8.11.17
The four fold lines of the Rambam/ Maimonides.
The four fold lines of the Rambam/ Maimonides. That is: (1) The Written Law [the Old Testament] (2) The Oral Law, that is Gemara, Rashi and Tosphot--mainly Tosphot.(3) Physics [up to and including String Theory] (4) Metaphysics (Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel.)
The way to do this is simple. Guard the first hour when you get up in the morning for learning alone. That is a Half hour of Gemara and a half hour of Physics and Metaphysics. Just say the words and go on. What you do not understand in this world you will understand in the next world.
[As it says in Avoda Zara and also in Shabat לעלם לגרס אדם אף על גב דמשכח ואף על גב דלא ידע מאי קאמר]
"One should always learn fast [Derek girsa] even though he forgets and even though he does not know what he is saying."]
The way to do this is simple. Guard the first hour when you get up in the morning for learning alone. That is a Half hour of Gemara and a half hour of Physics and Metaphysics. Just say the words and go on. What you do not understand in this world you will understand in the next world.
[As it says in Avoda Zara and also in Shabat לעלם לגרס אדם אף על גב דמשכח ואף על גב דלא ידע מאי קאמר]
"One should always learn fast [Derek girsa] even though he forgets and even though he does not know what he is saying."]
This brings to attachment with Absolute Spirit as the Rambam makes clear in the Guide.[The Rambam also says the same thing in the Mishne Torah but in such a way that people usually skip over it. That is in the Laws of Learning Torah where the Rambam quotes the Talmud that one should divide the period of one's learning into three parts: The written Law, the Oral Law and Gemara. Then he adds this significant phrase: "and in the category of the Gemara is Pardes" which he defined is the subjects he mentioned in the first four chapters of Mishna Torah. ]
[When I mention Physics I should add the math needed in order to get to Physics. And that is mainly Topology, Algebra, PDE, Lie Algebra and few other important things. ]
[When I mention Physics I should add the math needed in order to get to Physics. And that is mainly Topology, Algebra, PDE, Lie Algebra and few other important things. ]
Education has been turned to Post Modernism
Education has been turned to Post Modernism in the USA and that results in the general Leftist turn in politics. This seems to indicate that a lot depends on how people are educated. Instead of classical education along with STEM, people were fed Leftist propaganda.
To me, this is just one more example of how important it is to educate people in quality things.
To me education ought to be mainly along the four fold lines of the Rambam/ Maimonides. That is: (1) The Written Law [the Old Testament] (2) The Oral Law, that is Gemara, Rashi and Tosphot--mainly Tosphot.(3) Physics [up to and including String Theory] (4) Metaphysics (Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel.)
This program does not include any history or pseudo sciences or Shakespeare or any literature. These would all be considered a waste of time to the Rambam. And he specifically pointed out that history is a waste of time. And he was right. Who's history? For every single person today living in NYC there is a completely different history starting from this morning until this afternoon. Whose is more significant? Only the prophets were in a position to tell us the meaning behind the events. And their message was straightforward--all bad things that happen to people are because of worshiping any other being other than the First Cause, God.
[Even though Hegel was misused by the Left he still has valuable points. Even the Kant-Friesian School Dr Kelley Ross brings a point from Hegel in his doctoral thesis. The idea of background where all contractions are resolved.. Being and non Being.]
To me, this is just one more example of how important it is to educate people in quality things.
To me education ought to be mainly along the four fold lines of the Rambam/ Maimonides. That is: (1) The Written Law [the Old Testament] (2) The Oral Law, that is Gemara, Rashi and Tosphot--mainly Tosphot.(3) Physics [up to and including String Theory] (4) Metaphysics (Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel.)
This program does not include any history or pseudo sciences or Shakespeare or any literature. These would all be considered a waste of time to the Rambam. And he specifically pointed out that history is a waste of time. And he was right. Who's history? For every single person today living in NYC there is a completely different history starting from this morning until this afternoon. Whose is more significant? Only the prophets were in a position to tell us the meaning behind the events. And their message was straightforward--all bad things that happen to people are because of worshiping any other being other than the First Cause, God.
[Even though Hegel was misused by the Left he still has valuable points. Even the Kant-Friesian School Dr Kelley Ross brings a point from Hegel in his doctoral thesis. The idea of background where all contractions are resolved.. Being and non Being.]
7.11.17
I got excited by the major book of Isaac Blazzer, the Light of Israel which more or less is the definitive work of the Musar Movement. After reading it I got into Musar as much as possible.
In Proverbs there is a list of great things that Wisdom promises to a person that holds onto it. But right before the list starts there is a mention about Fear of God. Proverbs 8:13. To me it seems that that whole list might be in fact referring to Fear of God. יראת השם היא חכמה (לי עצה ותושייה וגו)'
In any case the goal of coming to fear of God is mainly unheard of except in the books of Reb Isaac Blazzer a disciple of Reb Israel Salanter. I got the idea from his book even though in the Torah itself it is pretty explicit: "Do the commandments so that you will come to Fear of God."
[I have to mention that there is a new book by Isaac Blazzer; one that came out recently that was never published before that consists of essays he wrote besides his famous book "The Light of Israel".]
I got excited by the major book of Isaac Blazzer, the Light of Israel which more or less is the definitive work of the Musar Movement. After reading it I got into Musar as much as possible.
This still seems to me to be a great thing-- even though I have fallen from the ideals of Musar. That is to plow through by yourself the works of Mediaeval Ethics and the books of the disciple of Reb Israel Salanter.
In any case the goal of coming to fear of God is mainly unheard of except in the books of Reb Isaac Blazzer a disciple of Reb Israel Salanter. I got the idea from his book even though in the Torah itself it is pretty explicit: "Do the commandments so that you will come to Fear of God."
[I have to mention that there is a new book by Isaac Blazzer; one that came out recently that was never published before that consists of essays he wrote besides his famous book "The Light of Israel".]
I got excited by the major book of Isaac Blazzer, the Light of Israel which more or less is the definitive work of the Musar Movement. After reading it I got into Musar as much as possible.
This still seems to me to be a great thing-- even though I have fallen from the ideals of Musar. That is to plow through by yourself the works of Mediaeval Ethics and the books of the disciple of Reb Israel Salanter.
The Musar movement of Reb Israel Salanter
Even though when I mention the Musar movement of Reb Israel Salanter which was mainly about learning the books of ethics from the Middle Ages I usually neglect to bring up the later Gedolai Musar like the Ramchal, Rav Moshe Haim Lutzato. His place in Musar in important because he tends to provide a link between the Mystics like the Ari and the Ramak and Musar..And a link between Musar, the Ari and Rational thought also. Though his thought (in books like Derech Hashem) is not exactly philosophical with the usual kind of logical arguments that one would expect in a philosophical treatise, still it deals with many of the familiar philosophic issues that Kant and Hegel do.
Besides that I noticed when I was in Israel that someone had printed up the writings of one of his disciples [of the Ramchal] which looked pretty important to me, though I did not get a chance to learn them.
Though the Musar books of the Middle Ages tend to be based more or less on Saadia Geon and the Maimonides, the connection with the Ari is absent. The Ramchal provides an important link. At least for me during my first years in yeshiva, I found the writings of the Ramchal to be very satisfying in terms of putting what I was doing into proper perspective.
The Ramchal also is important as one of the very good interpretations of the Ari. Sadly the name of the Ari has been dragged through the mud by the use the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] makes of his writings. So to get a proper understanding from a holy source like the Ramchal is a good project.
I should mention that the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter also wrote some really great Musar books.
Besides that I noticed when I was in Israel that someone had printed up the writings of one of his disciples [of the Ramchal] which looked pretty important to me, though I did not get a chance to learn them.
Though the Musar books of the Middle Ages tend to be based more or less on Saadia Geon and the Maimonides, the connection with the Ari is absent. The Ramchal provides an important link. At least for me during my first years in yeshiva, I found the writings of the Ramchal to be very satisfying in terms of putting what I was doing into proper perspective.
The Ramchal also is important as one of the very good interpretations of the Ari. Sadly the name of the Ari has been dragged through the mud by the use the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] makes of his writings. So to get a proper understanding from a holy source like the Ramchal is a good project.
I should mention that the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter also wrote some really great Musar books.
6.11.17
5.11.17
Complaints that people have towards the Jewish religious world.
The major complaint that people have towards the Jewish religious world usually focuses on obligations between man and his fellow man. And these complaints are usually accurate from what I can tell. Even if you have not encountered this problem personally, that does not invalidate most other people's experience. This applies in particular to rich secular American Jews to whom the religious world tries extra hard to seem righteous in order to get their money.
But my complaint is different. I focus more on the obligations between man and God. That is,-- I tend to believe the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] has made a nest there. The worship of their leaders also bothers me. To me it seems that what Khulda the prophetess said about burning incense to Ashterot applies just as much to burning candles for "tzadikim". To me it all looks the same.
One added point is this: the undermining of the State of Israel at every opportunity. Or any state besides themselves. It is not as if they have ever be able to build one single self sustaining community. If we can count on our house and its contents not being taken away from us, if the shops that supply our clothes and fuel and food are able to do their business, if there are roads on which we can get about, schools to send our children to, courts and police to deal with those who would take advantage of us, it is because behind these arrangements, protecting and guaranteeing them, is the power of the state. Without it, we would be at the mercy of the worst elements in our society.
But my complaint is different. I focus more on the obligations between man and God. That is,-- I tend to believe the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] has made a nest there. The worship of their leaders also bothers me. To me it seems that what Khulda the prophetess said about burning incense to Ashterot applies just as much to burning candles for "tzadikim". To me it all looks the same.
One added point is this: the undermining of the State of Israel at every opportunity. Or any state besides themselves. It is not as if they have ever be able to build one single self sustaining community. If we can count on our house and its contents not being taken away from us, if the shops that supply our clothes and fuel and food are able to do their business, if there are roads on which we can get about, schools to send our children to, courts and police to deal with those who would take advantage of us, it is because behind these arrangements, protecting and guaranteeing them, is the power of the state. Without it, we would be at the mercy of the worst elements in our society.
What the Rambam must have thought. If we look in to the book of Numbers ch 34 verses 18-19 we see that Kalev was the head of the tribe of Judah. To the Rambam that must be considered in the category of a king.
As I mentioned that most Rishonim [Mediaeval authorities] allow one to have a girl friend. [e.g. Ramban/Nachmanides, Raavad] The only question on this is the Rambam [Maimonides] who allows a פילגש girlfriend only to a king.
The question of the Gra [Rav Eliyahu from Villna] on this is Kalev ben Yefuna who had a few wives and a few girl friends and was not a king. [See Chronicles I ch 2:46] [You can see that this is in fact Kalev ben Yefuna from the fact that his daughter is Achsa the same as we know Kalev ben Yefuna had in the book of Judges right at the beginning.]]
In any case the achronim [later authorities] on the Shulchan Aruch itself right there on the page say that to the Rambam there is no לאו [prohibition] involved, but rather an איסור עשה [a prohibition that comes from the lack of doing a positive command].
In any case, today I just wanted to share what I think the Rambam must have thought. If we look in to the book of Numbers ch 34 verses 18-19 we see that Kalev was the head of the tribe of Judah.
To the Rambam that must be considered in the category of a king.
The problem however that the Rosh brings up and his son, the Tur, is the mikveh issue. Not everyone is near a river. or an ocean. And even those that are- have a problem in the winter where the rivers are frozen. One thing I wanted to mention about this problem is this: even in winter in places where the water is rough [--like the areas after a waterfall--] the water does not freeze over. So one can go there even without an ax to break through the ice.
