Muslims are obstacles to peace

I noticed on a blog  a letter from Germany about the problems with Muslims. You have an incident when a Muslim woman just walks up to a policeman in Germany and stabs them in the neck with no warning. What is odd about this is people in Israel have been going through this kind of insanity for 60 years with no sympathy from anyone. You would imagine that today people would have more sympathy for what Jews have gone through with Muslims. But no. Whom gets the blame for Muslim violence? Jews, of course!

I was actually there at such an incident. Besides the constant weekly suicide bombing of Jews in Jerusalem, I also experienced a lot of personal attacks, and also witnessed many attacks.
There was one incident just like that one in Germany that I remember- of a Muslim just walking up to a police officer and stabbing them without even saying, "hello."
Not that Jews got any sympathy from this. On the contrary. Even the Israeli media always referred to these kinds of incidents as "obstacles to peace." [As if these were just minor insignificant events!]

Even a Jewish woman in NY, when I mentioned this kind of thing to her, said "Well, they must have gone through a lot to be driven to such violence."

So ever since I stated blogging, I never referred  to this kind of thing. I figure, people are born  hating Jews. It is in the human DNA, and nothing I can say will change that.
If Jews are attacked by Muslims, then according to people, we deserve it. If people are attacked by Muslims, then Jews are at fault.
Where I saw this letter the comments were referring to some Zionist conspiracy, or other kinds of Jewish world take-over types of ideas.  But I did not pay much attention because these kinds of opinions are very common nowadays in the USA Germany and Russia. World takeover? I'd rather sit and learn Torah.
And in terms of how the world ought to be? Frankly, I thought normal American Wasp [White Anglo Saxon Protestant] society was pretty good.  Now I do realize there are lots of leftists and Marxists that are joining together to destroy decent Wasp society. But that is not a Jewish conspiracy. There are plenty of ordinary white people that are trying to take down the USA and Western civilization. But these are Marxist and Islamic conspiracies , not Jewish ones. But that is not the point for most people. They really just don't care about Western civilization. The main thing is to blame Jews whenever things don't work. If Americans would really care about Wasp society, they would not have an Islamic president. If Germany really cared about Western civilization, they would not invite the Islamic invasion.

Ideas on Bava Metzia page 14

Ideas in Shas  Ideas in Bava Metzia ch 8 and ch 9

In בבא מציעא we find that the רב said that in a case where one has bought something from a thief and the property returns to  the owner, that the buyer  gets the money he paid for it from the thief and the improvement also. רש''י explains that this is a case in which the original property was already improved and the thief damaged the property. So the original owner is getting back the property with zero improvement.  תוספות explains that the case is simply that the property was empty and the buyer improved it, and so when רב says the גנב pays back the שבח, it is a simple case of his giving back the improvement, and the original owner gives back the investment to the buyer.

The idea of תוספות is that this is not any different from a case where a person goes into someone else's field and plants it. In such a case the owner pays the הוצאה, או את השבח which ever is less.
This all seems simple and plain. Now this is also the way the פני יהושע understands this and it seems like there is no need of any explanation.

The problem here arises when we look at בבא קמא page צ''ה ע''ב. It looks like this entire subject in בבא מציעא is going according to the opinion of רבי מאיר over there, and against רבי יהודה and רבי שמעון. That seems absurd on the face of it.   רבי מאיר is the one person who holds that improvement goes back to the original owner with the stolen object, not רבי יהודה or רבי שמעון. But if you try to explain the subject in  בבא מציעא as if it was going like the law in בבא קמא , you encounter major problems. Some of these problems were noted by the פני יהושע, but there is  a  question  that seems to me to be even more powerful that the questions the פני יהושע raised. The fact is that שמואל is the person that argues with רב in בבא מציעא דף י''ד and he says  the buyer does not get back the improvement. If you try to explain this according to רבי יהודה it makes no sense. Of course he does not get back the improvement  because no one took it from him in the first place!
In short, the whole subject in  בבא מציעא seems to be going completely like רבי מאיר and we know from עירובין that this is simply impossible. When there is an argument between רבי מאיר and or רבי שמעון with רבי יהודה the law always is like רבי יהודה.

) בבא מציעא דף י''ד. בבבא מציעא אנו מוצאים כי רב אמר כי במקרה שבו אחד קנה מגרש מגנב ואחרי  חזרת הרכוש לבעלים, שהקונה מקבל את הכסף ששילם עבור אותו מגרש מהגנב ואת השיפור גם. רש''י מסביר כי מדובר במקרה שבו הנכס המקורי השתפר ביד הקונה אחר שהגנב היזק את הרכוש. אז הבעלים המקורים מקבלים בחזרה את הנכס עם אפס שיפור. תוספות מסביר כי במקרה הוא פשוט כי הנכס היה ריק והקונה שפר אותה, ולכן כאשר רב אומר הגנב משלם בחזרה את השבח, זה מקרה פשוט של  חזרת השיפור לקונה שעשה את השיפור,  והבעלים המקוריים יחזירו את ההשקעה לקונה. הרעיון של תוספות הוא שזה לא שונה מכל מקרה שבו אדם נכנס לשדה של מישהוא  ונטע הצמחים. במקרה כזה בעלים משלם את ההוצאה, או את השבח איזה שהוא פחות. כל זה נראה פשוט ורגיל. עכשיו זה גם האופן שבו הפני יהושע מבין את זה. הבעיה כאן מתעוררת כאשר אנו מסתכלים על בבא קמא דף צ''ה ע''ב. זה נראה כמו כל הנושא בבבא מציעא הולך לפי דעתו של רבי מאיר שם, ונגד רבי יהודה ואת רבי שמעון. זה נראה אבסורדי על פניו. רבי מאיר הוא האדם היחיד אשר גורס כי שיפור חוזר לבעלי המקורי עם החפץ הגנוב, לא רב יהודה או רב שמעון. אבל אם אתה מנסה להסביר את הנושא בבא מציעא כאילו שזה הולך כמו החוק בבא קמא, אתה נתקל בבעיות גדולות. חלק מהבעיות הללו צוינו על ידי הפני יהושע, אבל יש שאלה שנראית לי להיות אפילו יותר חזקה  מן השאלות שהפני יהושע הרים. העובדה היא כי שמואל הוא האדם שמתווכח עם רב בבבא מציעא דף י''ד והוא אומר הקונה אינו מקבל את השיפור. אם אתה מנסה להסביר את זה על פי דעתו של רבי יהודה זה לא הגיוני. כמובן שהוא לא נחזיר את השיפור כי אף אחד לא לקח את זה ממנו מלכתחילה! בקיצור, כל הנושא בבבא מציעא נראה שהולך לגמרי כמו רבי מאיר ואנחנו יודעים בעירובין כי זה פשוט בלתי אפשרי. כשיש ויכוח בין רבי מאיר לבין רבי שמעון או עם רבי יהודה החוק תמיד הוא כמו רבי יהודה. יש לומר יש חילוק בין מגרש לחפץ המיטלטל.

