not lose. But that is exactly the trick. --To get you to hang out with people whose ultimate effect is to cause you to lower your standards of decency .

, the vast majority of people I met and talked with thought rule from Moscow was much better than from Kiev.

I think that it is better not to get involved in Ukraine. One thing is that, the more weapons sent to Ukraine, the more the conflict will be drawn out. And that will just make things worse for the average people on the street who do not care if the government is in Moscow or Kiev. Plus sending weapons will just begin to involve a war between the USA and Moscow. And that leaves the USA open to nuclear strikes which can be placed anywhere on the map. Is that worth it?

 And the whole approach of painting the Ukraine as saints  does not seem accurate. [I barely escaped.] 

Plus, the oddest fact is, in a city of about 100,000, the vast majority of people I met and talked with thought rule from Moscow was much better than from Kiev.

I recall this attitude even going back to the 1990's and up until I left in 2018. When I asked whether things were better then under the USSR or now? they always said, "Things were better then."Тогда дела обстояли лучше. And in one of the last incidents when I asked this, the shop owner explained how in the USSR you were given a a free house or apartment. You could swap it with someone else, but it was yours.

[That policy began under Khrushchev.]

 z-70 midi music file

z-70 in nwc format

 I gave upon understanding people along time ago. [In White Anglo Saxon {WASP} USA, I realized I did not "get it", when my girlfriend, Wendy Wilson at BHHS [Beverly Hills High School] invited me to a dinner with her parents. I was so out of place, it was painfully obvious.] But then being in Ukraine [Uman for Rosh Hashana], I just as equally poorly understood what was going on. The best I can say is that Ukraine is an equal mixture of saints and sinners.

And in my own understanding of what human life is all about, I discovered the great books of Musar.--that define two major things-Fear of God and good character traits. This helps me navigate my place in an increasingly confusing world.

Musar means four basic books: Gates of Repentance, Paths of the Just, Ways of the Righteous, Obligations of the Hearts.

In Torah good character is one of the main goals, but how to come to good character is the question. The first step is definitions. Then the actual working on it. 

 Even though there is such a thing as positive religious value, unless  it is tempered down with reason, it gets attached to the Dark Side. That is why in the Middle Ages, the connection between Torah and Aristotle and Plato was a major emphasis. Especially you see this in the Obligations of the Hearts and the Rambam.

There is such a thing as insane religious fanaticism --. Rav Nahman brings out this point on the verses before the giving of the Torah. פן יעלו בהר "Least they go up into the mountain." In Breslov this is refered to as "ריבוי אור"{ribuy or} "too much excitement" [literally: "Too much light"].

In the major book of Rav Nahman there is brought the fact that most religious leaders are demonic Torah scholars. That is in the LeM I1:2 and I:28. But this sort of problem has been around longer.

In the Five Books of Moses we find that Korah had a bunch of people with him [250] that were against Moses.  The Midrash says those people were the heads of the sanhedrins. [I mean to say that Moses had picked out judges to provide for small courts and larger courts of appeal. These very same people were the ones that later went against Moses.

I do would not trust religious authorities if they told me the sky is blue.

Nowadays if you want to know what the Torah requires of you there the best way of finding a good Litvak yeshiva based on the Gra and Rav Shach and sitting and learning there for a few years. There is a somewhat shorter approach by getting the basic set of Musar books [Ethics] from the Middle Ages plus learning the Tur with the Beit Yoseph and Bach. [The Tur was the son of the Rosh. His is the best book on law that I know of. It certainly helped me gain clarity about scores of issues.]

 

 I think "woke-ism"is on a mission to wipe out the white race from the face of the planet.  This is upsetting to me because I have great admiration for Western Civilization. [And I guess I have a certain compassion for others.] Nor do I see other cultures as being superior. On one hand I have always had great admiration for the Indians of the USA  in terms of the living off the land, and being in harmony with nature, but I also am aware of their wars one with another. [I tried recently to get an idea of the history of Ohio Indians.] I just do not see the way of painting everyone not white as lily white,- and all whites as black as demons  as being accurate. 