[Of course the best thing is to be married, however nowadays that does not seem to be possible for a lot of people for reasons that are well known. Women nowadays tend to devolve into selfish bitches right after they are married. Besides that, it is that it is always better when you come home to be greeted by kiss rather than a nag and complaints. Human flourishing does not usually happen in such conditions. For that reason it is almost always better to have a girl friend rather than a wife.]
The question of the Gra [Rav Eliyahu from Villna] on this is Kalev ben Yefuna who had a few wives and a few girl friends and was not a king. [See Chronicles I ch 2:46] [You can see that this is in fact Kalev ben Yefuna from the fact that his daughter is Achsa the same as we know Kalev ben Yefuna had in the book of Judges right at the beginning.]]
In any case the achronim [later authorities] on the Shulchan Aruch itself right there on the page say that to the Rambam there is no לאו [prohibition] involved, but rather an איסור עשה [a prohibition that comes from the lack of doing a positive command].
In any case, today I just wanted to share what I think the Rambam must have thought. If we look in to the book of Numbers ch 34 verses 18-19 we see that Kalev was the head of the tribe of Judah.
To the Rambam that must be considered in the category of a king.
The problem however that the Rosh brings up and his son, the Tur, is the mikveh issue. Not everyone is near a river. or an ocean. And even those that are- have a problem in the winter where the rivers are frozen. One thing I wanted to mention about this problem is this: even in winter in places where the water is rough [--like the areas after a waterfall--] the water does not freeze over. So one can go there even without an ax to break through the ice.
[Of course the best thing is to be married, however nowadays that does not seem to be possible for a lot of people for reasons that are well known. Women nowadays tend to devolve into selfish bitches right after they are married. Besides that, it is that it is always better when you come home to be greeted by kiss rather than a nag and complaints. Human flourishing does not usually happen in such conditions. For that reason it is almost always better to have a girl friend rather than a wife.]
3.11.17
there is a commandment to have children.
We know in the Torah there is a commandment to have children. That is a male and female. When does one fulfill this mizvah? When the children are born or by sex? It seems to me that Tosphot holds the later opinion. The reason is this: There is n argument between th house of Hillel and the house of Shamai [that is the students of Hillel and Shamai]. Let's say you and another person own a slave. So half is owned by you and half by another. Then the another lets the slave go. [That is he write for him a שטר שחחרור]. Then at that point half the slave is a regular Jew and half is still a gentile. [I forgot to mention that a slave that is let free becomes automatically Jewish and obligated in all the mizvot of the Torah] . So at that point the slave can not have sex with a Jewess because he is still half a slave, and he can not have sex with anyone else because he is half a Jew. Thus the House of Shamai says the court of law forces you to let the slave go free so that he becomes a full Jews. The question of Tosphot is, "Why do we not say עשה דוחה לא תעשה the positive mitzvah of having children פרו ורבו pushes off the negative command of not having sex with a שפחה כנענית? " (Since the general rule is always a positive command pushes off a negative command.] Tosphot answers because the mizvah is fulfilled at the end of the sex while the negative command is violated right at הערה--the beginning.
To me it seems clear that Tosphot is thinking that be fruitful and multiply applies to every act for otherwise the question would not even begin.
To me it seems clear that Tosphot is thinking that be fruitful and multiply applies to every act for otherwise the question would not even begin.
The reason Bitachon [trust in God]comes up in Litvak yeshivas is because it is relevant to the question should one be sitting and learning in a full time Litvak yeshiva of should one go to university or college to learn a profession. This makes the question of Bitachon enormously relevant.
My own experience with this is that I just went along with the system without thinking much into it. I got married and sat in kollel and got the kollel check at the end of the month. Then I went to Israel. At that point the thing that got me out of kollel was not the issue of trust in God but the fact that the kollel system in israel is set up in such a way that to be part of it one has to be using Torah to make money קרדום לחפור בו. [It is set up as a 9-5 job that if you come in you get the money. It is not set up as a kind of charity that is the only permissible way of doing this at least according to Rav Joseph Karo] That however still ignores the question of trust.
In Litvak yeshivas the issue of trust is boiled down to the argument between the חובות לבבות [Obligations of the Heart by Ibn Pekuda] versus the רמב''ן
This is not anything new so far. Everyone knows all this
The reason I bring this up is I notice that the place where this comes up in the Bible is the Story of King Asa.who got sick in his feet and the verse says he sought help from the doctors instead of from God and therefore he died. The obvious question is what does this mean? Could he have sought help from God but also gone to doctors and that would have been OK?
What is interesting is that that was not the first time that King Asa was criticized for not trusting in God. It turns out that before that time, he had been attacked by the king of Israel [the ten tribes] and he had taken all the gold and silver from the Temple in Jerusalem and sent it to the king of Syria asking him for help. The king of Syria then in fact attacked Israel and King Asa was criticized for that action also. Kings I ch 15. Chronicles II 16.
To me today it looks like the Obligations of the Heart was correct when he said that the trouble with King Asa was he sought help from the doctors only. What he should have done was to trust in God but also do the necessary steps according to the way of the world to go to the doctors and listen to their advice. And that seems to have been the conclusion of Reb Israel Salanter also.
The thing which muddles the issue is that yeshivas are often geared towards making money by getting donations. In itself this does not seem so bad but then there should not be any talk about trust in God. Rather they ought to say they are using the Torah as a means to make money and then claim that it is OK to do so. But the last step is impossible. No one can believe that there is any source for such a permission. Thus there is an inherent inconsistency in the system itself.
Great tzadikim like Bava Sali however never had this kind of trouble because of the fact that people wanted to give him money because of his obvious tzidkut righteousness. They counted it as a great privilege to be able to give him money. So he was not using Torah to make money.
My own experience with this is that I just went along with the system without thinking much into it. I got married and sat in kollel and got the kollel check at the end of the month. Then I went to Israel. At that point the thing that got me out of kollel was not the issue of trust in God but the fact that the kollel system in israel is set up in such a way that to be part of it one has to be using Torah to make money קרדום לחפור בו. [It is set up as a 9-5 job that if you come in you get the money. It is not set up as a kind of charity that is the only permissible way of doing this at least according to Rav Joseph Karo] That however still ignores the question of trust.
In Litvak yeshivas the issue of trust is boiled down to the argument between the חובות לבבות [Obligations of the Heart by Ibn Pekuda] versus the רמב''ן
This is not anything new so far. Everyone knows all this
The reason I bring this up is I notice that the place where this comes up in the Bible is the Story of King Asa.who got sick in his feet and the verse says he sought help from the doctors instead of from God and therefore he died. The obvious question is what does this mean? Could he have sought help from God but also gone to doctors and that would have been OK?
What is interesting is that that was not the first time that King Asa was criticized for not trusting in God. It turns out that before that time, he had been attacked by the king of Israel [the ten tribes] and he had taken all the gold and silver from the Temple in Jerusalem and sent it to the king of Syria asking him for help. The king of Syria then in fact attacked Israel and King Asa was criticized for that action also. Kings I ch 15. Chronicles II 16.
To me today it looks like the Obligations of the Heart was correct when he said that the trouble with King Asa was he sought help from the doctors only. What he should have done was to trust in God but also do the necessary steps according to the way of the world to go to the doctors and listen to their advice. And that seems to have been the conclusion of Reb Israel Salanter also.
The thing which muddles the issue is that yeshivas are often geared towards making money by getting donations. In itself this does not seem so bad but then there should not be any talk about trust in God. Rather they ought to say they are using the Torah as a means to make money and then claim that it is OK to do so. But the last step is impossible. No one can believe that there is any source for such a permission. Thus there is an inherent inconsistency in the system itself.
Great tzadikim like Bava Sali however never had this kind of trouble because of the fact that people wanted to give him money because of his obvious tzidkut righteousness. They counted it as a great privilege to be able to give him money. So he was not using Torah to make money.
2.11.17
In most of the books of Musar [Mediaeval Moral Principles] from the school of thought of the Geonim and Rambam [Maimonides] learning natural science and metaphysics comes up as the way to come to love and fear God.
This fact gets hidden in Musar books based on the Ramban [Nachmanides]
And later on Musar books will quote the Rambam but attempt to absorb him into the world view of the Ramban.
On one hand in the years when I was in the Mir and Shar Yashuv in NY I did not want to be distracted from learning Gemara and I feel that learning Gemara exclusively did help me in remarkable ways.
However that does not change the fact that the Rambam did see Physics and the Metaphysics of Aristotle as an essential part of Torah learning.
The way to understand the Rambam I think is this: By being exposed to the wisdom of God as revealed in his creation automatically love and fear of God are awakened in one's soul.The Rambam says this openly more or less but still it is a hard concept to grasp after that the general opinion is the reverse.
Empirical evidence seems to show is that the Rambam [Maimonides] was right since the opposite opinion when it is followed seem to lead to religious fanaticism and loss of good character.
This fact gets hidden in Musar books based on the Ramban [Nachmanides]
And later on Musar books will quote the Rambam but attempt to absorb him into the world view of the Ramban.
On one hand in the years when I was in the Mir and Shar Yashuv in NY I did not want to be distracted from learning Gemara and I feel that learning Gemara exclusively did help me in remarkable ways.
However that does not change the fact that the Rambam did see Physics and the Metaphysics of Aristotle as an essential part of Torah learning.
The way to understand the Rambam I think is this: By being exposed to the wisdom of God as revealed in his creation automatically love and fear of God are awakened in one's soul.The Rambam says this openly more or less but still it is a hard concept to grasp after that the general opinion is the reverse.
Empirical evidence seems to show is that the Rambam [Maimonides] was right since the opposite opinion when it is followed seem to lead to religious fanaticism and loss of good character.
1.11.17
Education: Stop feeding the kids garbage
People like Maimonides, Aristotle, Plato, and Allan Bloom concentrated a lot on education. That is a major theme in The Republic and also in The Closing of the American Mind. The natural thing to restore Western Civilization then would be to look at education.
Stop feeding the kids garbage would be the first step.
The next step would be to take the advice of the Rambam to learn Physics and Metaphysics. That is to restructure education completely by throwing out the worthless subjects and putting in things of value.
Everything called science nowadays outside of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology is just pseudo science. Allan Bloom was critical of the Humanities and Social Studies departments in universities but still I would have to say they do good work in terms of Music and the Arts.
[Metaphysics in the terminology of the Rambam clearly includes Aristotle's book The Metaphysics. But I think one would have to include also Plato, Kant and Hegel.]
Stop feeding the kids garbage would be the first step.
The next step would be to take the advice of the Rambam to learn Physics and Metaphysics. That is to restructure education completely by throwing out the worthless subjects and putting in things of value.
Everything called science nowadays outside of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology is just pseudo science. Allan Bloom was critical of the Humanities and Social Studies departments in universities but still I would have to say they do good work in terms of Music and the Arts.
[Metaphysics in the terminology of the Rambam clearly includes Aristotle's book The Metaphysics. But I think one would have to include also Plato, Kant and Hegel.]
Torah as a cure
The Sages of the Gemara in Bava Batra bring down that Job said that God created righteous people and evil people. Therefore what can man say to Him? He does what he likes. [That is the problem of Theodicity. The problem with evil. That is there are evil people and they do get punished for their sins even though it seems they had no choice but to be evil as they were created.]
His friends answered ברא יצר הרע ברא לו תורה תבלין God created the evil inclination but he also created the Torah as a cure. So there still is free will. One can choose to learn and thus be saved from the evil inclination.
To the Rambam this would have to include learning Physics and Metaphysics as he includes both in the category of th Oral Law in the Mishne Torah. [And he expands on this in the Guide.]
