Rav Nahman of Breslov

There are a few things Rav Nahman of Breslov said that I think are related to how one goes about learning. He said them as general principles in life but to me they seem to apply very much to the way he said to learn-. That is to say the words fast and go on.

For example he said one does not need "hard services." That is to make things hard. 

Also he said as אין להתעקש על שום דבר--not to be stubborn about anything in the world.

The way this applies to learning seem to me to be that one should learn learn simply by saying the words and go on and not be overly concerned if you understand everything.



The way i do this is even with the Avi Ezri I just go over the whole piece one day and the next time I can get to the study hall to so the same thing again.
But I ought to add that my learning partner learns in that slow and tedious way, and it seems by that he comes to great insights that I do not get to.

Uman for Rosh Hashana?

My learning partner David noted that things tend to fall apart when one is not in Uman for Rosh Hashana. This year I did not take his advice and in fact right after Rosh Hashana things fell apart. But I am still not thinking of being in Uman since it has become dangerous. Very dangerous. So the best overall idea I think would be to bring the grave to Israel. The problem with that though it it is not known exactly where the actual grave is. One fellow who paints portraits there told me that a WWII survivor told him that she knew the actual site is not where people think but rather North West about ten yards. from the grave site that is marked. [Actually West but slightly north]

Lithuanian Study hall.

I am very thankful that I am in an area where there is a Lithuanian Study hall. So even though I still do not have the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, I have been able to do a little bit of study in his book.
Once I was going to the ocean and I asked a young fellow who looked a bit like a Litvak if there is a study hall on the name of the Gra in this area. He said No, but he did suggest this other place that is close enough.

Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications

As you can imagine after my arrest my mind has not been settled that much. But because of this I have been thinking along the lines of Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications. While he was more into the idea in order to come to to attachment with God, I have been thinking along the lines of  finding the particular verses in Torah and the prophets that relate to my problems and finding the unifications that come out of each verse.

One of the most important aspects of Rav Abulafia is his claim that Jesus was a true tzadik saint even though that certainly was not very politically correct in the Middle Ages.

But he also is quoted by Rav Haim Vital as presenting the unifications that brings one to attachment with God. This was not known since Rav Vital only brings this in the last volume of his Musar book, Gates of Holiness. And that volume was not even printed until recently.

I still have no computer but a friend is letting me write on his. Finally I have access to Rav Shach's Avi Ezri and I have been looking at it along with a drop of string theory and math. {I still learn these mainly by the method of גירסה  just saying the words and going on  as the Gemara brings.}
One thing I noticed in Rav Shach is that he says the argument between R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish about קנין פירות כקנין הגוף דמי [''Possession of the fruit is like possession of the thing''] is not like it sounds. He says [in laws of renting] that the issue is if renting in itself is like possession of the thing.

That is how he answers the question that I brought up in my booklet on Bava Metzia that the Gemara seems to say that the person that is renting owns the fertilizer in the courtyard, while the Rambam [Maimonides] says not.
I would like to delve more deeply into this but in short Rav Shach says the cases that you find in Shas where the renter owes the stuff that is left in the courtyard is where the intention of the renting was for that specific purpose.--in the view of the Rambam. Clearly the Raavad disagrees. Also I might mention that Rav Shach at the end of that chapter leaves off with a question on Tosphot. To me that is a clear invitation to try and answer for Tosphot.







I am still hoping to get a hold of the books of Rav Avraham Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic that I have mentioned a few times] to get a better idea of his approach. But so far things are going with difficulty in Israel. In any case, it is clear to me that Rav Abulafia is much more interested in unifications than the Ari. I lost interest in unifications for a while but recent events have rekindled my interest. That is to find the right unifications that are applicable to my recent problems.







Also since Professor Moshe Idel has done a lot of research into Rav Abulafia I would like to get his books also.[It was in fact looking at Moshe Ideal's Ph.D thesis that gave me a degree of clarity about Rav Abulafia's opinions about Christianity.