For some reason this whole piece was not in either book as far as I could tell so I put it into the Ideas on Shas just now Sept 7  2016. I can't remember if there was some reason I left it out.

After thinking about it it occur to me I might have left it out because it seems trivial.

The literal meaning of Torah פשט הפשוט

The idea of going straight to the Torah [the Five books of Moses and the Old Testament]  is not a bad idea. I think a lot of doubts can be settled that way.This does not mean there is not a need to solve contradictions. Contradictions in metaphysical reality seems to be part of the nature of reality as Kant saw.

What we see in practice is a lot of what goes on is contrary to the Law of God but people have ways of excusing  it by finding some verse that they say is ambiguous and making a explanation that contradicts the plain meaning of the text. The reason is people are attracted to the ugly and profane and sexual sin and want to hear that it is OK and so find some verse to support them.

It seems that Saul was in fact interpreting the word of God.  It was not the same as simple disobedience.

If you look at the actual verses it seems Saul thought he had obeyed the word of God because that is how he interpreted  it. It was not simple disobedience. It was first- interpret. And then to imagine that  he fulfilled it.

I would like to name  this sin, "the sin of interpretation." חטאת הפירוש

The group that the Gra put into excommunication is poison.

The group that the Gra put into excommunication is poison.

The toxicity is in the dosage.  When children are constantly inundated with this, the overall effect will be noticeable.  They internalize this as the new normal.

So why are they doing this?

Part of the reason is that religious teachers hate you.  You, the stupid  masses that do whatever you are told, and never question; they despise you in the same way that a rapist hates his victim.  Your unguarded mind is too tempting for them to resist (or so they tell themselves) and it’s your fault for making them do it.

Another part of the reason is that it works.  Every single one of you is a fallen creature in love with sin.  You lust after ugly pornography, you live  through  antiheroes, and deep down you want to rebel against the reality God made. 

So while a Litvak yeshiva  showing off how delicious learning Torah is might raise awareness, its impact is going to fall short of a group that subtly implies something subversive, dark, and sinister.  Part of you loves things that are twisted; they’re just giving you what they want. It is the same reason the group of the Shatz was so successful. You want sin, and you want to be told it's OK.

In the Middle Ages the point of Christian scholarship was to iron out the contradictions plus work out the problems of theology based on the Neo Platonic school.  One such problem was Divine simplicity. The way this was done by Boethius was mainly to stick to Neo Platonism. This was serious work and was not made irrelevant by subsequent people, nor Martin Luther.  The Jewish world faced a similar problem. To iron out the contradictions and meaning of the OT and in the Talmud. Plus similar problems in Theology. In any case, all this is based on one idea. There is no essential contradiction in the word of God. What Protestants do is to ignore all these problems. If a certain verse appeals to one, then he or she grabs it and that is that. Divine simplicity never bothers Protestant at all. All the problems facing the Middle Ages were simply swept under the carpet, not answered.


As about a thousand years of trouble with Divine simplicity did not get very far, Aquinas simply  went to Aristotle following Maimonides.This was very helpful as far as Divine simplicity was concerned but made other problems. Kelley Ross thinks the problems with Aristotle are so great that the logical thing to do was to go back to Plato. [Not that Aquinas or Maimonides could have done that since they were busy working out their system. But later on people when they saw the problems could have simply gone back to a Neo Platonic approach. But in the West that is not what happened. People went into a far more radical empirical-ism than that contemplated by Aristotle. So the Western Judaic Christian  world tends to be pretty secular.
[Dr. Kelley Ross: However, a stricter empiricism again creates the difficulty that the apparent "form" of an object cannot provide knowledge of an end (an entelechy) that is only implicit in the present object, and so hidden to present knowledge.
Curiously, the reaction to this was not immediately a new Platonism or Neoplatonism, but a more extreme empiricism:  The Nominalists overcame the Aristotelian difficulty by rejecting Realism altogether.]


My own feeling about all this is the to learn the Oral and Written Law and take a Neo Platonic approach. I do not think Aquinas was very successful in answering the Divine simplicity problem. Or rather let me say I think the Rambam did a better job by simply sticking with Aristotle and the First Cause. Though I can appreciate the efforts of Aquinas and what he did for natural law but in terms of the NT I think he was simply trying to do the impossible. As long as Paul is part of the NT there can not be any way to get him to correspond to the OT

I have thought that the Left will use violence to stop Trump because of two reasons. (1) Power is their religion. That is they do not have transcendental traditional religious values. Thus they bring to politics all the fervor you would normally find in religious fanatics. (2) I have some interest in Marxism and am aware of some of its doctrines. See some Marxist writings and you too will see that  the tendency is to advocate violence. Plus I saw that these kinds of books were being taught even in the humanities and social studies departments of good universities that I was in like Polytechnic in NY. So in terms of that I have to agree with the previous comment.