In fact I see everything about woke-ism as having one single objective that is approached from many different angles. First the perversion of Western Civilization, then the enslavement of the white race, then the final eradication of the white race as the final step..

 Chametz leavened bread is any one of the main five types of grain that has sat in water for more that 18 up until 24 minutes.  So if one takes pure oatmeal and makes boiled porridge, that is not chametz. And not only that but after one has made boiled porridge it can never become chametz. 

 There does not seem to be a good reason to seek for extra restrictions.לא דייך את מה שאסרה תורה? As the sages said:" It is not enough for you what the Torah has forbidden that you seek to find new things to forbid?] 

Temura 18. On the subject of the Passover Sacrifice. And if one sanctifies a female sheep for that purpose.

 The way Rav Shach sees things is that there are two different kinds of "pushing off" in terms of sacrifices.  That explains the law of the sages (against R. Elazar) that when one sets aside a female pregnant sheep for a passover, the baby sheep and mother must be put to pasture. [That is so even though in terms of a sin offering עובר לאו ירך אמו a fetus is not part of the mother. That is: if you sanctify a pregnant female sheep or cow or goat as a sin offering, she or her infant can be brought as a sin offering--but not both.] So this looks like a direct contradiction..

The answer of Rav Shach is  that  the Rambam goes like the opinion בעלי חיים אינם נדחים but in the case of the female sheep, the essence of the holiness is already pushed off. It is a different sort of being pushed off.

That is where he disagrees with Rav Isaac Zev Soloveitchik.  R.I.Z. wrote in order to answer for the Rambam that even though בעלי חיים אינם נדחים  still when one sanctifies a female sheep that is pregnant, the fetus is one sacrifice with the mother. Rav Shach asks on this. 

The regular case of pushing off is when a sheep is owned by two owners. and one sanctifies his half, then buys the other half and sanctifies that. The sheep can be brought as a sacrifice. That is obviously different from sanctifying a female sheep for a passover--which must be a male sheep. 

If you consider Rav Isaac Zev' answer, it does make some sense. But the answer of Rav Shach makes much more sense since it takes into account something apparently unnoticed by Rav Isaac Zev, these two kinds of "being pushed off".And besides that Rav Isaac Zev's way seems like just away of sneaking עובר ירך אמו into what is in fact the law that עובר לאו ירך אמו

 I found the religious world to be similar to Pangloss all talk. Talk the talk but not walk the walk. That is what in fact has provided a challenge to me in terms to of learning and keeping Torah.  For I found the religious world to be somewhat "cultish", that is partaking of all of the characteristic of small maniac religious Eastern  Cults, but simply more successful in term of numbers.  

In fact I had to study the cult of Adi Ad and Scientology for a while to be able to see what the religious world is really all about .--and it is not Torah. But that does not mean that there is no one that is not sincere and loyal to Torah, but it is not those making a song and dance about it.

The actual trouble with the religious world is not at all obvious to new comers- with tons of enthusiasm and idealism, but low on experience with fraudsters. If fact, the better the homes they were brought up in, the less of the ability to discern fraudsters they will have. That is part of the conundrum of human experience.

 [In short, joining the religious world is the same as joining the Adi Da cult or Scientology. The rituals are different but the essence is the same. ] 

to make clear my previous blog entry.  You have to bring a male sheep on the 14th day of the first month of Spring..[Roughly speaking, that is. The 15 day of that month has to come out in Spring, not the first day of the month.] But what happens if someone makes mistake and sets aside female sheep for his or her passover offering?  It is put to pasture and one waits until it gets a blemish, and then it is sold. With the money one buys and brings a passover, or if all this happens after passover then the money is used to buy a peace offering. [A peace offering is a sacrifice that some of the parts are given to the priests, but most goes to the owners. But it has to be eaten in Jerusalem for two days and one night.