[I have also been looking at Heidegger who I find to have a some important points. While philosophers tend to look at what is common to all people, Heidegger brings the idea that that is not as interesting as what makes people different.

V-57 G and c major  v-57 nwc

music file v65

V-65 F Major

"devekut" (attachment with God)

There is an aspect of "devekut" (attachment with God) that comes by learning Torah. And that mainly happens in the context of straight Torah. A slight deviation leaves that effect and even brings one to harm. Now by straight Torah I mean mainly Gemara Tosphot and Rishonim [Mediaeval authorities].
But it can include akhronim also like the Maharsha and the Avi Ezri.

Now why I bring this up is that we see in the Torah itself there is a commandment to be attached to God [Deuteronomy 30:20] and that leaves one wondering how to go about that.
The disciple of the Gra in the Nefesh HaHaim goes into great length showing in fact how learning Torah does bring God's light down into all the worlds. [He brings it from several places in the Chazal].
And I think most people in straight Litvak yeshivas in fact feel this devekut thought it is not talked about at all.
Perhaps the reason it is not talked about is spirituality can get easily sidetracked.
So as a side effect, devekut is certainly there in Litvak yeshivas. But because of the danger that accompanies any overt effort or open effort in spiritual directions, that aspect of learning Torah is downplayed.

I would like also to expand this idea of learning Torah to include the wisdom of God in Creation as most Rishonim say. That means the obligations of the heart and the rambam and others

devekut attachment with God connected with learning the Ari-  learning the Ari is in itself learning Torah.

I like Kant a lot and I think his questions were  good most people did not accept his answers. That left room for immediate non intuitive knowledge of Fries and Leonard Nelson.  But even Reid accepted the old world view that our mind is form without matter was not really the best approach. The questions brought up by Descartes,and Berkeley he did not really answer except to say that common sense shows our we our we do have knowledge of the objective world. I

Why electricity is allowed on Shabat

I just wanted to mention why electricity is allowed on Shabat. It is not fire which is an oxidation process. [Electricity is  a flow of electrons.] And it is not building, nor fixing a vessel. It is simply turning on a light. That is not the same thing as fixing a light.
[What the fixation of the religious is about this I have no idea. It seems that they have to defend the idea turning on a light is forbidden at all cost with no support from the Gemara or Rishonim. If only they would have the same fixation about things that the Gemara actually does say!

[ I wrote  long blog on this a long time ago in more detail. I had heard about the Chazon Ish but did not have the chance to look at his book on this issue until I got back to the Mir in NY and there looked at it. I was impressed, but then talked with Rav Nelkenbaum about it and he said  that the Chazon Ish was simply not right. I had no idea what he meant at first but then I realized what that  must have meant. That is : you have to squeeze the Chazon Ish into the Gemara. It does not come out of the Gemara itself. You have to make up your own idea why electricity must be forbidden and then try to fit it into the Gemara.]

Later someone showed to me the book of the disciple of the Chazon Ish [Rav Aurbach] that also says electricity is not building nor fixing a vessel.


The main reason why the religious are fixated about this is it makes them feel superior to others while also helping to divert attention from things that the Torah actually does require.

Sukka.

Sukka. The covering needs to be more shade than sun. But to what hour of the day does that refer? If when the sun gets up in the morning, the shade will  be vast. If at midday it will be minuscule.

Rav Ovadiah Joseph did a great thing a few years back when he noted that the sheets they use for the walls flap in the wind. So you need the three small ropes on the side lower areas  to count as walls.

obsession with religion is the primary trait of a schizoid personality.

To clarify a previous post: There is nothing wrong with being religious. Fear of God is a great thing. But there is some kind of aspect of balance of values that one needs. And that balance is what the Torah itself says.

Sapolsky [Stanford University] also mentions that obsession with religion is the primary trait of a schizoid personality.