See the links to Marx and Hegel on the internet and you will see what I mean

Lithuanian yeshivas

I was thinking in high school that  I did not want to join the rat race and instead wanted to seek for the truth. I am grateful that I was in two very wonderful Lithuanian yeshivas, Shar Yashuv and the Mir in NY. I am eternally grateful to God for guiding my steps towards authentic Torah.





Here are some ideas [not my own] that I saw on a blog called Amerika  and actually reflect closely my own thoughts on jobs and work.

___________________________________________________________________________
Often jobs are not actually work and produce nothing of value and often produce the opposite of value e.g. psychologists generally ruin people's sanity and get paid for doing so. 

In  jobs,  little of worth is done. This occurs because most of the assigned activities are pro forma or make believe -work. Most business activities are ill-advised or irrelevant, through the creation of regulatory law.


 In traditional work, the individual learns how the world works and applies himself or herself to tasks and achieving mastery. 

Jobs do the opposite. Jobs reward appearance, not actuality, except in a few rare cases. Even in professional fields, the goal is to keep abreast of what others have done and do the same in a certain specific case, and accountability occurs only when one deviates from the commonly accepted practice, even if results are bad. Doctors lose patients, lawyers loses cases, and architects design junk all the time but so long as these are competitive with what others have established as “safe” minimums, no consequences attach.
_______Here are my thought about this: So what I recommend instead is Torah with Derech Eretz. That is to learn the Oral and Written Law {Old Testament and Gemara and Musar} and that one's work should not be to make money but rather to make something of value and learn somethings of intrinsic value. 
Many in the the Modern religious world value jobs for the sake of money, and that makes no sense to me. Others value Torah only if they can make money from it and that makes even less sense to me. [I have actually heard this from people that were in a kollel. That showed me that there are people that really use the holy Torah as  a means to make money. This to me is really shocking. Even many years later I find this attitude to be extremely vile. ]

s1 D Minor

s1 D Minor Edited. In the final part I used an idea of Mozart to end with 6-8 time

s1 d minor midi file'

s1 D minor nwc file

If it leaves behind it a trail of human trash then you know it is a cult.

My feeling is that the excommunication  {Cherem } that the Gra signed would be valid even if it was not based on objective reality. Besides that I think it did reflect objective reality. That is to say when he identified the groups he put into Cherem [excommunication] with the Sitra Achara [the Dark Side], I think he was correct. Sadly enough I am basing this on evidence and study over a period of many years.

Part of the problem is idolatry. Another aspect of the problem is the claim that their idolatry is in accord with the Law of Moses.  That is a kind of fraud.


I did a great deal of study on this, which is sad- because if I had been smart, I simply would have accepted what the Gra said, and not have wasted years. But the human ruin that that movement leaves behind it ought to give any decent person pause. If it leaves behind it a trail of human trash, then you know it is a cult.

  I am very well aware of their doctrines and teachings. Have nothing to do with them at all. Do not go to their place on Shabat and don't read their books. It is pure Sitra Achra.


  This is why understanding the cultural assumptions tells you a whole lot about the trajectory a culture is on. It’s also important to realize some people can change a culture for generations by either positive or negative actions, given their place. 

But some ask, why did the Gra put a Cherem [excommunication] on the whole movement when not everyone was bad? The answer is that poison got mixed up into it. What if I tell you, " Here’s a box of candy. One of them is poisoned with Ricin, but don’t mind that. Enjoy." Would you eat any?

The laws of Cherem are strict. One that ignores them is also under Cherem. There are difference between types of Cherem and Niduy, but in case of fact the cherem is the most strict. And it does mean one can't sit within four yards of the person nor learn Torah from them.


If others ignore these laws that does not make them invalid.

If one ignores the cherem it is guaranteed he will become infected

It is a kind of deflecting people's interest in fear of God and to redirect it into something that destroys their sanity. While fear of God is a good thing and ought to be pursued by means of learning books of Musar [Mediaeval Ethics], still this desire to be right with God can be hijacked.

To a large degree this happened with me. I was at the Mir in NY and often instead of learning Musar I would learn books from that cult thinking that qualified as Musar.

It took me a long time until I starting noticing the poison contained in them. I needed experience with that cults and also to see the books from the Shatz cult to see from where many of the doctrines were coming from. It would have been better if the Litvish Gedolim [the great Roshei Yeshiva of Lithuanian Yeshivas] had been aware of this from the beginning and warned others, instead of my having to make my way through that filth.

Socrates:

Thoughts on Socrates:

(1) I think some things in human life are constrained. To me it seems Socrates had to do what he had to do and his end had to be the way it was.

(2) It has been argued that  Socrates could have argued that not all laws are created equal. Some laws are for expedience. Some are  expressions of natural law. Some laws are unjust.

(3) Also, I should mention that Socrates was not just bothering the leading citizens of Athens, but  among his followers were people that were traitors to Athens. The court might have been aware of this.

Marriage

It was easy when the rules and obligations were spelled out. This is what I found. When both the husband and wife know exactly what is expected. That is at least what I discovered. But it gets difficult when others stick their noses into your business. Especially psychologists and others that are supposed to be helpful.Religious teachers especially are to be avoided as they are experts at home wreaking. Traitors to Torah.
They are a separate category from those who learn  Torah for its own sake--not for money. 

"Transgender"

"Transgender" comes from the idea that people think reality is a social construct That is why it is best to throw out the social studies and humanities departments in universities.

People that were responsible should not have let pseudo science be called science. STEM just have been called science and everything else should have been called "fraud" or some other appropriate name.