Obviously other rishonim like the Ramban and the Rashba disagree with the Rambam on this point but to me it seems the Rambam was correct. Not that I am in any position to decide between giants like the Rishonim but rather I had to decide for myself what approach to take.
So Torah as a cure would include the Written Law, the Oral Law, Physics, and Metaphysics.
The last two clearly refer to Aristotle, but more than Aristotle. {The Rambam specifically says he is referring to there subjects as understood by the ancient Greeks.}
My humble opinion is that Physics would include String Theory and Quantum Mechanics. Metaphysics I think would include Neo Platonic approach which came after the Ancient Greeks. Also Kant an Hegel. (That is my opinion.)
The Rambam as is known has an approach towards Midrashim that they are much deeper than meets the eye. The Gra also said the secrets of the Torah are contained in the Midrashim. So here too I think there must be some deeper meaning.
One thing I did notice is that God in the end of the book of Job does not agree with the friends of Job. Rather He said they had sinned in what they said. So the fact that the sages of the Talmud bring the words of Job's friends must mean something beyond the surface meaning.. That is another reason I think the Rambam is looking at the idea of Torah from a wider perspective. That is as including Metaphysics and Physics and objective moral law.
Obviously other rishonim like the Ramban and the Rashba disagree with the Rambam on this point but to me it seems the Rambam was correct. Not that I am in any position to decide between giants like the Rishonim but rather I had to decide for myself what approach to take.
So Torah as a cure would include the Written Law, the Oral Law, Physics, and Metaphysics.
The last two clearly refer to Aristotle, but more than Aristotle. {The Rambam specifically says he is referring to there subjects as understood by the ancient Greeks.}
My humble opinion is that Physics would include String Theory and Quantum Mechanics. Metaphysics I think would include Neo Platonic approach which came after the Ancient Greeks. Also Kant an Hegel. (That is my opinion.)
The Rambam as is known has an approach towards Midrashim that they are much deeper than meets the eye. The Gra also said the secrets of the Torah are contained in the Midrashim. So here too I think there must be some deeper meaning.
One thing I did notice is that God in the end of the book of Job does not agree with the friends of Job. Rather He said they had sinned in what they said. So the fact that the sages of the Talmud bring the words of Job's friends must mean something beyond the surface meaning.. That is another reason I think the Rambam is looking at the idea of Torah from a wider perspective. That is as including Metaphysics and Physics and objective moral law.
31.10.17
היצר רע מתלבש במצוות the Satan dresses up in mitzvot. He never approaches a person saying to do a sin. Rather he always comes saying, "Let's go do a mitzvah." But inside the mitzvah is enclosed a hidden sin that takes away all the value of the mizvah because it is מצווה הבאה בעבירה
Reb Nachman brings this idea from a midrashic statement brought in Bava Batra. But the Gra says the same thing more or less explicitly,
[This is one of the reasons I stay as far as possible from the Jewish religious world. But the major reason is not just the above mentioned reason, rather it is that I try to avoid the straight forward idolatry that is the essence of the religious world. You can see this point in the Nefesh HaChaim of a disciple of the Gra where he explains that idolatry can be directed towards people as much as towards inanimate objects.]
And further I feel a lot of problems that the world faces today are a result of idolatry as you can see quite often in the Old Testament--that troubles come close on the heels of idolatry.
Reb Nachman brings this idea from a midrashic statement brought in Bava Batra. But the Gra says the same thing more or less explicitly,
[This is one of the reasons I stay as far as possible from the Jewish religious world. But the major reason is not just the above mentioned reason, rather it is that I try to avoid the straight forward idolatry that is the essence of the religious world. You can see this point in the Nefesh HaChaim of a disciple of the Gra where he explains that idolatry can be directed towards people as much as towards inanimate objects.]
And further I feel a lot of problems that the world faces today are a result of idolatry as you can see quite often in the Old Testament--that troubles come close on the heels of idolatry.
[That is I think some people like my own Dad work well under pressure. But that is not me.
White society has an underlying current of the drive to excel. -But that is putting it politely. In fact it is the drive to be better than anyone else. This creates a environment in which people that can excel do so. For me however this caused me a great deal of discomfort. In any case it explains why in fact White society does come up with all the new and neat stuff.
[Euclidean geometry. Parabolic geometry. Hyperbolic geometry. Projective geometry. Differential geometry. Calculus: Limits, continuity, differentiation, integration. Physical chemistry. Organic chemistry. Biochemistry. Classical mechanics. String Theory, The indeterminacy principle. The wave equation. The Parthenon. Air conditioning. Number theory. Romanesque architecture. Gothic architecture. Information theory. Entropy. Enthalpy. Every symphony ever written. Pierre Auguste Renoir. The twelve-tone scale. The mathematics behind it, twelfth root of two and all that. S-p hybrid bonding orbitals. The Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. The purine-pyrimidine structure of the DNA ladder. Single-sideband radio. All other radio. Dentistry. The internal-combustion engine. Turbojets. Turbofans. Doppler beam-sharpening. Penicillin. Airplanes. Surgery. The mammogram. Polio vaccine. The integrated circuit. The computer. Football. Computational fluid dynamics. Tensors. The Constitution. Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Homer, Hesiod. Glass. Rubber. Nylon. Roads. Buildings. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. (OK, that’s nerve gas, and maybe we didn’t really need it.) Silicone. The automobile. Really weird stuff, like clathrates, Buckyballs, and rotaxanes. The Bible. Bug spray, public-key cryptography, and RSA. Et cetera.]
Things like this:
I found the Beit Midrash environment--in [Litvak yeshivas] much more congenial to my taste. It also had an element of the drive to excel-- but in a much more relaxed form.
And in fact, even today I noticed that I do not work well under pressure.
You might have noted in the two books on Gemara that I put links to that I bring down the Chidushei HaRambam of Rav Soloveitchik and Tosphot. But as a rule, I never was able to understand Tosphot except by a kind of learning in which I would just say the entire Tosphot from beginning to end every day for a few weeks without understanding a single word. But then at some point after a few weeks or more the whole Tosphot would become clear. But the learning to get to that point was always in this kind of relaxed way or not even thinking whether I understand it or not
[That was however not when I was learning with my learning partner David Bronson who in general took the more direct approach to Tosphot: "Stay on it until you get it."]
[That is I think some people like my own Dad worked well under pressure. But that is not me.]
[Euclidean geometry. Parabolic geometry. Hyperbolic geometry. Projective geometry. Differential geometry. Calculus: Limits, continuity, differentiation, integration. Physical chemistry. Organic chemistry. Biochemistry. Classical mechanics. String Theory, The indeterminacy principle. The wave equation. The Parthenon. Air conditioning. Number theory. Romanesque architecture. Gothic architecture. Information theory. Entropy. Enthalpy. Every symphony ever written. Pierre Auguste Renoir. The twelve-tone scale. The mathematics behind it, twelfth root of two and all that. S-p hybrid bonding orbitals. The Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. The purine-pyrimidine structure of the DNA ladder. Single-sideband radio. All other radio. Dentistry. The internal-combustion engine. Turbojets. Turbofans. Doppler beam-sharpening. Penicillin. Airplanes. Surgery. The mammogram. Polio vaccine. The integrated circuit. The computer. Football. Computational fluid dynamics. Tensors. The Constitution. Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Homer, Hesiod. Glass. Rubber. Nylon. Roads. Buildings. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. (OK, that’s nerve gas, and maybe we didn’t really need it.) Silicone. The automobile. Really weird stuff, like clathrates, Buckyballs, and rotaxanes. The Bible. Bug spray, public-key cryptography, and RSA. Et cetera.]
Things like this:
I found the Beit Midrash environment--in [Litvak yeshivas] much more congenial to my taste. It also had an element of the drive to excel-- but in a much more relaxed form.
And in fact, even today I noticed that I do not work well under pressure.
You might have noted in the two books on Gemara that I put links to that I bring down the Chidushei HaRambam of Rav Soloveitchik and Tosphot. But as a rule, I never was able to understand Tosphot except by a kind of learning in which I would just say the entire Tosphot from beginning to end every day for a few weeks without understanding a single word. But then at some point after a few weeks or more the whole Tosphot would become clear. But the learning to get to that point was always in this kind of relaxed way or not even thinking whether I understand it or not
[That was however not when I was learning with my learning partner David Bronson who in general took the more direct approach to Tosphot: "Stay on it until you get it."]
[That is I think some people like my own Dad worked well under pressure. But that is not me.]
World view used to be connected with the idea of a systematic philosophy. That idea was lost to the degree that people have world views that are immune to realty and employ self contradictory principles. A lot of work during the Middle Ages in philosophy was done to get to a systematic non self contradictory system. This still existed during the time of Hegel. But after that a world view could be just that --a world view unrelated to reality.
The good thing about Musar Ethics of the Middle Ages is that its structure depends on well worked out world views.
[I mean that Musar tends to depend on the books of Saadia Gaon and the Rambam in terms of world view]
The good thing about Musar Ethics of the Middle Ages is that its structure depends on well worked out world views.
[I mean that Musar tends to depend on the books of Saadia Gaon and the Rambam in terms of world view]
30.10.17
The religious world
The religious world is pretty worthless at this point, but there are still a few decent Litvak yeshivas by which a new beginning might be made. That would obviously be Ponovitch and the great NY Litvak yeshivas. But before a new start can be made, the first thing is to clear out the avoda zara--idolatry-that the Gra was trying to warn people about. [I should point out that Reb Nachman was not in the category of the "herem". ]
If there is any way at all to come to authentic Torah, it certainly is not through the religious world.
When I actually try to think about what it would take to come to Torah, my thoughts automatically drift to the שערי תשובה The Gates of Repentance of Rabbainu Yona. I am not sure why. Maybe it is because he gives there the short and simple way. But mainly, my feeling is coming to Torah and the Absolute Spirit is mainly by learning Gemara and Musar [all the mediaeval books of Ethics], not just the Gates of Repentance.
The way to learn Gemara is to have a fast session and an in-depth session. The fast one is by reading the Gemara along with Rashi [line by line, word by word] and at the end of the page to read all the Tosphot. The in depth session is to learn one or more Tosphot many times for many days.
The importance of learning Torah is that it is higher than repentance. So when one does not know what of how his or her actions are objectively wrong, learning Torah in itself sends corrections into the world of Repentance.
Reb Israel Salanter noticed the problem that religious people lose the menschlichkeit of Torah the more religious they become. He wanted to correct this problem by means of the Musar movement. He had a few disciples that went out and spread the good news about Musar/ learning Ethics. This to me seems to be a good idea. The way to do this I think is to get all the books of the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter and of the rishonim and just plow through them word by word.
The printing house Eshkol in Israel used to print all the major Musar books in one set.
If there is any way at all to come to authentic Torah, it certainly is not through the religious world.
When I actually try to think about what it would take to come to Torah, my thoughts automatically drift to the שערי תשובה The Gates of Repentance of Rabbainu Yona. I am not sure why. Maybe it is because he gives there the short and simple way. But mainly, my feeling is coming to Torah and the Absolute Spirit is mainly by learning Gemara and Musar [all the mediaeval books of Ethics], not just the Gates of Repentance.
The way to learn Gemara is to have a fast session and an in-depth session. The fast one is by reading the Gemara along with Rashi [line by line, word by word] and at the end of the page to read all the Tosphot. The in depth session is to learn one or more Tosphot many times for many days.
The importance of learning Torah is that it is higher than repentance. So when one does not know what of how his or her actions are objectively wrong, learning Torah in itself sends corrections into the world of Repentance.