I thought to mention that getting the right kind of orientation right away in the morning seems like a good idea to me. So to start the day with one of the classical books of Ethics like Obligations of the Heart [חובות לבבות] or any other of the books of Musar seems important to me. [That is the Mesilat Yesharim, Gates of Repentance, Ways of the Righteous etc.]
This is what I try to do myself in order to get my mind set straight right at the beginning of the day.

F Major  [V53 in nwc]

A Major  [V54 nwc]

V-55 G Minor  [V55]

Making people religious amounts to making them wicked

In the religious world there is nothing so highly valued as making other people religious. The trouble with that is that making others religious usually amounts to making them wicked. They abandon the good lessons they learned from their parents  and lose all respect for their parents and teachers and accept some idiot as their idol. [You do not need me to notice this. It is a famous and well known fact. No one becomes religious and gains in good character. These are two polar opposites.]

They will have to spend a life time doing "תשובה על תשובה" repenting on their repentance.

[On the other hand there are parents who do not deserve respect. ]

That is to say there is a hierarchy of values in Torah. Making people religious means ignoring what is essential in Torah and making up new values which are contrary to Torah and pretending as if that is authentic Torah.
The basic problem is the result of the religious world being essentially black, dark and in the total control of the Sitra Achra.

[It is a  good thing to be מזכה את הרבים--bring merit to the many--but to make people religious brings sin to the many, not merit.]
Just to be clear: One is suppose to keep Torah, but that has nothing to do with the religious world except in so far as if you do everything the exact opposite of them, you are on the right track.

Litvak Yeshiva World

One of the great things about the Litvak Yeshiva world is the emphasis on  a  few basic points. Not to speak lashon hara, to be very careful about monetary issues--to never touch that which does not belong to you, and above all --to learn Torah which is in itself the highest commandment and brings one to fulfill all the rest of the commandments.
Add to this the musar ideal of Rav Israel Slanter of trying to gain Fear of God and good traits, and you have  a very potent combination.

The system does not however work for just anyone. And I myself have encountered people, not just on the Litvak path, but even founders of famous kollels that leave a lot to be desired when it comes to being decent people.

My reaction to this is to try an concentrate on areas where I know I need to repent. I figure that in spite of everything, what ever I or anyone has suffered must be connected in some way to my own faults.
And finding my own faults was easy. It was easy to identify areas that I messed up.  This is brought in the words of the sages when a person sees problems coming on him, he should check out his own deeds. If he finds nothing he should know it is from Bitul Torah.[Bitul Torah is a sin. It means not learning Torah when you can.]

But nowadays it is hard to go through the entire Oral and Written Law as one is required. We live in the fast food age. To go through even one Tosphot thoroughly is like eating raw steak. You have to chew and chew until you get something. But learning Rav Shach's Avi Ezri is like going to Mconald's. You get the same calories and even more with the least amount of effort.

Can God create something that is not God?

I rarely have a chance to write so just a quick question --Can God create something that is not God?
I would say of course. That is the whole point of the Torah as Saadia Gaon and the Rambam make clear. So to me it seems the signature of the Gra on letter of excommunication was justified even if it had been about this one point. All the more so that time has shown the Gra to be 100% correct anyway.

For that reason it makes sense to avoid the religious world which ignores the Gra. Because they ignore the  Gra they have been basically taken over by the Sitra Achra.

[Rav Nahman I consider to be a separate issue and in fact he noted the exact same problems that the Gra was referring to. You can see hints of his in all his books but even more openly in the "השמטות"[left out parts] of Rav Shmuel Horwitz that was published by the Na Nach group. [I mean that he found original early editions of the חיי מוהר''ן  that contained Rav Nahman's views that later people decided were not politically correct.]

Since the religious world nowadays is insane the best thing to do is to learn Torah at home.[The main point of the religious world is to make a show of their religiosity in order to get money from secular Jews as the Obligations of the Heart חובות לבבות points out


[In any case the fact of Creation Ex Nihilo is stated openly in all books of the Rishonim.  But why argue with the Sitra Achra [dark side]anyway? Those that know the truth, already know.]