Philosophy departments also tend to be trash.

Wittgenstein's naturalism reduces even science to word game behaviors that do not refer to objects and are not justified by facts.
Psychologists especially ought to be put into some garbage bag and thrown out.

Torah with Math and Physics and Aristotle's Metaphysics is my approach in a nutshell. That means simply to get through the basic Oral and Written Law word for word, plus math up to Algebraic Topology and Abstract Algebra and string theory plus the actual sets of books, The Metaphysics  of Aristotle. [Oral Law is the two Talmuds,  Sifra Sifri the Rambam with Rav Shach's Avi Ezri]
Say the words דרך גרסה in the way of just saying them and going on, with no repeats.

I would like to defend this approach but for right now I thought it is enough to at least state it in a simple straightforward way.

Source for Math Physics Metaphysics is Rambam (Maimonides), and  the Musar book, Obligations of the Heart.
Source for just saying the words and going on in the Talmud לעולם לגרס אינש אע''ג דמשכח ואע''ג דלא ידע מאי קאמר.

(The Lithuanian yeshiva world has a lot of this right, but the nepotism hurts it. It is  purported to be a meritocracy. But that seems to be not the case. Mostly the perks are  for family members only. The fact that the State gives money to yeshivas which are nothing more than private club houses with no learning Torah hurts the entire system.]

Feminism is hatred of Western Civilization [Comment on Dalrock]

1. 
   
2. link
3. The entire basis of Feminism is hatred of Western Civilization, and in the context of Feminist ideology, hatred of White men. Don’t believe me? Take it from arch-Feminist/Lesbian/Jewess Susan Sontag,

   “If America is the culmination of Western white civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something terribly wrong with Western white civilization.[…]

   […]The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself. What the Mongol hordes threaten is far less frightening than the damage that Western “Faustian” man, with his idealism, his magnificent art, his sense of intellectual adventure, his world-devouring energies for conquest, has already done, and further threatens to do….”

   From Susan Sontag’s collection of essays, ‘Styles of Radical Will’, 1969. Link:https://books.google.com/books?

   IMO, this is the veritable ‘Rosetta Stone’ of the Left. Feminism, Marxism, Post-Colonialism, LGBTnXYZ, Black Nationalism, MultiCulturalism, et al. All of it is about a visceral, obsessive hatred of the Christian, Western Civilization that White men have created over the past 3000+ years.

To The Other Jim: Not all Jewish people agree with those views. She might be Jewish but feminism is not the view of the Law of Moses. Not everything Jewish people do is in accord with the law of God. She is clearly an enemy of Western civilization but that is not representative of all Jewish people nor of the Torah

Concerning Justice Ginsberg:
I am very unhappy with liberals and see them as very destructive towards Torah values and objective morality. The fact that she is Jewish does not help in the slightest since her view oppose the Law of Moses. In the Torah you will find that Jewish people do not get a pass when they transgress the law of God.

Political correctness and secular humanism

Nice comment on Kiev Post: Political correctness and multi-culturalism (as well as repression of Christianity while coddling of Islam, secular humanism, etc.) is to blame not only for the terrorist incidents but for the continuously unfolding suicide of the West.

A good deal of American technology comes from Jews.

I see many people think that American technology was created only by non Jewish people.

A good deal of American technology comes from Jews. The Manhattan Project was like the roll call of a yeshiva. My Dad was the head scientist of a lab that created the first night vision  apparatus and made one of the cameras for the U-2 and satellite communication by lasers and other projects. I admit many other people helped, but there was a significant Jewish contribution to all aspects of American technology.

comment i saw on Unz:
The recent atrocities, both in the U.S. and in France,
show us that young men are out of control. The
usual civilizing agents – religion, education,
early marriage, military service (let alone family) -
no longer seem effective. Rejection of early marriage,
while producing many feral women, has been even
worse for men who too often seem to have
nothing better to do with their lives than squandering
their energy on video games and masturbation to online
porn. If Trump wins, I hope he gives serious consideration
to reintroducing some sort of a rite of passage for
18-20 year olds. Young people need to challenged hard at
that age to make a successful transition into manhood
and womanhood

The paradigm of the West  is feminism and leftism. It is not the same as a chosen worldview. It is the default setting, the colored glasses that everything is seen through. The best advice I have is to learn the Law of Moses in depth until the basic approach is internalized..  

Torah [The Five Books of Moses] and Judaism are really not the same thing. But neither is Christianity that same as the Five Books of Moses.

The Law of Moses does need a Background and explanation  but neither Judaism nor Christianity provide  accurate believable background.

Judaism as defined by what Jews do and believe could just as well be defined as belief in the Golden Calf since that was what the vast majority of Jews believed at Mount Sinai.

Nor is it believable that the Law of Moses is just a shadow of things to come. Any honest reading of it will show it was meant to be obeyed and observed for all time.

 Clarity about these things came to me in stages. You could say learning the Talmud was helpful because of the rigorous examination and attempt to understand the Law of Moses. Mainly in the beginning of Yevamot and Nedarim and also in the Shar Yashuv Yeshiva it became clear to me that the Law of Moses is rigorous and has a well defined meaning that is objective and not dependent on who is reading it.



A real defining moment of clarity came to me in Geula [a neighborhood in Jerusalem] when a beggar woman was reading the book of Deuteronomy all the time. I asked her about this. She told me Moses came to her in a dream and asked her "What flaw did people find in my book that they feel it is unnecessary and irrelevant? Why do they not read it and keep it?" [I don't remember her exact words. But it was something along the lines of Moses asking her why people ignored the Law of Moses. This refers to all the Five Books but she was concentrating of Devarim Deuteronomy for some reason]



Of course, the Law is used as a cover up for worship of idols. Worship of people is the common way this is done. You have con men, supposed saints, that make a  show of keeping Torah and then people worship them. This is more insidious than open idolatry. I will simply not walk into an religious synagogue because it is a place of idolatry. But if there was an authentic Litvak yeshiva (orBeit Midrash) in my area, I would run to be there as much as possible.