Reb Israel Salanter noticed the problem that religious people lose the menschlichkeit of Torah the more religious they become. He wanted to correct this problem by means of the Musar movement. He had a few disciples that went out and spread the good news about Musar/ learning Ethics. This to me seems to be a good idea. The way to do this I think is to get all the books of the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter and of the rishonim and just plow through them word by word.
The printing house Eshkol in Israel used to print all the major Musar books in one set.
Some girls just are interested in you because of your American passport.
. Some girls just are interested in you because of your American identity. Some are interested in your money. And some are not honest. I have sadlly known all these types.Sometimes you can find all three wrapped up in a single girl.
If you find yourself giving free English lessons to someone who is supposed to be your friend, then you know you are in a bad relationship.
I think reading the news is a kind of evil inclination. History also. If one's intention is to relax, then reading news and history does not accomplish that goal. It just makes one more nervous.
Also the Rambam includes reading history in the category of Outside books that one loses his portion in the next world for reading] [That is in his commentary to the Mishna.]
That is to say there is a short list of what are called secular subjects that were recommended by the Gra and the Rambam. [Physics Metaphysics the Trivium and Quadrivium] but outside of that they forbid.
[Most other Rishonim were against learning things the Rambam recommended like Aristotle. Certainly the Ramban and Rav Ovadia from Bartenura. But I have reason to believe the Rambam was right. Mainly my reasoning is that I did no see much in the way of righteousness of even human decency n the path of religious fanaticism. This observation convinced me that the Rambam and the Gra are correct.\]
I should mention the news does not really add much in terms of objective knowledge about the world in any case. You can tell this yourself. Just think about any event that your were personally present at or involved with that was reported in the news. Was there any connection between the real facts and what was reported?
Also the Rambam includes reading history in the category of Outside books that one loses his portion in the next world for reading] [That is in his commentary to the Mishna.]
That is to say there is a short list of what are called secular subjects that were recommended by the Gra and the Rambam. [Physics Metaphysics the Trivium and Quadrivium] but outside of that they forbid.
[Most other Rishonim were against learning things the Rambam recommended like Aristotle. Certainly the Ramban and Rav Ovadia from Bartenura. But I have reason to believe the Rambam was right. Mainly my reasoning is that I did no see much in the way of righteousness of even human decency n the path of religious fanaticism. This observation convinced me that the Rambam and the Gra are correct.\]
I should mention the news does not really add much in terms of objective knowledge about the world in any case. You can tell this yourself. Just think about any event that your were personally present at or involved with that was reported in the news. Was there any connection between the real facts and what was reported?
29.10.17
listening to one's parents
Rav Naftali Troup does bring the idea that listening to one's parents is a command in the Torah. This is usually ignored but still it should be fairly clear in the Ten Commandments.
One place where you see this is in the Old Testament in the book of Jeremiah. The children of Yonadav ben Rekav were charged by their father not to drink wine and not to dwell in a house but rather only in tents. So when they were ordered by a true prophet Jeremiah (to drink wine) they refused to obey him because of the commandment of their father. This got for them a promise from God that the family of Yonadav ben Rekav will continue forever.
This is interesting from the standpoint of obeying one's parents even when what they say is not related to Torah. Or even further--it seems to imply that listening to one's parents overrides listening to a true prophet.
The idea is that one does not have to think that what one's parents are saying makes sense for this command of the Torah to apply. But it can not be a case when they command one to transgress the more severe kinds of commands in the Torah. This is because a positive command overrides a negative command, but not a negative command that has as a punishment being cut off from one's people.
Rav Naftali Troup was one of the great Litvak sages in litvak yeshivas before WWII.
Why is this relevant? Mainly because my parents did have a set of wishes for me. This includes things they specifically asked for and also things that their wishes were clear even if they did not express them openly. This is is one of the reasons that when I mention about the idea of the Rambam about the importance of learning Physics and Metaphysics that I sometimes mention my parents.
One place where you see this is in the Old Testament in the book of Jeremiah. The children of Yonadav ben Rekav were charged by their father not to drink wine and not to dwell in a house but rather only in tents. So when they were ordered by a true prophet Jeremiah (to drink wine) they refused to obey him because of the commandment of their father. This got for them a promise from God that the family of Yonadav ben Rekav will continue forever.
This is interesting from the standpoint of obeying one's parents even when what they say is not related to Torah. Or even further--it seems to imply that listening to one's parents overrides listening to a true prophet.
The idea is that one does not have to think that what one's parents are saying makes sense for this command of the Torah to apply. But it can not be a case when they command one to transgress the more severe kinds of commands in the Torah. This is because a positive command overrides a negative command, but not a negative command that has as a punishment being cut off from one's people.
Rav Naftali Troup was one of the great Litvak sages in litvak yeshivas before WWII.
Why is this relevant? Mainly because my parents did have a set of wishes for me. This includes things they specifically asked for and also things that their wishes were clear even if they did not express them openly. This is is one of the reasons that when I mention about the idea of the Rambam about the importance of learning Physics and Metaphysics that I sometimes mention my parents.
There is an idea in the Ari [Rav Isaac Luria] small mindedness. That is that people can fall into a constricted state of consciousness.[or just normal state].
[n the Ari this all comes up in zeir anpin. This in fact has no connection with people except for souls of Emanation like the Patriarchs.Still there is what to learn from the concepts that apply to zeir anpin. The soul of a person is not a miniature zeir anpin as is clear throughout the entire set of the writings of the Ari.]
The way out of limited consciousness is by
idea of a fulcrum--that is finding small acts and habits that can led to a higher state of consciousness or connection with Absolute Spirit.
These are:
Learning Torah [The Old Testament and the two Talmuds and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach] , Musar [Mediaeval Ethics books], learning fast but simply saying the words in order and then going on with no review until one has finished the book at least four times. Talking with God in one's own language. Avoiding cults. Avoiding sins of the tongue lashon hara, lies, rebuke in the wring kind of way. "Thou shalt not steal" to the ultimate extreme.
[n the Ari this all comes up in zeir anpin. This in fact has no connection with people except for souls of Emanation like the Patriarchs.Still there is what to learn from the concepts that apply to zeir anpin. The soul of a person is not a miniature zeir anpin as is clear throughout the entire set of the writings of the Ari.]
The way out of limited consciousness is by
idea of a fulcrum--that is finding small acts and habits that can led to a higher state of consciousness or connection with Absolute Spirit.
These are:
Learning Torah [The Old Testament and the two Talmuds and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach] , Musar [Mediaeval Ethics books], learning fast but simply saying the words in order and then going on with no review until one has finished the book at least four times. Talking with God in one's own language. Avoiding cults. Avoiding sins of the tongue lashon hara, lies, rebuke in the wring kind of way. "Thou shalt not steal" to the ultimate extreme.
Avoiding the entire religious Jewish world is important because the Dark Side just got intertwined and embedded too deeply. It is just now a large cult.
27.10.17
Whatever religious group one gets involves with, it always seems to end up being worship of people.
Even Buddha who was not asking for worship, did end up becoming an object of worship.
I must say that even though it is good to learn from the wise, it is never good to worship them.
I think it proper to mention that I try to stick with good principles that have been emphasized by wise men. And I try to use common sense to avoid things that may be held up for admiration but which I feel are suspicious.
(1) So worship of people as far as I am concerned is completely out of the question.
(2) I also avoid rebuking others for the same reason. It is a command in the Torah, but it is a command that I feel can cause more damage than good if applied without great caution. I try to save it for the most serious of issues.
(3) I definitly agree with the emphasis in the Mir Yeshiva on learning Gemara and Musar [ethics and rules of proper conduct].
(4) I feel that Rav Silverman [Eliyahu] was right for taking the Gra at his word about putting his signature on the letter of excommunication. That is the only yeshiva that I am aware of that does take it seriously. That is for the same above mentioned reason about the importance of not doing idolatry.
Even Buddha who was not asking for worship, did end up becoming an object of worship.
I must say that even though it is good to learn from the wise, it is never good to worship them.
I think it proper to mention that I try to stick with good principles that have been emphasized by wise men. And I try to use common sense to avoid things that may be held up for admiration but which I feel are suspicious.
(1) So worship of people as far as I am concerned is completely out of the question.
(2) I also avoid rebuking others for the same reason. It is a command in the Torah, but it is a command that I feel can cause more damage than good if applied without great caution. I try to save it for the most serious of issues.
(3) I definitly agree with the emphasis in the Mir Yeshiva on learning Gemara and Musar [ethics and rules of proper conduct].
(4) I feel that Rav Silverman [Eliyahu] was right for taking the Gra at his word about putting his signature on the letter of excommunication. That is the only yeshiva that I am aware of that does take it seriously. That is for the same above mentioned reason about the importance of not doing idolatry.
26.10.17
What is relevant now about this is that keeping Torah depends on staying away from Jewish religious teachers as far as possible.
סביב רשעים יתהלכון In Psalms there is a verse that states "around go the wicked" This is usually understood to mean wherever holiness is found, around that come the kelipot dark forces to wreak it up.
In Reb Nachman's thought this comes up in different ways. One is the idea he brings from the Zohar that when there is a lot of sin in the world, the opening towards holiness is almost shut. But in order that it should not be shut completely they place there a false teacher.
For me in particular this is relevant because my experiences with religious teachers has been universally negative in the extreme. I definitely can relate to what Reb Nachman is saying.
That is that religious teachers are actually placed there to keep people away from Torah and to give Torah and bad name. There is no question that there is a great deal of evidence to support Reb Nachman's thesis that Jewish religious teachers are home wreckers and their actual mission is to destroy families and all adherence to Torah.
What is relevant now about this is that keeping Torah depends on staying away from Jewish religious teachers as far as possible.
As ironic as it seems the best places with real authentic Torah are places that go by the Gra--and the more closely they follow the Gra the better.
[It seems to me that this ties in with another idea of Reb Nachman that the evil inclination is a continuous spectrum. That is--it starts at coarse physical desires but reaches up towards the spiritual evil inclination and even up to the fallen angel the Satan. That is similar to the idea of Reb Israel Salanter that there is a physical evil inclination and spiritual evil inclination. The spiritual one has nothing to do with physical desires but rather what ever is against the Law of God, the Law of Moses, it gives one a great desire to do. ]
It should be clear that the spiritual evil inclination is vastly more evil than the physical evil inclination. And this explains the reasons for the phenomenon that I discuses in the above essay.
In Reb Nachman's thought this comes up in different ways. One is the idea he brings from the Zohar that when there is a lot of sin in the world, the opening towards holiness is almost shut. But in order that it should not be shut completely they place there a false teacher.
For me in particular this is relevant because my experiences with religious teachers has been universally negative in the extreme. I definitely can relate to what Reb Nachman is saying.
That is that religious teachers are actually placed there to keep people away from Torah and to give Torah and bad name. There is no question that there is a great deal of evidence to support Reb Nachman's thesis that Jewish religious teachers are home wreckers and their actual mission is to destroy families and all adherence to Torah.
What is relevant now about this is that keeping Torah depends on staying away from Jewish religious teachers as far as possible.
As ironic as it seems the best places with real authentic Torah are places that go by the Gra--and the more closely they follow the Gra the better.
[It seems to me that this ties in with another idea of Reb Nachman that the evil inclination is a continuous spectrum. That is--it starts at coarse physical desires but reaches up towards the spiritual evil inclination and even up to the fallen angel the Satan. That is similar to the idea of Reb Israel Salanter that there is a physical evil inclination and spiritual evil inclination. The spiritual one has nothing to do with physical desires but rather what ever is against the Law of God, the Law of Moses, it gives one a great desire to do. ]
It should be clear that the spiritual evil inclination is vastly more evil than the physical evil inclination. And this explains the reasons for the phenomenon that I discuses in the above essay.