Repeating every paragraph twice helps to learn.

I have found that repeating every paragraph twice helps me to learn. I discovered this in my first year in Shar Yashuv yeshiva in NY. I had heard of the idea of just saying the words and going on but also in Shar Yashuv the idea of review was emphasized by Rav Freifled an his son Motti. So I arrived on this compromise. This idea also helped me later in the Mir where in depth learning was emphasized but i felt i needed to make progress. [That was in learning Gemara Hulin, Ketuboth and Yevamot.]]

This also helped me when I began to learn Physics and Mathematics.


[I have gone back and forth on this over time but this idea of doing a small amount of review and then going on seems to work best for me.]


[For some time in University I did this kind of review because I needed to pass the tests. But later I began just to say the words and go on. Nowadays I am thinking this method of minimal review makes the most sense for me. ]

[The way I originally learned Gemara was with the Soncino English-- paragraph by paragraph-with the Aramaic then English and then Aramaic. [But even then I was doing Tosphot and Maharsha] That is how I as doing Gemara in NY.  That is to say in the Mir people were way above my level. But still for some reason Rav Shmuel Berenbaum felt I could learn well enough to accept me. In any case I found that repeating each section of Gemara twice was good for me to be able to make progress but also to get the basic idea.

Later when learning with David Bronson, I saw his way of sticking on every single word of Tosphot until he would understand. And then I started seeing the same kind of learning that Rav Naftai Yeagger was doing in Far Rockaway--totally different than the path of the Mir and Rav Haim of Brisk. At that point I started this thing of reviewing each page of Gemara a whole lot of times and that is how I started writing those two books of chidushim [news ideas] on Gemara

The Musar Movement of Rav Israel Salanter

The only way that I know of to correct my own faults is to find a place in the books of Ethics (Musar) which discuss that particular fault and to say it to myself every day when I get up in the morning. This has some relation to the Musar Movement of Rav Israel Salanter in which he said that the only way to correct one's faults is by learning Musar. But I found that for me the only thing that seems effective is to do it right away in the morning.

There are faults that I have no idea how to correct, but this method seems to be the most effective for the few that I know about.

For example: In the Madragat HaAdam of the school of Navardok it is brought the statement of the Gra about trust in God. In the Nefesh HaHaim of rav Haim from Voloshin is brought a few statements about accepting the yoke of Torah an another one about judging people on the scales of merit.

I try to say them every day. But still I am aware they might be be that relevant to other faults I have of things I really need to correct. But I figure at it is a start.

The best idea is to avoid anyone who makes a show of their religiosity.That way you are more or less safe from the Dark Side.

Almost all Torah teachers nowadays teach Torah of the Sitra Achra [Torah of the Dark Side.] I would learn only authentic Torah, but that is hard to come by. I would not spent any time on the Torah lessons of the Dark Side. I would learn only Rav Shach's Avi Ezri and the two Talmuds with Tosphot and Pnei Moshe and Rav Haim from Brisk's חידושי הרמב''ם. But in fact to learn Rav Shach it is needed to find a place of study or a yeshiva that goes specifically by the path of the Gra with with compromises with the Dark Side. I would not go anywhere else because the Dark Side, once it gets inside a person's head, never comes out. It is like a circuit board that is solidified. After it gets solidified, there is no way to undo it since it is already hardwired [unless one simply tears up the whole circuit board and throws it out and starts a new one.]

[If  there is not a yeshiva on the name of the Gra in your area then I would simply go to a Reform Judaism or Conservative place. That way one is more or less safe from the Dark Side.]oid t.

It is ironic that people that are aware of the warning of Rav Nahman of Breslov to avoid teachers of the Dark Side often fall into that very trap by trying to avoid it. Not just that but also they hear he emphasized being close to a true tzadik and by that they usually fall into the trap of some teacher of the Sitra Achra. People would do a lot better if they would simply take straight Torah as their guide as it is taught in the Mir Yeshiva and Ponovitch.