Act against Islam

overreach-and-invasion

At some point people have to say enough is enough. We will not abide by Muslims invading our land and our women and murdering us anymore

r100 e minor

One problem I have noticed is  דורש אל המתים. I do not know why people think it is OK to go to the graves of tzadikim when this seems to be contrary to an open verse in the Torah in Leviticus 20. Do not seek after the dead.

What some people are looking for is the Mediaeval period which in fact formed the backbone of the Renaissance. For example the Amerika Blog

The fact of democracy decaying into tyranny we have seen in these last 8 years. But what people have suggested about a return to Aristocracy as Aristotle suggested is more about the Medieval period I think of kings and queens and strong faith

Catholic approach to Islamic invasion.

Link

Letter from a Catholic to his priest.

 Dear Father Remi:

I've come close to walking out of mass before, when Deacon Mike was plugging for gun control. I didn't, then, but I resolved that I would walk out if the church again attempted to interfere, even if only by suggestion, with matters of internal politics of the United States or undermining of the Constitution of the United States or undermining of the security of the United States.

This morning, at the early mass, I did walk out after we were intoned to not be afraid of letting in "refugees." I'm not sure what universe the reader lives in. I am not sure what universe the writer of the request for prayers lives in. In the universe I live in, the real universe, those refugees are mostly - no, _overwhelmingly_ - military age males, from a hostile religion, heavily infiltrated by ISIS/DAESH, a slave trading, raping, fanatical, genocidal, and expanding group of that religion. No, the State Department and DHS cannot filter out the maniacs.

Yes, as a matter of fact I do have quite a bit of experience over there.

I will not welcome them. I will not encourage others to welcome them. And I will not support a church that says we should. They are the enemy. They are the enemy of both civilization and Christianity. They are not an enemy to be turned by turning the other cheek. (Indeed, given the sexual proclivities of the region, it is wise to keep all one's cheeks far, far from them.) And those who would let them in are working hand in hand with the enemies of civilization and the Church.

Whether I shall come back to Saint Mary's, find another Catholic Church less politically and suicidally liberal, or join a less effectively anti-Christian Protestant church I cannot say at this time. I am pretty sure that whichever way I decide, God will understand my preferring not to support the ruin of my country, my civilization, or my religion.

Sincerely,

Thomas P. Kratman
------------
From Ex-Army: Me, now, the last time I was in a church was when I got married, I think, several decades ago. I have no hostility to religion or organized religion, I'm just sort of indifferent to its manifestation in public. Just indifferent. I have no grudge against it. If anything, I'm rather biased in favor of Christianity because it's been instrumental in producing the Western Civilization that I value above all other cultures of mankind. And, though I'm not a believer, I usually prefer believers to non-believers. They tend to be better people. I'm a lifelong fan of C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, and other Christian-oriented writers of that sort. Morality-wise, I find Christianity as good a guide as any religion or philosophy, and superior to the vast majority.

That said, a damn fool is a damn fool, whether he's a Christian or not. Some of my fellow-thinkers among the realist right are hostile to Christianity precisely because of the sort of nonsense that Mr. Kratman describes above. I'm not, or I'm usually not, because the same kind of nonsense can be found outside of the churches and outside of Christianity, among just about every other religion or nonreligious belief system. Indeed, I first encountered it, back in the 60's, with the counterculture movement which was overwhelmingly anti-Christian.

Obviously, Christians don't have to be damn fools, because Tom Kratman clearly isn't. Ir also occurs to me that while Pope Francis is a damn fool in much the same way that the priest addressed is, Pat Buchanan, of the same church, definitely is not.

My attitude in these matters is simple. When someone is correct on the issues of gun control and inviting "Syrian" "refugees" to move in, I respect him for his conclusions whether he's a theist or an atheist or something in between. When he's wrong on those issues, I have zero respect for his opinions on the matters whether he's a peasant, Pope, or punk rocker.

A religious leader is, supposedly, an expert on matters of religion. That's where his authority lies. He has no more expertise in matters of statecraft than does a janitor or a courtesan. Bad advice from a preacher or priest deserves no more respect than bad advice from anyone else.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

My thought on this is: While I think being compassionate is admirable, I can see the point of not letting in people that desire one's demise.

I have written before about my experience in this area but just for now I should just admit that it took a lot of major wake-up calls for me to realize that Muslims really mean business. Just one example out of many. I was going to the small river the Shiloach where King Solomon was anointed king. It is deep, and to get to it one has to go down though a long flight of stairs  about 30 yards. When down there the Muslims at the top started throwing large rocks at me. After being accelerated after a 30 yard drop, if even one had hit me, that would have been the end. And of course that is what they were intending. I prayed to God and said: "I have no army, nor any weapon. But I have You."  And I started up the stairs. There was a lull in the rock throwing. When I got up to the top, there was a whole gang of Arabs. One said to the other "Here he is again." And they started again throwing rocks at me at point blank range. As I walked away I saw the rocks flying at every side of me. But not one hit me. I was shaken and shocked. And I realized then that they were not my friends.

Muslims are to be a problem whenever they get past a certain percentage. When below 10% they are exemplary. Then everyone thinks they are peace loving. Then after the 10% mark things start to get violent. First they send in their children and teenagers to cause trouble and claim they have no control. etc. Bringing in large number in Germany is definitely treasonous.

And people can be fooled. Genes tend to determine a lot. People can marry some black person or Muslim or Tartar and think they are getting a good deal -but then the children revert to form.

race riots

There are race riots  scheduled for attacking white people tomorrow across all major American cities. What I suggest for Jewish people are: (1) To stop supporting black causes. (2) Get a carry-conceal licence and train. (3) Stop trying to bring down decent white, Wasp {White, Anglo Saxon Protestant}society.