25.10.17
The Constitution of the USA
There is an aspect to the Constitution that is not mentioned often. It is this. It was the way in the ancient world that if you had a small village that was just barely surviving and there was a neighboring village that was doing better you had two choices. Do better--work harder. But that turns out to be hard. It is much easier to get a few men together and invade the next village and kill the men and enslave the women. The only protection from this was for the other village to have more men. And thus States arose. The more men--the more protected you were. And thus arose Empires also. The bigger--the better. This is the unspoken story about the USA Constitution.It is a way to get everyone together to make a State.But the unique thing is it is based on moral principles not just might makes right like the Left. [In this I am leaving out the important point that human flourishing depends on there being a state.] In any case the Constitution depends on the kind of people that created it. It can not exist without the majority of the people agreeing with it's principles. I mean it can not be a unifying force strong enough to create a nation unless people agree with it.
The reason socialism appeals to people is also because of agreement but its agreement depends on greed. "Take from the rich and give it to us." It appeals to the lowest denominator of human nature. The Constitution appeals to the highest aspects of human nature.
The reason socialism appeals to people is also because of agreement but its agreement depends on greed. "Take from the rich and give it to us." It appeals to the lowest denominator of human nature. The Constitution appeals to the highest aspects of human nature.
In the yeshiva world in the Mir in N.Y. and Shar Yashuv in Far Rockaway the emphasis was on learning Torah. The basic idea I think is that you can either tell people what your ideas of morality and justice are and hope that they will accept them. Or a better choice is let people learn Torah, and thus teach themselves morality.
This goes along with the basic problem of trying to convince other's of your own ideas. Usually it does not work. But when people learn Torah and Musar along the lines of Reb Israel Salanter and the Gra--in that way they teach themselves.
But I never really saw much justification for this idea until I learned the Nefesh HaChaim by a disciple of the Gra. There he brings the well known ideas about learning Torah from Shas.
That is to say that learning Torah is a drawing down of the light of the (4) שם מ''ה יוד הא ואו הא and therefore on a whole new level beyond any of the other commandments of the Torah.
The idea of Musar I should mention is also along the same lines. It is not possible to reach the "self" directly because only the surface of the self is visible. But by learning Torah and Musar one indirectly can reach the self. [ I might mention the important principle of not speaking Lashon Hara [speaking evil] about others as being the opposite side of the coin of learning Torah.--That is to say that both of these things together reach to the light of the שם מ''ה {Divine Name with the value 45}
But both of these ideas are based on Chazal. You can not just go through the Torah and find something that appeals to you and claim that "This... is the main thing." That is called המגלה פנים התורה שלא כהלכה and the Rif and Rosh say that books that claim that type of thing are in the category of ספרים חיצוניים -books of the Dark Side.
Since it came up I might as well expand a bit. The basic idea of the Ari Isaac Luria is that at first there was no place for creation because the Infinite Light was everywhere and so God contracted Himself to create a hollow space for creation (and left a spot of his light in the middle ) and then drew into it a קו וחוט a line and thread of his Infinite Light which went down a drop and then turne towards the sides to make the first sepherah of circles. Then from there down some more nine more times. Then came אדם קדמון The ten sepherot in the form of a man. Then from his ears nose mouth were drawn more worlds. Then from his eyes. That last one caused the breaking of the vessels and then the light of the שם מ''ה [name of value 45] shown to make a correction. That is the short story of why it is important to learn Torah. That is because it draws that light which is a correction to all the kelipot and breaking of the vessels.
I usually do not go into this because the Dark Side has taken the Ari as prisoner..
This goes along with the basic problem of trying to convince other's of your own ideas. Usually it does not work. But when people learn Torah and Musar along the lines of Reb Israel Salanter and the Gra--in that way they teach themselves.
But I never really saw much justification for this idea until I learned the Nefesh HaChaim by a disciple of the Gra. There he brings the well known ideas about learning Torah from Shas.
That is to say that learning Torah is a drawing down of the light of the (4) שם מ''ה יוד הא ואו הא and therefore on a whole new level beyond any of the other commandments of the Torah.
The idea of Musar I should mention is also along the same lines. It is not possible to reach the "self" directly because only the surface of the self is visible. But by learning Torah and Musar one indirectly can reach the self. [ I might mention the important principle of not speaking Lashon Hara [speaking evil] about others as being the opposite side of the coin of learning Torah.--That is to say that both of these things together reach to the light of the שם מ''ה {Divine Name with the value 45}
But both of these ideas are based on Chazal. You can not just go through the Torah and find something that appeals to you and claim that "This... is the main thing." That is called המגלה פנים התורה שלא כהלכה and the Rif and Rosh say that books that claim that type of thing are in the category of ספרים חיצוניים -books of the Dark Side.
Since it came up I might as well expand a bit. The basic idea of the Ari Isaac Luria is that at first there was no place for creation because the Infinite Light was everywhere and so God contracted Himself to create a hollow space for creation (and left a spot of his light in the middle ) and then drew into it a קו וחוט a line and thread of his Infinite Light which went down a drop and then turne towards the sides to make the first sepherah of circles. Then from there down some more nine more times. Then came אדם קדמון The ten sepherot in the form of a man. Then from his ears nose mouth were drawn more worlds. Then from his eyes. That last one caused the breaking of the vessels and then the light of the שם מ''ה [name of value 45] shown to make a correction. That is the short story of why it is important to learn Torah. That is because it draws that light which is a correction to all the kelipot and breaking of the vessels.
I usually do not go into this because the Dark Side has taken the Ari as prisoner..
In the beginning of בבא בתרא the גמרא is trying to figure out if היזק ראיה שמיה היזקץ or not? They do this at first by looking at the משנה
The משנה says that if שותפים want to divide a court yard they build a wall.
The words the משנה uses are שרצו לעשות מחיצה. So the question is what is a מחיצה? A wall? or just some sticks stuck in the ground to show where the dividing line is. The גמרא seems to say that if the word מחיצה means a wall [גודא] then we learn from this that היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק.
I have at this point in time no idea what the גמרא means. Does it mean this. If it means a wall then there is no proof one way or the other. Only if it means a division, then we can deduce that היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. Or does it mean there is an actual proof?
I think it is possible that the גמרא is thinking like this. If the משנה would hold היזק ראיה שמיה היזק then it would have written השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. That is to say it had an easy way of adding a little more information. But it choose not to do so. Therefore it must hold לאו שמיה היזק
בתחילת בבא בתרא הגמרא מנסה להבין אם היזק ראיה שמיה היזק או לא? הם עושים זאת בהתחלה על ידי שמסתכלים במשנה. המשנה אומרת שאם שותפים רוצים לחלק חצר הם בונים קיר. המילים שהמשנה משתמשת בהן הן "שרצו לעשות מחיצה". אז השאלה היא מה היא מחיצה? קיר? או רק מקלות תקועים באדמה כדי להראות היכן הקו המפריד הוא. גמרא נראית שרוצה לומר שאם המילה מחיצה פירושו קיר [גודא] אז אנחנו לומדים מכך היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק. אין לי בשלב הזה מושג מה הגמרא מכוונת. האם זאת אומרת - אם פירושו קיר אז אין הוכחה לכאן או לכאן. רק אם זה אומר חלוקה, אז אנחנו יכולים להסיק כי היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. או אולי פירוש הדבר ישנה הוכחה בפועל?
אני חושב שזה אפשרי שהגמרא חושבת ככה. אם המשנה מחזיקה שהיזק ראיה שמיה היזק אז היא היתה כותבת השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. כלומר היה למשנה דרך קלה להוסיף קצת יותר מידע. אבל היא בחרה שלא לעשות זאת. לכן היא חייבת להחזיק לאו שמיה היזק.
The משנה says that if שותפים want to divide a court yard they build a wall.
The words the משנה uses are שרצו לעשות מחיצה. So the question is what is a מחיצה? A wall? or just some sticks stuck in the ground to show where the dividing line is. The גמרא seems to say that if the word מחיצה means a wall [גודא] then we learn from this that היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק.
I have at this point in time no idea what the גמרא means. Does it mean this. If it means a wall then there is no proof one way or the other. Only if it means a division, then we can deduce that היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. Or does it mean there is an actual proof?
I think it is possible that the גמרא is thinking like this. If the משנה would hold היזק ראיה שמיה היזק then it would have written השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. That is to say it had an easy way of adding a little more information. But it choose not to do so. Therefore it must hold לאו שמיה היזק
בתחילת בבא בתרא הגמרא מנסה להבין אם היזק ראיה שמיה היזק או לא? הם עושים זאת בהתחלה על ידי שמסתכלים במשנה. המשנה אומרת שאם שותפים רוצים לחלק חצר הם בונים קיר. המילים שהמשנה משתמשת בהן הן "שרצו לעשות מחיצה". אז השאלה היא מה היא מחיצה? קיר? או רק מקלות תקועים באדמה כדי להראות היכן הקו המפריד הוא. גמרא נראית שרוצה לומר שאם המילה מחיצה פירושו קיר [גודא] אז אנחנו לומדים מכך היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק. אין לי בשלב הזה מושג מה הגמרא מכוונת. האם זאת אומרת - אם פירושו קיר אז אין הוכחה לכאן או לכאן. רק אם זה אומר חלוקה, אז אנחנו יכולים להסיק כי היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. או אולי פירוש הדבר ישנה הוכחה בפועל?
אני חושב שזה אפשרי שהגמרא חושבת ככה. אם המשנה מחזיקה שהיזק ראיה שמיה היזק אז היא היתה כותבת השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. כלומר היה למשנה דרך קלה להוסיף קצת יותר מידע. אבל היא בחרה שלא לעשות זאת. לכן היא חייבת להחזיק לאו שמיה היזק.
In the beginning of Bava Batra the Gemara is trying to figure out if היזק ראיה שמיה היזקץ. (Damage caused by seeing is damage or not). They do this at first by looking at the Mishna
The Mishna says that if partners want to divide a court yard they build a wall.
The words the mishna uses are שרצו לעשות מחיצה (that wanted to make a division) so the question is what is a מחיצה (division)? A wall? or just some sticks stuck in the ground to show where the dividing line is. The Gemara seems to say that if the word מחיצה means a wall [גודא] then we learn from this that היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק ((Damage caused by seeing is not damage).
I have at this point in time no idea what the Gemara means. Does it mean that if it means a wall then there is no proof one way or the other. Only if it means a division then we can deduce that היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. Or does it mean there is an actual proof?
I think it is possible that the gemara is thinking like this: If the Mishna would hold היזק ראיה שמיה היזק then it would have written השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. That is to say it had an easy way of adding a little more information. But it choose not to do so. Therefore it must hold לאו שמיה היזק
The Mishna says that if partners want to divide a court yard they build a wall.
The words the mishna uses are שרצו לעשות מחיצה (that wanted to make a division) so the question is what is a מחיצה (division)? A wall? or just some sticks stuck in the ground to show where the dividing line is. The Gemara seems to say that if the word מחיצה means a wall [גודא] then we learn from this that היזק ראיה לאו שמיה היזק ((Damage caused by seeing is not damage).
I have at this point in time no idea what the Gemara means. Does it mean that if it means a wall then there is no proof one way or the other. Only if it means a division then we can deduce that היזק ראיה שמיה היזק. Or does it mean there is an actual proof?