The best idea is to avoid anyone who makes a show of their religiosity.That way you are more or less safe from the Dark Side.

The Gra said that to the degree that one lacks any of the seven wisdoms, he will lack in understanding of Torah a hundred fold more.

The Gra said that to the degree that one lacks any of the seven wisdoms, he will lack in understanding of Torah a hundred fold more. That statement was printed in the (Introduction to) Translation of Euclid by one of the Gra's disciples.

This refers to what was in the Middle Ages a well known set of subjects, including Math, Music and Astronomy etc.[Trivium, Quadrium]

In the חובות לבבות Obligations of the Heart [Ibn Pakuda] this same idea comes up except there in the Introduction he has Metaphysics  and only later in שער הבחינה [Gate of Reflection] he goes into the need to know Physics, Biology and human anatomy.
Plus he adds there even practical wisdom--the same kinds of things he said in the Introduction were not necessary for Torah, but then he adds them later in the Gate of Reflection as being necessary for reflection on the greatness of God.

[Rav Eliyahu Zilverman [Rosh Yeshiva of Aderet Eliyahu on the name of the Gra] said to me that Electrical Engineering is in the category of what the Gra meant and now I see the Obligations of the Heart also has that opinion.



The opinion of Saadia Gaon and the Rambam [Maimonides] I have already mentioned. The Rambam specifically wrote about the importance of Physics and Metaphysics as these subjects were understood by the ancient Greeks. He was not referring to mysticism.

[This is not meant to replace learning the regular curriculum of Torah--the two Talmuds with Tosphot, the Avi Ezri, Rav Haim from Brisk's חידושי הרמב''ם known as the Hidushei Rav Haim]

[Learning Torah I did myself for reasons.  It leads to good character traits and fear of God and even eventually to "Devekut." Devekut is attachment with God as is brought in Deuteronomy 30:20. That is the highest goal is to be attached and one with God.]
That is in Shar Yashuv and the Mir I only learned Torah. But eventually I decided that the path of balance was better.--that is Torah with Physics an Math.

So now I want tell people how it is possible to learn Physics even if you do not think you understand.
That is from the Gemara in  tractate Avoda Zara ""Always a person ought to be גורס (just say the words and go on.) even though he forgets and even thought he does not know what he is saying.
After one has finished the whole book, then to go back and review. i believe people ought to have two sessions of learning, one in the morning for in depth learning with lots of review. the other in the afternoon for fast learning--saying the words in order and going on. plus listening to classe in each subject from someone that knows it well.   

The subject of Rav Avraham Abulafia was known to people even before his books were published in Jerusalem and are being sold in Mea Shearim book stores. Mainly the reason is that Professor Moshe  Idel made his PhD thesis about Rav Abulfia and later published  a whole series of books on him and on ecstatic kabala. The attitude of Rav Abulafia towards Yeshua was contained in his PhD thesis.

But some people knew anyway. Rav Avigdor Miller knew. I asked him if he was aware of Rav Abulfia and he said, "Yes". One reason he is not known is that kabalah took a different track after the Middle Ages. Now it is almost synonymous with Zohar. But to me that seems to be a mistake. Even though the Ari himself merited to great levels of Divine Spirit, it seems to me that whatever was based on the Zohar itself does not have much merit.
 Mystics in general were not lacking. There were plenty of Jewish Mystics that had revelations. But when they base themselves on the Zohar, it seems to me they get off track.

[The main problem I see with the Zohar is עם כל דא a translate of עם כל זה. And עם כל זה was made as a phrase to substitute for אף על גב or אף אל פי--"even though". But this phrase על כל זה was invented by the Ibn Tibon family. So what is it doing in the Zohr which was supposedly written a thousand years before the phrase was invented?