Blacks have been at war with whites,- including white, Ashkenazic Jews for a long time. Ignoring this will not make it go away. In fact, pretending race does not exist, and at the same time trying to nuke decent Wasp society is bad strategy,  and self contradictory, and guaranteed to backfire

To get to Torah you have to go through Hell and back

Though I was born and raised in an exceptional home I felt very unsatisfied in high school.

When I got to yeshiva in NY I felt like I was breathing free air for the first time. When the Torah declares itself "the good and the life", I really felt this.

Not just me. but when I called a friend I had in high school, and told her about yeshiva, she too was filled with this sense of urgency and meaning.

This experience was overpowering. But I have not been able, and still am not able to recommend it because of reasons beyond my ability to control.
I was myself, perhaps, not worthy of Torah. And thus, I found people supposedly in the Torah world whose character left something to be desired. Morally challenged people. If I had myself been worthy this never would have happened.

It says in the Torah God put the fiery sword on the path to the Tree of Life so that Adam and Eve would not go back and eat from it and live forever. To get to Torah you have to go through the trials of fire and water, and the people that stand in the way. The charlatans that make a show of keeping Torah -for profit.

Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot, Physics and Mathematics is the truth and the light. The path the Rambam specifically held is the path of Torah.

The Torah [Five Books of Moses] is the inspired Word of God. The Torah declares itself to be God-breathed, inerrant, and authoritative. We also know that God does not change His mind or contradict Himself. So the Torah  most definitely does not allow for traditions that contradict its message. This is not as much of an argument against tradition as it is an argument against un-Torah, extra-Torah and/or anti-Torah doctrines. The only way to know for sure what God expects of us is to stay true to what we know He has revealed—the Law of God תורת משה. We can know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that The Law of God is true, authoritative, and reliable. The same cannot be said of tradition.

For example in Leviticus 18 it says these are the commandments that God commanded by which one may do them and live. So we know the Law of God gives life and the good. So there is no room to nullify the law of God. It is for all who want life and the good to come and learn and keep.
So if there are traditions that are anti Torah or contradict the Torah we must not listen to them. 

Traditions are valid only when they are based on the Law of God and are in full agreement with the Five Books of Moses. Traditions that contradict the the Five Books of Moses are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the  faith. Torah alone is the only way to avoid subjectivity and keep personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Five Books of Moses.

Torah alone does not nullify the concept of  traditions. Rather, Torah alone gives us a solid foundation on which to base  traditions. There are many practices, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Law of God. It is good, and even necessary to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with God’s Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Torah. The problem  is that many base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Torah. That is why we must always go back to Torah alone, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice.

This is the reason the Gemara is always measuring itself against the verses of the Torah to make sure it does not contradict the Torah. 
Thus: learning the Oral and Written Law
Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot, Physics and Mathematics  is the truth and the light. That is the Oral and Written Law with מעשה בראשית מעשה מרכבה.
The path the Rambam specifically held is the path of Torah.



If the Gemara is always right is not the issue. Rather the issue is if it is not better to try to understand what work on Shabat is, rather than throw out the whole concept? Which approach would you say is more in accord with the Law of Moses,-to try to understand what work on Shabat is even at the risk of making mistakes or saying that one no longer has to listen to the word of God because someone already listened to the word of God once? Does the Torah say do not work on Shabat until someone comes along and does no work on Shabat. After that, you can then work on Shabat.  Similarly the Torah leaves no room for many other practices.
The only path that I know of that is in accord with this idea is the Litvish [Lithuanian] Yeshiva based on the approach of the Gra and the Rambam. 

This may sound like a critique on Christians but it is not. Rather I mean to exclude all groups that clock themselves in  mantle and clothing pretending to keep Torah while doing idolatry.

The Litvak yeshiva is where I found happiness.

Litvish Yeshiva. The Litvak yeshiva is where I found happiness. But I have not been a good advocate of this  system. We can understand what has prevented me from being able to advocate this kind of system.
That is if we look at the gentiles we can perhaps see a kind of parallel. In the gentile world there was a fellow by the name  Ludder. One day he was out walking and a lightening storm occurred. He made a vow to be a monk. He was a schizoid personality type. He could not stop washing. As he put it: " The more I washed, the more dirty I felt". Until one day he broke out of his mental prison, and announced to the word that with faith all things are clean. That was Martin Luther. He changed his name.

The Ding An Sich, the thing in itself, the self is hidden from us. Sometimes inside the self is some amazing new idea or world revolution that is just waiting to come out. But it can't come out because it is trapped inside the personality flaws of the individual.
That is me. I have recognized and known this amazing system for years, but because of my own mental prison I have never been able to advocate it. It is as if Luther had remained Ludder and never broken free.
What prevents me from saying this are the problems I had after the original years when things were going well. And even when things were going well, they were not as well as one could hope for. So there are mental obstacles and people obstacles preventing me from saying openly the Litvak Yeshiva is the best approach,  So instead I surf the internet until I find things that I like, or bother me, but do not spend the time and effort explain what is right and proper and great about the Litvak Yeshiva. [Nor do I spend the time on the Talmud that I ought.]  I live in a world of delusion. Thus, I can't be an advocate of something great and good. [The light and greatness and importance of the Litvak yeshiva are buried inside of me. Unless they break out of their prison, there is nothing I can do.]