I think it is possible that the gemara is thinking like this: If the Mishna would hold היזק ראיה שמיה היזק then it would have written השותפים שרצו ליחלק בונים כותל. That is to say it had an easy way of adding a little more information. But it choose not to do so. Therefore it must hold לאו שמיה היזק
24.10.17
The issue of love and family is hard to figure out. When I was in high school I waited for my Dad [almost every day ] to pick me up at the public library and there I read some of the symposium of Plato which is about Love. I must say growing up in my parent's home along with my learning of Plato gave me a very idealistic concept of what Love is all about.
[This left me unprepared for the cynical type of marriage that exists today -that which is called marriage but is really just a financial arrangement. The "real thing", the authentic connection between souls I think no longer exists.]
[This left me unprepared for the cynical type of marriage that exists today -that which is called marriage but is really just a financial arrangement. The "real thing", the authentic connection between souls I think no longer exists.]
What accounts for charismatic leaders? Sometimes someone really knows what they are talking about and that can account for it. That is the reason people will flock to a lecture in Quantum Mechanics from Leonard Susskind.
But other times it is hard to tell. Most often charismatic leaders are ignorant of what they profess to know, but are in their position because of the snowball effect. They managed to get one or two people under their influence and then those people go out to make more converts etc. Sometimes like in academia you have a group of people that award to each other credentials.
A friend played for me a little bit of of an Allan Watts talk on Buddhism. He started out saying that survival is a game. He then explained that survival is just a game that people play. He elaborated on this theme a little and bit and I asked my friend what he learned from that. It occurs to me that what Allan Watts was saying to his audience was that their survival was just a game to him. It seems unlikely that he was saying that his own survival is just a game. I think he took his own survival deathly serious. So I wonder what is it about someone that is spouting utter nonsense that people get attracted to?
Mainly I would have to say that it is the desire to fit into a social group that gets people to accept whatever themes they say and to respect whom so ever they respect.
But unless something is really evil, I think it is best not to criticize. Say criticism for when it is absolutely necessary. I think much of the interest in Buddhism is a reaction to corrupt religions in the West and so it makes little sense to criticize what might be good for the people that are following it..
[People have needs that can be satisfied only in a social group. So the message of many groups is: agree with us and you will be accepted. Disagree? Then get out. ] Women nowadays use that leverage--you want to be in a relationship you have to agree that she is a supreme being worthy of worship and praise. [At least that is what I found among Western women.]
But other times it is hard to tell. Most often charismatic leaders are ignorant of what they profess to know, but are in their position because of the snowball effect. They managed to get one or two people under their influence and then those people go out to make more converts etc. Sometimes like in academia you have a group of people that award to each other credentials.
A friend played for me a little bit of of an Allan Watts talk on Buddhism. He started out saying that survival is a game. He then explained that survival is just a game that people play. He elaborated on this theme a little and bit and I asked my friend what he learned from that. It occurs to me that what Allan Watts was saying to his audience was that their survival was just a game to him. It seems unlikely that he was saying that his own survival is just a game. I think he took his own survival deathly serious. So I wonder what is it about someone that is spouting utter nonsense that people get attracted to?
Mainly I would have to say that it is the desire to fit into a social group that gets people to accept whatever themes they say and to respect whom so ever they respect.
But unless something is really evil, I think it is best not to criticize. Say criticism for when it is absolutely necessary. I think much of the interest in Buddhism is a reaction to corrupt religions in the West and so it makes little sense to criticize what might be good for the people that are following it..
[People have needs that can be satisfied only in a social group. So the message of many groups is: agree with us and you will be accepted. Disagree? Then get out. ] Women nowadays use that leverage--you want to be in a relationship you have to agree that she is a supreme being worthy of worship and praise. [At least that is what I found among Western women.]
23.10.17
Renaissance and the Enlightenment
I like the Renaissance a lot and Kant was pro Enlightenment to some degree. I mean though in fact he was pro Enlightenment, still in his system you find an area in which Reason has trouble penetrating. And that seems to leave room for faith. That is at least how Kant and Dr Kelley Ross look at it.
But with Hegel you really do not need the area of the dinge an sich/things in themselves to be immune from Reason, but rather a realm that some kind of awareness does exist.
I have never been able to blame the problems of the modern world on the Renaissance nor on the Enlightenment. Rather my own tendency has been to see Rousseau as the actual source of the problems. Later I saw in fact a few problems in Locke and Hume that I think may also contribute to the problems. But I still would not blame the Enlightenment itself.
[Dr Ross I would surely disagree with me about Hegel, but at this point I think that it is true that Hegel holds from an area of faith/knowledge that is not based on reason , nor understanding, nor empirical evidence. At least that is what I saw one time in reading Hegel. But Hegel would call it spirit--as different from Absolute Spirit.]
And furthermore I think it is necessary to agree with me. How can one think that all areas of spirit are open to knowledge by means of Reason or dialectics in Hegel's system?
Of course Hegel is open to abuse as the Marxists have found out. But I still can not see him to blame for that when openly the Marxists reject most of his system. but use some concepts they found useful.
There are plenty of problematic issues nowadays, but I would not blame the Renaissance nor the Enlightenment for them.
The problem that I see is the Satan that goes around with his agents. The way to get out of the problem with the Dark Side is not at all clear. The thing is there are different areas of value, and the main job of every person is to penetrate to the good core and avoid the kelipa [evil] in each area.
But with Hegel you really do not need the area of the dinge an sich/things in themselves to be immune from Reason, but rather a realm that some kind of awareness does exist.
I have never been able to blame the problems of the modern world on the Renaissance nor on the Enlightenment. Rather my own tendency has been to see Rousseau as the actual source of the problems. Later I saw in fact a few problems in Locke and Hume that I think may also contribute to the problems. But I still would not blame the Enlightenment itself.
[Dr Ross I would surely disagree with me about Hegel, but at this point I think that it is true that Hegel holds from an area of faith/knowledge that is not based on reason , nor understanding, nor empirical evidence. At least that is what I saw one time in reading Hegel. But Hegel would call it spirit--as different from Absolute Spirit.]
And furthermore I think it is necessary to agree with me. How can one think that all areas of spirit are open to knowledge by means of Reason or dialectics in Hegel's system?
Of course Hegel is open to abuse as the Marxists have found out. But I still can not see him to blame for that when openly the Marxists reject most of his system. but use some concepts they found useful.
There are plenty of problematic issues nowadays, but I would not blame the Renaissance nor the Enlightenment for them.
The problem that I see is the Satan that goes around with his agents. The way to get out of the problem with the Dark Side is not at all clear. The thing is there are different areas of value, and the main job of every person is to penetrate to the good core and avoid the kelipa [evil] in each area.
22.10.17
When the Rambam discusses Physics and Metaphysics
When the Rambam includes Physics and Metaphysics in the category of the Oral Law it seems to include chemistry. That is he says is he referring to these subjects as understood by the ancient Greeks and whether in Mishne Torah or in Aristotle we can see Chemistry being included.
Even though the actual Physics of Aristotle does not seem valid anymore, still the subject matter that the Rambam was referring to is clear.
On the other hand when the Rambam refers to Metaphysics, I think it is clear he means specifically the book Metaphysics of Aristotle. But then going by subject matter I think then one would have to include Kant and Hegel.
Even though the actual Physics of Aristotle does not seem valid anymore, still the subject matter that the Rambam was referring to is clear.
On the other hand when the Rambam refers to Metaphysics, I think it is clear he means specifically the book Metaphysics of Aristotle. But then going by subject matter I think then one would have to include Kant and Hegel.
Hezekiah (king of Judah) had been giving money [tribute] to Assyria. Then at one point he stopped. Then the king of Assyria sent an army against the cities of Judah. So Hezekiah said to him "I am sorry. How much would it take to make peace between us?" Assyria gave some staggering amount and Hezekiah sent it to him. Then the king of Assyria sent an army to conquer Jerusalem.
The lesson seems to be: Do not compromise with the Dark Side. They get a taste of victory and then they just want more.
The lesson seems to be: Do not compromise with the Dark Side. They get a taste of victory and then they just want more.
21.10.17
Basic principles.
[] Talking with God in one's mother tongue. [As we see King David was doing. We also see the Rambam mention that this was the actual way people prayed before the prayers became solidified and set.
[] No Lashon Hara [speaking bad]. That is no talking bad about other unless you fulfill the seven conditions the Chafetz Chaim brings for saying lashon hara for sins between man and his fellow man. For sin between man and God these seven conditions do not exist but there are a few other conditions as the Chafetz Chaim goes into in chapter 4.
[] Truth. Speak the truth at all cost.
[] Try review the Oral and Written Law. That is every day one full chapter of the Old Testament at the dinner table with the whole family. That is to get through the entire Tenach from cover to cover.
Also the Two Talmuds. [With the all the basic commentaries if possible].
[] Same with Physics and Math [as Maimonides (the Rambam) mentions in Mishne Torah and also the Guide.].= to get through the basic subjects. I know of no particular text, but at least to get through the basic subjects.
[]The way to do this learning is to say the words and to go on. That is called "Girsa".
[] learning survival skills.
[] If in Israel, it is important to serve in the IDF and otherwise support the peace of the state. [There were plenty of Jews that tried to stop the second return to Israel n the days of Ezra and Nechemia and their names are recorded for a in the book of Nechemia for their eternal shame. Thus the religious world that today also tries to undermine the State of Israel will also been remembered as cursed for all future generations.
I got to thinking about this after breaking my foot and leg in three places. I was not able to walk for two months so I had lots of time to think about teshuva (repentance). That is I hope to not let this crisis go to waste but rather to strive to understand in what ways do I need to improve myself.
[] Talking with God in one's mother tongue. [As we see King David was doing. We also see the Rambam mention that this was the actual way people prayed before the prayers became solidified and set.
[] No Lashon Hara [speaking bad]. That is no talking bad about other unless you fulfill the seven conditions the Chafetz Chaim brings for saying lashon hara for sins between man and his fellow man. For sin between man and God these seven conditions do not exist but there are a few other conditions as the Chafetz Chaim goes into in chapter 4.
[] Truth. Speak the truth at all cost.
[] Try review the Oral and Written Law. That is every day one full chapter of the Old Testament at the dinner table with the whole family. That is to get through the entire Tenach from cover to cover.
Also the Two Talmuds. [With the all the basic commentaries if possible].
[] Same with Physics and Math [as Maimonides (the Rambam) mentions in Mishne Torah and also the Guide.].= to get through the basic subjects. I know of no particular text, but at least to get through the basic subjects.
[]The way to do this learning is to say the words and to go on. That is called "Girsa".
[] learning survival skills.
[] If in Israel, it is important to serve in the IDF and otherwise support the peace of the state. [There were plenty of Jews that tried to stop the second return to Israel n the days of Ezra and Nechemia and their names are recorded for a in the book of Nechemia for their eternal shame. Thus the religious world that today also tries to undermine the State of Israel will also been remembered as cursed for all future generations.
I got to thinking about this after breaking my foot and leg in three places. I was not able to walk for two months so I had lots of time to think about teshuva (repentance). That is I hope to not let this crisis go to waste but rather to strive to understand in what ways do I need to improve myself.
religious teachers are actually demons
Reb Nachman of Breslov has a good point that most religious teachers are actually demons. That is to say they do not have human souls--though they might have had human souls once. [He calls them "Torah scholars that are demons" and he brings this idea from the Zohar.]
This theory has one thing going for it- it accounts for the damage they cause.
On the other hand if you go with the idea that everyone has an evil inclination, then it is hard to see from where their uniformly evil advice comes from.
The fact is that Jeremiah and all true tzadikim throughout the ages have had to deal with the problem of false teachers.
The obvious question is how to tell who is from legitimate and who is not. From my experience there is nothing in the religious world that is legit except for the rare exception of the great Litvak yeshivas in NY and Ponovitch in Israel.