Rav Avraham Abulafia was a figure shrouded in mystery.

Rav Avraham Abulafia was a figure shrouded in mystery.  He was one of the most famous mystics of the Middle Ages and he had a definite positive attitude towards Yeshua (Jesus of Nazeret). But that is not what made him subject to scrutiny. It was rather his mystic approach. 

The Rashba definitely was against him and also Yehuda the Tailor. [Yehuda Hahayat]. Yehuda Hahayat was the one who collected all the writings that were  thought to be part of the Zohar that were scattered in his time.[The way the Zohar was a originally published by Moshe De Leon was that he would sell page by page of it for a high price. So it was never put together until much later by Yehuda the Tailor.

These two people were very much against Rav Abulafia.

The major reason that Rav Abulafia got to be considered important and kosher was that the later mystics like Rav Moshe of Cordoba quotes him extensively in his Pardas and also Rav Haim Vital quotes him at length in his שערי קדושה חלק רביעי
The Chida [Rav Haim David Azulay] brings this whole controversy. He wrote a book listing all the great sages [Shem Hagedolim], and he brings Rav Abulafia. And there he says "The Rashba was against him, but I do not know why because he as in fact a great man."

Now I can say what I think Rav Abulafia was thinking. It is clear he held Yeshua [Jesus] was what is called in the Talmud, "messiah son of Joseph." But that does not mean anything like the Trinity. Rather the idea is more along the lines that you find in Rav Nahman's books [of Breslov] about the ideal of "believing in a true tzadik." That is he would be thinking of Jesus more than what we would call a saint, but less than what Christians think about the Trinity.  That is a "tzadik emet" a true tzadik is one whom by means of believing in him-there is imparted to one's soul a certain amount of the holiness of that tzadik.

I might mention that the Ari clearly held the same opinion as Rav Abulafia as you can see in the end of Genesis where he discusses Joseph [HaTzadik] ben Jacob. [There are three books from the Ari which discuss the verses of Torah, and in all three of them he mentions this. However it is well known that the Ari himself did not do the actual writing, but it was Rav Haim Vital who wrote, and then Rav Shmuel Vital (his son) who organized the whole thing into the famous Eight Gates שמנה שערים


What makes this such an emotional issue to people is beyond me. It seems to me simple that once Rav Abulafia and the Ari have expressed their opinion concerning this matter, that would be the end of the discussion.


The reason I ought to add why this does not imply the Trinity is well explained in the Obligations of the Hearts about the difference between אחד האמת The true One and something that is one  by accident--very Aristotelian concepts.
Simply that means God is not a composite, and that he is the true One in that his essence is oneness.

Learning Torah requires saying the words-not just reading them

Learning Torah by saying the words is brought in the Talmud as the only legit way of learning. Just reading is not thought to be in the category of learning Torah at all. אין התורה מתקיימת אלא למוצאיהם בפה

Once I got the idea from Maimonides [Rambam] about the importance of learning Physics and Metaphysics as these subjects were understood by the ancient Greeks, I began to apply the same idea to learning Physics.

Furthermore I saw in the אורחות צדיקים [a mediaeval book of Ethics/ Musar] the importance of just saying the words and going on and not to worry if I understand or not. [But combined with this one should also have a separate time to review --ten times every paragraph.]

Not that this takes the place of learning regular Torah. So what I think is that one ought to divide his time in such a way that he gets through the two Talmuds, the Midrashim, Rif, Rosh, Tur, the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach -- plus the basic set of Physics and Math up until and including String Theory.

[The importance of Rav Shach's Avi Ezri is that it is the best representation of a kind of learning that was implicit since the commentaries on the Rambam but began to be more explicit in Rav Haim Soloveitchik's Hidushei HaRambam.] That is to bring to light the reasoning of the Rambam and its place among the other Rishonim [mediaeval writers especially Tosphot.] This approach of Rav Haim of Brisk is now the golden standard in all Lithuanian type of yeshivas



[I think the idea of learning fast by just saying the words and going further was also brought down in בנין עולם  a book printed in Bnei Brak a few years ago that brought this idea from a lot of great people in Torah thought.]