In my first yeshiva I had a great deal of problems. First of all my parents were against it. They thought it was an institution that prepared people to use the Torah to make money. And even if that had not been the case, they still thought that Torah with Derech Eretz (Torah with a vocation) is important. But Something clicked inside of me when I got to yeshiva. Some amazing energy just gripped me. I found something so amazing in the Oral and Written Law that it would have taken a thermonuclear device to separate me from the Gemara. And there was no learning Musar there. It was Sola Gemara (Not Sola Scriptura, scripture alone but Gemara alone.) . {The two Talmuds, Sifra, Sifri, Tosephta, Torah Kohanim, Midrash Raba, Midrash Tanchuma}

But I fell into a mental prison. And since then the Gemara is....[unfinished.]


What my approach is today is in fact like my parents held:Torah with a vocation. And  I also go with the Rambam concerning Physics being a part of the Oral Law. So I do not think learning Physics or Aristotle is bitul Torah but rather a part of the Oral tradition. See the Rambam in Hilchot Talmud Torah in the halacah that one should divide his day into three parts. One part for the Oral Law and he says there the subjects called Pardes as he explained in the first four chapters are part of the Oral Law

Thus the Gra was right. And the excommunication should still be considered valid based on theory alone. The kind of wicked behavior that we see ought to convince us that the Gra knew what he was talking about. Does it not say a lot that no one wants to live anywhere near them?

Religious veneration can be idolatry. This is one of the reason I think that the Gra was right to sign the excommunication.

If, that is, the thing venerated is the thing the religion was founded to venerate {God}, and not something substituted, that is proper. This infinite God is a bit scary. If he knows what we need already, why pray to him? And he’s worse than Santa Claus – he knows whether we’ve been bad or good in excruciating detail. And if he says "No," then what? Talk about "The buck stops here." No, what we need is something a bit closer to us, a bit more limited in powers, a bit less in a position to point fingers. Something that leaves open the possibility of a bargain, or an end run around the rules. Like a saint; someone who made the grade, but is still human. And if one doesn’t perform, we can try others; we never have to face the fact that something might be off-limits.
Or maybe it’s a relic, a place, a holy object or a ritual. In theory, the purpose of the relic, holy place, object or ritual is to focus attention on God, and give the religion tangibility. In practice, it very often happens that the tangible expression itself becomes the object of veneration.
Thus the Gra was right. And the excommunication should still be considered valid based on theory alone. The kind of wicked behavior that we see ought to convince us that the Gra knew what he was talking about.  Does it not say a lot that no one wants to live anywhere near them?

  

I spend a good deal of time on tracatates Shabat and Eruvin.--The reason was force of circumstances. I had spend the previous two years in Shar Yashuv learning Ketubot and Yevamot. So when in my new yeshiva--the Mir in NY-started learning Ketubot, I felt it was time to start something new. So I did Shabat with a lot of the Tosphot, the Tur Beit Yoseph, Maharsha and Pnei Yehoshua. [I joined the small group that was doing Shabat in those days with my learning partner Hagi Presher who later became a rosh yeshiva in Russia and with Rav Nelkenbaum who is one of the roshei Yeshiva in NY in the Mir.] I did not however finish everything because in those days I was tried to get through the material as fast as I could, but also to understand it. Recently I put some nice ideas about Shabat (link) in my little booklet on Shas that deals with the most fundamental aspects of Shabat מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה. At the time I was thinking about these things, I was learning with my learning partner, David Bronson, who had  a copy of the Avi Ezri. The fact that he had the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach was very helpful. The main thing about Shabat is the Tosphot in Yoma page 34 or its sister Tosphot in Shabat and Sanhedrin. [Take a look at Rav Shach. The ideas there are astounding in depth and clarity.]

In terms of getting through Shas, I would prefer it if you would do a half a page per day with Tosphot and the Maharasha. Or if you do a whole page, then to still do it with Tosphot and the Maharsha. I think that it is important to get an idea of what is going on in Tosphot in one's early years,- because doing so later is often impossible. This is the reason why the places like Shar Yashuv and the Mir get involved in Tosphot even in the high school years. I did not understand at the time why learning Tosphot was important when I had not even finished Shas once, but now I see the wisdom in the approach of the Litvak [Lithuanian] yeshivas.

The book of Job

The book of Job  is a very important book.The Rambam goes into it in the Guide. My main feeling about the book is this. That the author has a privileged position. That is,- he is in a position to tell you accurately what happened. So though other positions [the friends of Job] have various degrees of validity, still the position of the author is different and should be considered the right position. So when he starts off that "Job had no sin," we should take that literally. And when Job gets punished from Heaven, we should not take that as a punishment for sin. Rather that Hashem (God) wanted to win a  bet with the Satan. Job surely was not at fault for this. And though the opinions of the three friends and then the last friend do reflect some aspects of reality, still they are not in the privileged position of the author. Furthermore, we know this is true because God himself tells the friends that they were wrong and should ask Job for forgiveness. Therefore what we learn is that numinous reality is beyond reason. It is the most basic and fundamental conclusion of Kant and Schopenhauer.  

This is important from a philosophical point of view, because  when you have God himself in the book of Job arguing the same point as Schopenhauer that gives it more weight.  

r97 C Minor  [r97 in midi format]

 [r101 in midi]

r98 F Minor r96 D major 6-8 time  [r98 in midi]

r93 f minor  in midi  r91 F Minor r91 in midi r90 e flat major  [r90 in midi]

Some things are not scale-able. The context of the Litvak yeshiva really works mainly in a small group. There is a kind of mystery in the fact that the Far Rockaway yeshiva of Reb Freifeld for me had a lot  more of the spirit of Torah than the larger more famous yeshiva I went to later.


[What I mean here is that once Gpddard and Von Braun figured out how to make a rocket ship, it was scale-able. The Democracy of Athens was not scale-able. Homemade bread is not scale-able. Certain things depend on size.]

Oral Law - Talmud

Sentences express abstract features, but these are always in a context of other abstract features (what Searle calls the "Network") . Thus the meaning of any verse in the Torah is radically under-determined. You need the Oral Law to get an idea of the overall context of Torah.