I bring this up because there is a great deal that one can learn from the Oral and Written Law [Torah] but the first step is to avoid the teachers from the Dark Side.
[ These demonic Torah scholars use Torah and prayer to relieve people of their money. For them Torah is a way to get ahead in life.]
I might mention that the problem of telling the difference between good and evil I am beginning to see is world wide problem. To me it looks that the Dark Side is very active is getting evil to seem like good. The best solution to this problem I take as being this: Reason perceives universals. That is to say: reason might not tell us much, but it remains the only possible way to tell the difference between good and the Devil's plots..
To put this differently I go with Maimonides that there is a reason for the commandments of the Torah and that is to bring to natural law--that is moral law that is objective. Also this goes along with Hegel that reason can penetrate into the dinge an sich by means of a dialectical process.
But I do not mean that Torah is only consequential morality, rather i think it is like what Kelley Ross of the Kant Fries school calls "Ontological undecidability." That is that commandments of the Torah are to bring to some goal and also have an inherent holiness .
This theory has one thing going for it- it accounts for the damage they cause.
On the other hand if you go with the idea that everyone has an evil inclination, then it is hard to see from where their uniformly evil advice comes from.
The fact is that Jeremiah and all true tzadikim throughout the ages have had to deal with the problem of false teachers.
The obvious question is how to tell who is from legitimate and who is not. From my experience there is nothing in the religious world that is legit except for the rare exception of the great Litvak yeshivas in NY and Ponovitch in Israel.
I bring this up because there is a great deal that one can learn from the Oral and Written Law [Torah] but the first step is to avoid the teachers from the Dark Side.
[ These demonic Torah scholars use Torah and prayer to relieve people of their money. For them Torah is a way to get ahead in life.]
I might mention that the problem of telling the difference between good and evil I am beginning to see is world wide problem. To me it looks that the Dark Side is very active is getting evil to seem like good. The best solution to this problem I take as being this: Reason perceives universals. That is to say: reason might not tell us much, but it remains the only possible way to tell the difference between good and the Devil's plots..
To put this differently I go with Maimonides that there is a reason for the commandments of the Torah and that is to bring to natural law--that is moral law that is objective. Also this goes along with Hegel that reason can penetrate into the dinge an sich by means of a dialectical process.
But I do not mean that Torah is only consequential morality, rather i think it is like what Kelley Ross of the Kant Fries school calls "Ontological undecidability." That is that commandments of the Torah are to bring to some goal and also have an inherent holiness .
20.10.17
Having a girl friend? To me it seems that nowadays it is preferable to have a girlfriend rather than a wife. I would rather have someone who comes up to kiss me when I walk through the front door rather than someone who yells at me.
The major reason I think that having a girl friend is OK is mainly the two commentaries on the in Even HaEzer that say that even to the Rambam the whole problem is only an איסור עשה a prohibition that is derived from a positive commandment. [That is to say we know this is allowed to the Raavad and Ramban/Nachmanides. The whole question is the Rambam. But even to the Rambam there is no prohibition per se, but rather simply the lack of doing kidushin (the marriage ceremony).]
If you look over there, you will see that Rav Joseph Karo just brings the Rambam, and the Rema brings the opinions that it is allowed. But that is not news. What is interesting is the fact that the two major commentaries on Rav Yoseph Karo [בית שמואל, חלקת מחוקק] both say the Rambam only forbids it from an איסור עשה that is a prohibition that is derived from a positive commandment.
See this idea from Chronicles I ch. 2 verse 46.
The reason this is interesting and also important is that not everything people plan on works out the way they expect. Even in marriage. In fact, in marriage I assume most people think hard and think twice before settling on a particular marriage partner,- and even with that it does not always work out the way they expect. Thus this idea of a girl friend is a very positive option.
[Normally I find it a lot better to look at the Tur to clarify difficult issues. The Tur is ambiguous because he brings the Rosh who clearly does not like the idea but from side reasons. That is-- that there is not any prohibition in itself.]
And a further issue is simply that it is not good to be without a wife. So if having a wife is not possible in places like the USA where women are bad news, the best idea is a girl friend.
[Women in the USA have been determined to destroy men ever since around 1990 and on,]
To me it seems that nowadays it is preferable to have a girlfriend rather than a wife. I would rather have someone who comes up to kiss me when I walk through the front door rather than someone who yells at me.
The reason why Calev ben Yefuna having a few girl friends (Chronicles I 2:46) is important is that he was not a king. So we see there is no special status granted to a king in this regard. Having one or more girl friends is perfectly permitted. [The fact of Caleb ben Yefuna is significant since he was a true righteous person. He was the friend of Joshua and one of the spies sent by Moses. But he an Joshua brought back a good report about the Land of Israel. So the act that he had multiple girl friends is significant.]
The proof from Caleb ben Yefuna found in the Gra's commentary.
A girl friend is an argument in the gemara about if she is without kiduhin at all, or with kiduhin but without ketubah
If you look over there, you will see that Rav Joseph Karo just brings the Rambam, and the Rema brings the opinions that it is allowed. But that is not news. What is interesting is the fact that the two major commentaries on Rav Yoseph Karo [בית שמואל, חלקת מחוקק] both say the Rambam only forbids it from an איסור עשה that is a prohibition that is derived from a positive commandment.
See this idea from Chronicles I ch. 2 verse 46.
The reason this is interesting and also important is that not everything people plan on works out the way they expect. Even in marriage. In fact, in marriage I assume most people think hard and think twice before settling on a particular marriage partner,- and even with that it does not always work out the way they expect. Thus this idea of a girl friend is a very positive option.
[Normally I find it a lot better to look at the Tur to clarify difficult issues. The Tur is ambiguous because he brings the Rosh who clearly does not like the idea but from side reasons. That is-- that there is not any prohibition in itself.]
And a further issue is simply that it is not good to be without a wife. So if having a wife is not possible in places like the USA where women are bad news, the best idea is a girl friend.
[Women in the USA have been determined to destroy men ever since around 1990 and on,]
To me it seems that nowadays it is preferable to have a girlfriend rather than a wife. I would rather have someone who comes up to kiss me when I walk through the front door rather than someone who yells at me.
The reason why Calev ben Yefuna having a few girl friends (Chronicles I 2:46) is important is that he was not a king. So we see there is no special status granted to a king in this regard. Having one or more girl friends is perfectly permitted. [The fact of Caleb ben Yefuna is significant since he was a true righteous person. He was the friend of Joshua and one of the spies sent by Moses. But he an Joshua brought back a good report about the Land of Israel. So the act that he had multiple girl friends is significant.]
The proof from Caleb ben Yefuna found in the Gra's commentary.
I find it easier to stay healthy when I am not tempted by bad choices. Fast food was a temptation for me when I was in NY and in Israel. Cheap and tasty. Just for the sake of my own health I find it better to be in an area where fast foods are simply not available.
At one time I would concentrate on black bread, a raw beet and some fried eggs in the morning. That got my weight down.
Walking or jogging was also pretty good for that.
Sometimes one is however not able to make his or her own choices about where to live.
I was recently in a hellish apartment. So I did not have much ability to take care of my health. Now I thank God that he took me out of that evil place and brought me to a wonderful place. It happened in a kind of ironic kind of way. I broke my foot and spent a month in the hospital but in any case it got me out a place I should have left a long time ago.
At one time I would concentrate on black bread, a raw beet and some fried eggs in the morning. That got my weight down.
Walking or jogging was also pretty good for that.
Sometimes one is however not able to make his or her own choices about where to live.
I was recently in a hellish apartment. So I did not have much ability to take care of my health. Now I thank God that he took me out of that evil place and brought me to a wonderful place. It happened in a kind of ironic kind of way. I broke my foot and spent a month in the hospital but in any case it got me out a place I should have left a long time ago.
19.10.17
Looking at the kings of Israel, I got reminded that getting rid of idolatry was a central concern. Some of them simply got rid of every last idol they could find in Israel and every single idol worshiper.
I think that I myself have lost sight of this simple idea. Most religious places do worship human beings even though they pretend to keep Torah. But not only that, but furthermore the worship of their particular idol is central to their philosophy.
The first time I was going through Tenach the Old Testament, I noticed this central concern of many of the great kings only slightly. The next time I began to notice it more so.
My feeling about all this is that it would be great if someone would do like King Asa and just throw out all the idols once and for all. [This is certainly something the Gra wanted to do, but his advice was not accepted. Even the Litvak yeshivas which more or less follow his approach are watered down and diluted and infiltrated.]
I might mention all the idolatry I have seen in the religious world has always bothered me. I just have never spoken up because I figured there must be some excuses for it. After all I have never learned the subject in the Gemara in Sanhedrin 63 in detail. Only after doing the sugia with y learning partner do I feel I have a better grasp of the issue.
I think that I myself have lost sight of this simple idea. Most religious places do worship human beings even though they pretend to keep Torah. But not only that, but furthermore the worship of their particular idol is central to their philosophy.
The first time I was going through Tenach the Old Testament, I noticed this central concern of many of the great kings only slightly. The next time I began to notice it more so.
My feeling about all this is that it would be great if someone would do like King Asa and just throw out all the idols once and for all. [This is certainly something the Gra wanted to do, but his advice was not accepted. Even the Litvak yeshivas which more or less follow his approach are watered down and diluted and infiltrated.]
I might mention all the idolatry I have seen in the religious world has always bothered me. I just have never spoken up because I figured there must be some excuses for it. After all I have never learned the subject in the Gemara in Sanhedrin 63 in detail. Only after doing the sugia with y learning partner do I feel I have a better grasp of the issue.
Commandments of the Torah versus Paul.
Though many people think that Paul was a saint, I think that he said some things which were wrong. Paul in his letters says there is no need to keep the commandments of the Torah. He goes over this theme many times. Not just in the book of Hebrews, but it comes up quite often. [Too many times for me to remember. Ephesians is one place off hand I recall.]
If you take a look at the Book of Deuteronomy it says quite often to keep all the commandments. In one place it uses the phrase "כל הימים" "all the days" I think right before the Shema. But that I think was mistranslated in many translations in English into "כל ימי חייך" "all the days of your life."]
But besides that it does also say "Do not add or subtract from the commandments." And in the later chapter 13 it says a prophet who says true words of prophecy and yet tells you to serve other gods is trying to take you from the commandments of God and so he is false prophet.
So what ever Paul's reasons might have been, it seems he was trying to claim that people do not have to keep the laws of the Torah and therefore he would be considered a false prophet.
[He was subtracting the commandments.]
P.S. I know that this issue was a debate between Paul on one side and James and Peter on the other as is clear in the Doctrines and Homilies of Clementine. But that seems to be a different issue over there. I am looking at this strictly from the standpoint of Torah.
When Protestants talk about reading the Bible, all they really mean is to read Paul.
So what ever Paul's reasons might have been, it seems he was trying to claim that people do not have to keep the laws of the Torah and therefore he would be considered a false prophet.
[He was subtracting the commandments.]
P.S. I know that this issue was a debate between Paul on one side and James and Peter on the other as is clear in the Doctrines and Homilies of Clementine. But that seems to be a different issue over there. I am looking at this strictly from the standpoint of Torah.
When Protestants talk about reading the Bible, all they really mean is to read Paul.
18.10.17
What does Buddhism strive for? The destruction of the self.--And it succeeds.
On the subject of constellations of belief I realize that people disappointed with one value system that they have inherited often jump into another value system and tend to project into its leaders all the holiness and light that they expected to see in their former value system but wre disappointed.
So no wonder that given enough time they discover in the new system the same degree of fraud and chicanery.