The Rambam apparently contradicts himself in terms of עובר לאו ירך אמו [a sheep's fetus is not part of his mother.] Gemara Temura page 19

 The Rambam apparently contradicts himself  in terms of עובר לאו ירך אמו [a sheep's fetus is not part of his mother.]

For one one hand he writes When  a person who separates a pregnant sin offering (sheep, goats, or cows), the mother or the infant can be brought as a sin offering. Quite openly saying the law that עובר לאו ירך אמו  a fetus is not part of his mother. Yet in laws of Temura replacement he writes when one separates a pregnant female for a Passover sacrifice when she gives birth they both go to pasture until they get a blemish naturally, and then as sold and with that money a Passover offering is brought. Or if she gives birth after Passover, then both are sold for a peace offerings. The reason the for this last law is the exact opposite of the reason for the first law עובר ירך אמו a fetus is part of his mother.

[This last law is subject to a debate. R. Elazar says when one separates a pregnant sheep for a Passover, if she gives birth before Passover, the infant is brought as a Passover sacrifice and the Gemara says the reason for R Elazar is עובר לאו ירך אמו [a sheep's fetus is not part of his mother. So we see the sages hold עובר ירך אמו a fetus is part of his mother.

[Contradictions of this kind are very common in the Rambam and that gives plenty of folder for debate as to why. (Mainly held the best idea is to go with the simple approach of the Gemara like the Rosh. But others have tried to find explanations for these contradictions to the Gemara that you see in the Rambam all the time. ) Mainly the idea that Rav Shach brings is the mother and fetus are possible sin offerings. While in the case of the female separated for a passover sacrifice, the mother is obviously not going to be a passover --the passover must be a male. Okay--that makes some sense. The problem is if  עובר לאו ירך אמו [a sheep's fetus is not part of his mother then why should this matter?  Even if the holiness that descends on the mother is a pushed off holiness (only applicable in terms of money) still fetus should be a regular passover sacrifice just as when sets aside a male sheep for holiness of money, still automatically it becomes set for a regular sacrifice.   

I am hoping to go "vitter" further to the next sugia, but ust for a last note, it seems Rav Shach does agree with this idea that since the holiness that devolves on the mother is pushed off, that make the born sheep also not fit for a sacrifice. I noted tat he brings one of the Baali HaTosfot as a proof to this. 

It looks like I am clocking out. However סוף דבר הכל נשמע את האלוהים ירא ואץ מצוותיו שמור כי זה כל האדם The end of all things, after everything has been heard,, Fear God and keep his commandments, for that is all of a man.  Which in itself seems to indicate the importance of the path of the Gra-that of straight Torah.

Sadly I was not able to stick with this but I still can recognize its importance. 

But you can ask if Fear of God is the main thing, then why not emphasize Musar? The answer is I think there is a limit of how much Musar can help. That is the Law of Limited Returns. Probably it is best to concentrate on Gemara, Tosphot and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach.

 T 47  t47 mp3   t47 nwc

One of the great Musar books Gates of Repentance

There are four major things that I can see I did wrong in hindsight. Leaving the Land of Israel, and the advice of Rav Nahman of Brelov, the kind of devekut [attachment with God] that I had while I  was in Safed. and the path of my parents.

This is important because, I decided that I would not try to see where my mistakes were based on books but rather based on what I saw that lead to terrible consequences.

So this awareness of my sins helps me to keep my focus on not repeating the same mistakes.

One of the great Musar books Gates of Repentance helped me to see the importance of discovering what mistakes I have done. But to actually determine the exact sins, takes a lot more that just picking out what at first glance might seem to be wrong.

 There is clearly some sort of obligation to walk in the ways of one's parents, [note 1] but it hard to know how far this goes-especially in cases where one's innate talents are not the same as one's parents. And Western society in definitely based on the idea of one finding his or her talents and going in that direction.  Nor is there any concept in the West of doing both. Rather the way the West works in one person for one job. So how does one decide? I myself was in this sort of predicament, not having the same set of talents as my father. But I have tried somehow to walk the fine line between  the areas where he excelled [STEM] and my own interests Gemara, and Tosphot.