A comment on black and white relationships in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

I grew up in an all white part of GR [Grand Rapids]. Tremendous. The blacks were on the other side of town. My dad talked me into getting a job on that side of town(at a bowling alley).I also got my first apartment in a mixed part of town. Both were "educational" experiences,to say the least.
At the bowling alley, many blacks would bowl and skip out on paying.I ran out,at first,to yell at them and got jumped those first times. After that,I told the boss, you can run out. He never did either.
At my apartment,I ran into a black guy I knew from the bowling alley. He asked me if he could borrow my car to go to the store. Being a young guy, I let him do it. 3 days later, they found it--150 miles away, transmission effed up. I Couldn't press charges because I volunteered the car to him.
I learned quickly though. Blacks came and went at the apartment. Noisy was an understatement. Drug use and criminal activity by them--you couldn't OVER-EXAGGERATE. I helped the landlords and police catch some of them.One was a possible death by a black thug group that lived together.
I lived on the middle floor.Once,the Orkin pest control people came in to spray in the black apartment below. As I watched TV,the Orkin's must have started spraying, hundreds--if not thousands of roaches ran up the wall behind my TV,into the apartment above. Filthy? 90% of blacks I've been around, live in garbage.
That was then. Now they've come to my original side of town. I've told the stories of having to evict blacks and Mexicans on either side of my current house.They haven't improved one bit in 30 years. If anything, they're worse--because now, the minorities have an attitude. They think they know more than you, but in reality, have the IQ of a banana.
Just thought I'd write a few lines on my experiences also.
-GR Anonymous


link

r97 Midi file C minor 4-4 time I have no  mp3 converter, so here i the plain file.

Here is the same file in Mp3 r97

[r97 in nwc]

Walls do work

I  saw an article in Haaretz [a leftist newspaper] that said walls do not work. That was before the wall keeping out terrorists was built.  After it was built even only about a fourth, the difference in terrorist incidences was very noticeable. The amount of bombs going off in  areas and in malls was reduced greatly. I learned then that people can write clever editorials that sound good but do not correspond to reality. 

r101 Midi File A major 6-8 time i can not put it into mp3 so here it is unedited

 I think I made a small discovery in mathematics. You have heard of vectors right? They are on in a x y z 3-d space. Well there is a similar thing called octonians. The normal vector in 3d space you describe by basis vectors ijk. But in 8-d space you have i,j,k,l, il, jl, kl,

If you take a simple octonian squared you get -7. That is (i+j+k+l+il +jl+kl)^2= -7

And if you take a simple basis vector (i+j+k)^2= -3 

I have mentioned before the connection this has with Kant with his triad, and Hegel with his triads, and the Reshash {Shalom Sharabi}.

Women that frivorce their man have to be shunned.

Women that frivorce their man have to be shunned. And the religious teachers that encourage them to do so also ought to be shunned. {Religious teachers make  a song and dance about how pro family values they are but they are in fact on the forefront of the movement to destroy fatherhood and families and have been doing so for a very long time.}

Here is a comment from one person that did this: 

"I also do this in my own family. My wife’s brother, his wife frivorced him for cash and prizes and to f-ck another man, and I have told everyone and anyone in my married family that until she REPENTS for her sin (which she’ll never do, Pride and Satan have a strong hold on her) she is “dead to me.” I wont go over to her house and see her kids if she is there. I will not help her (or her blood family) in anyway. I ONLY want to be in the lives of her children (my nephew and one of my favorite nieces.) But I will only attend events that focus on her kids provided I don’t have to sit anywhere near that woman. Initially my red pill shunning of her was met with conflict with my father-in-law. He said I was “too good a man” to be treating my ex-sister-in-law this way, and that we had to look past it. Said it was that movie 50 Shades of Grey that made her think she could act this way. I had a little talk with him, one on one, man to man, and he understands how badly he crossed the line with me. He and I do not speak about her anymore. Slowly but surely, I have gained allies in my family against this woman. Everyone is starting to shun her. And maybe (someday) someone ELSE will think TWICE before they do what she did if they KNOW that they run the risk of losing a great and helpful family member the way I was with her prior to her running to a judge and nuking her marriage unilaterally.

Act locally as I do. It has to start small, incrementally. It all started small in destroying the family and fatherly headship. We have to start small in repairing it."

Marxism

erudite knight

I saw this in the humanities and social studies departments. I thought it was a conspiracy from the KGB. I have a friend who worked for the KGB and he thought the KGB did not have the resources to cause the kind of social upheaval we saw in the 1960’s. But to infiltrate the universities he might agree. Look at Bezmenov’s ytube. Something caused these departments of universities to turn hard left.
Though I did not take the classes, in those subjects, when I was at Polytechnic in NY, I saw the texts they were teaching in the English and humanities departments. Pure straightforward Marxism.  This was a place dedicated to STEM so that was a surprise to me.

Race is the beginning of the divide of one species into two

I see race as pretty important from a evolutionary point of view. That is straight Charles Darwin. Race is the beginning of the divide of one species into two. To try and stop this -to fight nature-is doomed to failure. Another reason race is important is it is in fact how people react to others. A third reason is that there are characteristics unique to different races.





I should expand on each point. The first is straightforward. One species in two places adapts and changes. The beginning of the change is often color as we see with birds. After some time the separation becomes permanent and you have two completely different species.
This happens often in other species. No reason to think humans are any different. Darwin noted this in finches.

The other element of this is Sephardim often react to Ashkenzim as "the other," which makes getting to Israel very difficult. An Ashkenzic Jew often finds in Israel that his neighbor is a Sephardi and then the Sephardi spends all his time and money and efforts to get rid of the Ashkenazi. This happens so much that you could say the main reason Ashkenazim do not make aliya is not the Arabs, but the Sephardim.