Mainly here I am referring to the recent scandals in Buddhism but I think my remarks apply in general.
Still I might mention that I do have myself my own constellation of values based on a few fundamental principles based on the Oral and Written Law [the law of Moses].
But I would have a hard time defining my own values. Still just the fact that my son was here in Uman with his interest in Buddhism got me thinking.
First of all I would have to say I disagree with Buddha in terms of the highest ideal being to be unattached to anything or anyone in this world. Non attachment seems to be a good principle when it comes to bad people-- to stay away from them as far as possible. But this is not a good principle when it comes to good and decent people. In particular I see Buddhism as having a goal of breaking family attachments and relationships. That seems frankly as the opposite of getting to one's true self. one's true self is not an isolated bubble in the void.
There are other things also that I am not sure how to phrase. One thing is meditation to come to know one's own mind is not possible since one is only thinking about what one remembers that he or she was thinking a few moments before. You can not think about what you are now thinking because you are thinking it now.
[Besides these I also noticed that the effect of Zen and Buddhism on one friend is to destroy his mind and personality. The more tolerant he thinks he is, the worse he gets. And that is what Buddhism strives for--the destruction of the self.--And they succeed. But I am taking Buddhism just as an example. Mysticism in the religious world that I am familiar with seems to have the same mind and morality destroying effect.]
So no wonder that given enough time they discover in the new system the same degree of fraud and chicanery.
Mainly here I am referring to the recent scandals in Buddhism but I think my remarks apply in general.
Still I might mention that I do have myself my own constellation of values based on a few fundamental principles based on the Oral and Written Law [the law of Moses].
But I would have a hard time defining my own values. Still just the fact that my son was here in Uman with his interest in Buddhism got me thinking.
First of all I would have to say I disagree with Buddha in terms of the highest ideal being to be unattached to anything or anyone in this world. Non attachment seems to be a good principle when it comes to bad people-- to stay away from them as far as possible. But this is not a good principle when it comes to good and decent people. In particular I see Buddhism as having a goal of breaking family attachments and relationships. That seems frankly as the opposite of getting to one's true self. one's true self is not an isolated bubble in the void.
There are other things also that I am not sure how to phrase. One thing is meditation to come to know one's own mind is not possible since one is only thinking about what one remembers that he or she was thinking a few moments before. You can not think about what you are now thinking because you are thinking it now.
[Besides these I also noticed that the effect of Zen and Buddhism on one friend is to destroy his mind and personality. The more tolerant he thinks he is, the worse he gets. And that is what Buddhism strives for--the destruction of the self.--And they succeed. But I am taking Buddhism just as an example. Mysticism in the religious world that I am familiar with seems to have the same mind and morality destroying effect.]
Constellations of Belief
People choose their belief system based on non rational principles. That is they choose a constellation of beliefs that have no rational connections. For example in politics many beliefs of the Left are unconnected. e.g. animal rights having more value than the rights of an unborn child.
Also these beliefs are resistant to evidence. So clearly these constellations of belief are not based on reasons nor on evidence. Rather they are most often reactions against parents or some perceived opposite social group.
A friend was in Uman for Rosh Hashanah and brought with him a lot of books of Buddhism of the Westernized versions. [Not one authentic Buddhist text.] That got me thinking about this issue of constellations of values.
My basic reaction to Buddhism is that it is a much better than a lot of other things out there.
That is, I do have a basic idea of objective moral values. So any value system I measure with this measuring stick: does it bring to objective moral values? That is I do not even look at motivation, or words. Acta non verba. [Actions, not words].
A Constellation of belief means if you believe one axiom of that group that you want to be associated with you have to believe other unrelated axioms or else be kicked out.
Also these beliefs are resistant to evidence. So clearly these constellations of belief are not based on reasons nor on evidence. Rather they are most often reactions against parents or some perceived opposite social group.
A friend was in Uman for Rosh Hashanah and brought with him a lot of books of Buddhism of the Westernized versions. [Not one authentic Buddhist text.] That got me thinking about this issue of constellations of values.
My basic reaction to Buddhism is that it is a much better than a lot of other things out there.
That is, I do have a basic idea of objective moral values. So any value system I measure with this measuring stick: does it bring to objective moral values? That is I do not even look at motivation, or words. Acta non verba. [Actions, not words].
A Constellation of belief means if you believe one axiom of that group that you want to be associated with you have to believe other unrelated axioms or else be kicked out.
"Felix Mendelssohn I think was very great, but simply on a second tier. I mean you have top level Bach Mozart Beethoven. Then the second tier where there are a lot more people Brahms, Mendelssohn, Sibelius etc. Then there are people that are somewhere between those two levels Handel, Hayden Vivaldi etc. and lots of Renaissance.
As for literature --it is hard to tell who is really great. The reason is that takes a lot longer to tell what is of lasting worth. Shakespeare for example has withstood the test of time and even so I am not sure that he is as great as people claim [Not that I read all of his work. After around the play that slandered Joan of Arc I gave upon him.]. In terms of plays and stories on the top level I think Sophocles is a lot better.
{Besides that I think the Rambam would have forbid reading "literature". I doubt if he would have thought there is any intrinsic worth in it. But for that matter he would have also forbid music of any kind. He did not have the same opinion as the Gra about the "seven wisdoms." This basic idea of spending my time learning Torah I would be doing except that I did not get along very well in the religious kinds of places where books of Torah are to be found. So just from simple self preservation I do not go to such places so as not to give them a chance to hurt me any more than they already have.
But if I could I would get my own set of books of Torah and do them at home.--Torah is valid and important but the Sitra Achra has taken over the entire religious world from head to toe.]
I was once playing on the violin on the street in Geula, and a grandson of Rav Israel Abuchatzaira came by and asked me to play something from Felix Mendelssohn. [I think he might have asked specifically for the violin concerto.]
His mother [Avigail Buso] is very much into listening to classical music--i.e. the daughter of Rav Israel Abuchatzeira.
She however did not approve of my playing violin on the street. She offered me this offer: If I would sit and learn Torah she would pay all my expenses. I did not accept at the time because of my grievances against the religious world.They had already done enough damage to me to the degree I did not see this offer as a good thing.
As for literature --it is hard to tell who is really great. The reason is that takes a lot longer to tell what is of lasting worth. Shakespeare for example has withstood the test of time and even so I am not sure that he is as great as people claim [Not that I read all of his work. After around the play that slandered Joan of Arc I gave upon him.]. In terms of plays and stories on the top level I think Sophocles is a lot better.
{Besides that I think the Rambam would have forbid reading "literature". I doubt if he would have thought there is any intrinsic worth in it. But for that matter he would have also forbid music of any kind. He did not have the same opinion as the Gra about the "seven wisdoms." This basic idea of spending my time learning Torah I would be doing except that I did not get along very well in the religious kinds of places where books of Torah are to be found. So just from simple self preservation I do not go to such places so as not to give them a chance to hurt me any more than they already have.
But if I could I would get my own set of books of Torah and do them at home.--Torah is valid and important but the Sitra Achra has taken over the entire religious world from head to toe.]
I was once playing on the violin on the street in Geula, and a grandson of Rav Israel Abuchatzaira came by and asked me to play something from Felix Mendelssohn. [I think he might have asked specifically for the violin concerto.]
His mother [Avigail Buso] is very much into listening to classical music--i.e. the daughter of Rav Israel Abuchatzeira.
She however did not approve of my playing violin on the street. She offered me this offer: If I would sit and learn Torah she would pay all my expenses. I did not accept at the time because of my grievances against the religious world.They had already done enough damage to me to the degree I did not see this offer as a good thing.
17.10.17
In the book of Isaiah it says in ch 40 "To whom will you liken me?" If God would have any form or substance, then there would be things [Heaven forbid] that one could compare Him to.
In the book of Isaiah it says in ch 40 "To whom will you liken me?" The Rambam (Maimonides) uses this verse as a commentary on the verses of the Torah that say God has no form.
The Rambam understands this verse to mean simply that God has no character trait that one could ascribe to anything physical. Thus God has no form, no matter, no substance, no "essence" or anything else that could be ascribe to any physical being.
This is well known and common place, but in the Jewish religious world in the next breath, people will start to talk about God as if he has characteristics that could apply to physical beings or things.
Thus the basic beliefs are self contradictory, and therefore false.
I mean to say that if God would have any form or substance, then there would be things [Heaven forbid] that one could compare Him to. Therefore nothing that one can attribute to a physical being can be applicable to God.
With the religious this change in the belief system of Torah goes along with worship of their religious teachers. They ascribe Divine traits to their leaders. Thus this change in the philosophy of Torah goes along with a hidden agenda. It is not an innocent mistake.
The Rambam understands this verse to mean simply that God has no character trait that one could ascribe to anything physical. Thus God has no form, no matter, no substance, no "essence" or anything else that could be ascribe to any physical being.
This is well known and common place, but in the Jewish religious world in the next breath, people will start to talk about God as if he has characteristics that could apply to physical beings or things.
Thus the basic beliefs are self contradictory, and therefore false.
I mean to say that if God would have any form or substance, then there would be things [Heaven forbid] that one could compare Him to. Therefore nothing that one can attribute to a physical being can be applicable to God.
With the religious this change in the belief system of Torah goes along with worship of their religious teachers. They ascribe Divine traits to their leaders. Thus this change in the philosophy of Torah goes along with a hidden agenda. It is not an innocent mistake.
During the Middle Ages people did not think about politics even though they were aware that there were other forms of government like that of ancient Athens or Rome. Religion was the major source of value in people's lives that is what they spent their spiritual and mental enegy upon.
The reason for this is that politics was irrelevant. They lived under monarchs.
Nowadays people take that same energy and spend it on politics or conspiracy theories or alternative religions.
Breslov, New Age, Buddhism are all motivated in this same way. Religion nowadays is almost always a reaction against something. Breslov is a last chance effort to find value in the religious world when people have been severely burnt. Buddhism (in the West) is a reaction against Christianity. New Age is similar.
Buddhism tries to break people's ties with their family and friends as if that will lead to Nirvana. They do this in the way of claiming there is no objective truth and therefore all truth is only what is inside of one, not in his relationship with others.
Webs of words are woven by all these cults not to reveal truth but to hide it.
Erez [a disciple of Rav Shick who later became a cult leader seperate from Rav Shick] used to say about Rav Shick's booklets "they have shining words". I always used to wonder about this. Shining words are not necessarily true words. In fact I have an aversion to too many words and too much talking. One of the reasons I never went for a degree in philosophy was I could not stand the obsession with words that philosopher have. As soon as a philosopher says something about language I change the channel.
The reason for this is that politics was irrelevant. They lived under monarchs.
Nowadays people take that same energy and spend it on politics or conspiracy theories or alternative religions.
Breslov, New Age, Buddhism are all motivated in this same way. Religion nowadays is almost always a reaction against something. Breslov is a last chance effort to find value in the religious world when people have been severely burnt. Buddhism (in the West) is a reaction against Christianity. New Age is similar.
Buddhism tries to break people's ties with their family and friends as if that will lead to Nirvana. They do this in the way of claiming there is no objective truth and therefore all truth is only what is inside of one, not in his relationship with others.
Webs of words are woven by all these cults not to reveal truth but to hide it.
Erez [a disciple of Rav Shick who later became a cult leader seperate from Rav Shick] used to say about Rav Shick's booklets "they have shining words". I always used to wonder about this. Shining words are not necessarily true words. In fact I have an aversion to too many words and too much talking. One of the reasons I never went for a degree in philosophy was I could not stand the obsession with words that philosopher have. As soon as a philosopher says something about language I change the channel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)