In the Obligations of the Hearts,  [Hovot Halevavot], Rav Ibn Pakua brings the obligation to learn Aristotle's Metaphysics as necessary for Torah in his introduction [on the very first page]. But at that point he does not sound like he thinks the same about Aristotle's Physics or Biology. But later in שער הבחינה it is clear that he is thinking of the natural sciences as brought in Aristotle's also as obligations but for a different reason.  The first--the Metaphysics he understands as being necessary in order to understand Torah properly. The second--the natural sciences-he understands as the way to fulfill
 coming to love and fear of God.
[The fact that the Hovot Levavot and the Rambam have the same opinion here is I think because they are both depending on Saadia Gaon . ]

[If the Obligations of the Heart had been written in Christian Spain, we would not know what he was talking about. For Christian Europe only had limited books of Aristotle. But the fact that he was writing in Muslim Spain makes it clear. Also he does not mention specifically Aristotle because these subjects had been developed by later people like Al Kindi and Farabi--so Ibn Pakuda wanted to make clear he meant the whole subject matter, not just the actual writings of Aristotle.]

Two arrows of time and two arrows of entropy.

Feynman thought his diagrams reflected an actual reality. So what are the particles that travel backwards in time? Are they not tachyons? Is that not what Relativity implies? The faster a particles goes, the slower it goes in time. So going faster than light means going backwards in time. And now we see in String Theory that the structure of D-branes of dimension 24 are made of tachyons.

[I would imagine that eventually there will be found a dimension in which entropy also goes backwards because for some reason or other the equations of motion with just backwards time do not reveal anything of interest as Feynman noticed in his 1948 paper. But putting negative entropy along with time going backwards does result in very interesting things.

But outside of a small circle of legitimate things most of what passes for Kabala is pure Sitra Achra [powers of darkness.]Especially people known kabalistic expertise are certainly all from the Dark Side sent to make innocent people unclean

The main place where the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] gets it façade of legitimacy from is Kabalah.
But there are some authors there that  are legitimate, and even worthwhile to learn like Shalom Sharabi's Nahar Shalom, Rav Yaakov Abuchatzeira, Issac Luria and the books of the Gra on Kabalah.[Also Rav Luzato. the author of the Mesilat Yesharim on Kabala are very good.] But outside of a small circle of legitimate things, most of what passes for Kabala is pure Sitra Achra [powers of darkness.] Especially people of known kabalistic expertise are certainly all from the Dark Side sent to make innocent people unclean. This is the reason one ought to run from the religious world as far away as possible since the whole shebang was taken over  long time ago, and they use their supposed religiosity to hide their inner rot and fungus revelations


[I ought to add that Rav Nahman's ideas were from the realm of holiness, but when taken without the straight Litvak context, tend to get people off track.]

In any case, to actually see and learn the wonders of God in his creation , I think it makes more sense to do Physics and Math. This idea is certainly that of the Rishonim [mediaeval authorities]before the Zohar was published as you can see in all books of Musar that were written before the Zohar was made known.

Even before the Sitra Achra became totally entwined with kabalah, it was still hard not to get sidetracked. All the more so nowadays, it just is not worth it to endanger one's soul for the sake of the delusional "high" that Kabala gives one.

To make yeshivas on the name of the Gra and Rav Shach would be in the category of "bringing merit to many."

There is a yeshiva in the old city of Jerusalem that goes by the Gra totally. That is the Aderet Eliyahu of the Zilverman's. But it seems to me that to start study halls in other places in the world especially Israel makes sense. The reason is that the regular Litvak path, while fairly decent, still lacks that emphasis on the Gra that would save a lot of people from the Sitra Achra (Dark Side).
this is not meant to disparage the great ideas of Rav Nahman of Breslov, but rather to help people come to straight authentic Torah. With the context of straight Torah, many of Rav Nahman's ideas can be very helpful. But when taken outside that context, it usually gets people off track.