So what comes out for me is more or less along the lines of Torah with Derech Eretz/work. A Balance between Physics and Math and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach  But I admire the great Litvak sages like the Gra, and Rav Shach who were able to devote all their time to Torah learning. Just that I never managed to succeed in that direction for reasons unknown tome.

[note 1] If you do not walk in the path of your parents, you are dishonoring them by definition.

But war is no answer. Rather the USA must say to both sides that they must sit down together and negotiate a peace deal.

The people of Ukraine were extremely kind to me. In the end I had to get back to Israel, but I feel that sticking up for the Ukraine makes a lot of sense. There might be some hot heads, but the vast majority of people there really have great hearts and a spirit of kindness.

But war is no answer. Rather the USA must say to both sides that they must sit down together and negotiate a peace deal.  [This is not my original idea. I heard it on a Tom Woods program. But I present it here because it makes a lot of sense.

the Litvak world is right about the primary importance of learning Torah,

 Even  though I feel the Litvak world is right about the primary importance of learning Torah, תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם that is not to say that I had the greatest time in the Litvak world. The best idea is not to put anyone on a pedestal. The admirable thong about the Litvak world the refusal to admit all of the false doctrines that people claim for Torah are true. Thankfully, they are insistent about straight Torah. But being human means that they do not always [or even very often] measure up to the standards of Torah. Even the roshei yeshivot are flawed human beings -as are the rest of us. But still they refuse to let in all the many insanities  of the religious world.

In every discipline there is the authentic true way, and the host of armies of falsehood that surround it that pretend to authenticity even though they are phonies- pseudo Torah.

This problem could have been avoided if people had been aware of the signature of the Gra on the famous letter of excommunication. But due to lack of faith in the wise, that is ignored

There is a series of positive values, and in every area of value there is a Sitra Achra-a Dark Side which imitates that value, but in fact just to to use the real to justify the phony  however I admit that I think of Rav Nahman as a great tzadik and this approach of the Gra should not be taken as a criticism of him.

[Even though learning Torah is an obligation on everyone,  this is often misunderstood. The Rambam wrote "Just as one is not allowed to add or subtract from the Written Law, So one is not allowed to add or subtract from the Oral Law." So only the books of the sages of the Mishna and Gemara count as "Torah". But I should also mention that learning these books counts as learning Torah, so when one learns Tosphot he is "learning Torah" 

I might mention here that i just noticed today a few books that have come out in the litvak world that are pretty good. I only asked my son Izhak at the end of his life to send to me the Avi Ezri, but now I see there are some other really great books out there-- the Birchat Shmuel, the Kehilat Yaakov by the Stipler, Even Haazel, and even nowadays there seem to be some pretty decent roshei yeshiva. Of course these are all along the lines of Reb Chaim of Brisk. But I do miss my great learning partner David Bronson whose path in learning is more along the lines of an electron microscope, but I have not been able to get to that kind of depth myself, nor have I seen any book that approaches that kind of depth. Still these other books in the Litvak world are very impressive. [i tried to capture some of the depththat i saw in david bronson  in my little book on bava metzia and also my other book on shas, but nothing can compare to hearing it from the first source]  

Gitin page 47. The way the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam.

 It is a startling fact that I realized on my way to the sea.  It is this, the meaning of יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes)[i.e., if he owns land in Israel, that land is not obligated in truma and tithes.]] is an argument between Tosphot and the Rambam-as far as the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam. For in Gitin page 47 we have the argument if יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) or if not. The way Tosphot understands this is that even an idolater can have possession of land in Israel still, that does not make it not Israel anymore. And the Rambam might agree. But the way the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam, if the law was that an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes, that means the land itself becomes not Israel [and has to be reconquered]. How do you see this? In this way: the Rambam says if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel but when the Israeli buys it back, the land is obligated in truma and tithe. The Keseph Mishna comments on this: Even though it seems in many places in Shas that the law is יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) still the Rambam holds that is not the law. Or that that is the law only when the land is in the possession of the idolater. So we see the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam to mean that the opinion יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel

 גיטין דף מ''ז The meaning of יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות  is an argument between תוספות and the רמב''ם,  as the כסף משנה understands the רמב''ם. For in גיטין דף מ''ז we have the argument if יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות or if not. The way תוספות understands this is that even an idolater can have possession of land in Israel still, that does not make it not Israel anymore. And the רמב''ם might agree. But the way the כסף משנה understands the רמב''ם, if the law was that יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות, that means the land itself becomes not Israel [and has to be reconquered]. How do you see this? In this way: the רמב''ם says if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel but when the Israeli buys it back, the land is obligated in תרומה and tithe. The כסף משנה comments on this: Even though it seems in many places in ש''ס that the law is יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות still the רמב''ם holds that is not the law. Or that that is the law only when the land is in the possession of the idolater. So we see the משנה understands the רמב''ם to mean that the opinion יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel

\

גיטין דף מ''ז הפירוש של יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות הוא ויכוח בין תוספות לרמב''ם, כפי שמבין הכסף משנה את הרמב''ם. כי בגיטין דף מ''ז יש לנו את הטיעון אם יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות או אם לא. הדרך שתוספות מבינים זאת היא שאפילו שעובד אלילים יכול להחזיק בקרקע בישראל, זה לא הופך אותה לא להיות ארץ ישראל יותר. והרמב''ם אולי יסכים. אבל איך שהכסף משנה מבין את הרמב''ם, אם החוק היה שיש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות, זה אומר שהארץ עצמה הופכת לא להיות ישראל [וצריך לכבוש אותה מחדש]. איך אתה רואה את זה? באופן זה: הרמב''ם אומר אם עובד אלילים קונה קרקע בישראל זה לא הופך האדמה לא להיות ישראל אבל כשהישראלי קונה אותה בחזרה, חייבת הקרקע בתרומה ובמעשר. הכסף משנה מעיר על כך: למרות שנראה בהרבה מקומות בש''ס שהדין יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות עדיין הרמב''ם קובע שזה לא הדין. או שכך הדין רק כשהארץ ברשותו של עובד האלילים. אז אנחנו רואים שהכסף משנה מבין את הרמב''ם שהדעת יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות אם עובד אלילים קונה קרקע בישראל האדמה לא הופכת לא ארץ ישראל.

When I was in need, it was never the people I had thought would be for me. Rather it was always the Ukrainians that came to help me.

 On my first Rosh Hashanah in Uman the fellow I was sharing a room [note 1] with left to go pray at the ziun but I was very sick. For some reason, the stress and strain of the trip go to me and i had a high fever and could barely move. Still the fellow I was with could not have cared less. It was specifically the Ukrainian owners of the apartment that looked and saw I was sick and brought medicine and food for me. 

This is just one incident of many along these lines, but I thought I should at least write down one event like this to let people know, that I found the people in Ukraine to be exceptionally kind to me.  

When I was in need, it was never the people I had thought would be for me. Rather it was always the Ukrainians that came to help me.  

Friends I had in Ukraine were real friends--people i could rely on in all circumstances. And this was not just friends be just ordinary people. So I would like to suggest that the Ukraine ought to be supported.

 Even the criminal elements were never that criminal. But I had to leave to get back home to Israel. But i still have fond memories of the amazing people that I met in Ukraine.  

[note 1] The room was in  a large apartment building right next to the grave of Rav Nahman 

I was at the beach and ran into Ronen, a friend who often swims a mile a day. He mentioned some of the difficulties that people face and I said, "At the Mir and Shar Yashuv they held There is no answer except to learn Torah."  And that I believe they are right. But I did not add the Rambam's opinion about Physics and Metaphysics.

Torah however is not all the nonsense that people spout out as Torah. It is the Old Testament and Gemara.