[The idea here is that sometimes it happens that one is not able to learn Torah as much as he should. if at least he or she could help contribute the creating places of study that go by the Gra specifically, this would at least be a step in the right direction.]


Besides that it would be good for me if there was a study hall or yeshiva in my area on the name of the Gra so that I would be able to learn a little bit of Torah. As things stand today I am afraid of walking into any religious place because the Sitra Achra has taken over most of them. But places on the name of the Gra or which go by the straight Litvak path are safe. 

I also noticed the Obligations of the Heart says all you can use reason for about God is that he exists and is One and eternal; but after that, we can only know Him by his works. All other questions about God are not knowable to Rav Ibn Pakuda [the author.] (note 1) But even more so. He says thinking about God any further that those three facts makes one insane. And that it clearly why the religious world is in fact insane in a collective way.

(note 1) The concept of location does not apply to God. Rav Ibn Pakuda makes a point of this fact. Asking, "Where is God?" is like talking about the color of air. He is not in space or time at all but also space and time are not empty of Him. Place is simply not applicable.

But this is really just one example of the problem that Rav Nahman of Breslov goes into concerning the issue of Torah scholars that are demons that falsify the teachings of Torah. Thus it came about that the entire religious world is built on false Torah [ Or as Rav Nahman puts it "Torah of the Sitra Achra."] because of this problem with Torah scholar demons.

To find authentic Torah is not easy unless you just want to get the basic books yourself and learn at home. Obviously the great Litvak yeshivas of NY and also Ponovitch get the closest to the real authentic light of Torah.

The problem is that it is almost impossible to find any place to study Torah that has not been infiltrated by the Dark Side.

I met one fellow who had blue threads on his garment [tzitzis]  and and asked if that was of the Gra or Breslov. He said of the Gra. How was I surprised! [That is to say the blue thread they make in Efrat is different from the one they use in Breslov. This led to a short conversation and he suggested that it would be  a good idea to make study halls or yeshivas on the name of the Gra and Rav Shach in Israel.[That means places that would specifically go by the path of the Gra with no compromises.]
I was pleased to hear that there are people interested in the Gra besides the Silvermans in the Old City of Jerusalem.

From my point of view, it would be great to have a study hall nearby that would be going by the Gra so that I could start to learn authentic Torah. The problem is that it is almost impossible to find any place to study Torah that has not been infiltrated by the Dark Side. So to have a place nearby that would go by the Gra and Rav Shach would be for me a great joy.


[The type of blue that is use in Breslov seems to me to be not from the original Khilazon [the kind of creature that was used to make the dye], but rather the kind used by the people that go with the Gra. I had looked into this some years ago and that was my conclusion.] The Gra kind of blue thread is made from a fish. The Breslov one is not from a fish but a kin of small octopus. 

There are some commandments that are ignored.

There are some commandments that are ignored. One is honor of one's parents. Though there are plenty of cases where reason dictates that one's parents are not worthy of honor or respect because they are crazy, still there are lots of cases in which one's parents are good people and still the commandment  is ignored.

Living in Israel is another one.  The Ramban' (Nachmanides) counts it as one of the 613.
The Rambam (Maimonides) does not count it, but it might still be a branch of the command to conquer the Land of Canaan.

Bitul Torah [not learning Torah when one is able] is certainly one of the most wide spread problems.

But one that I would like to include is Physics and Metaphysics as brought by Maimonides. Somehow that opinion of the Rambam is ignored even thought it is more or less repeated by many other Rishonim.

I also have an ambition to start a place to learn Torah on the name of the Gra and Rav Shach for I feel that there is no place where one can learn Torah nowadays that is not a den of the Sitra Achra [Dark Side] .[Unless there are already places that make it their business to walk specifically in the straight path of the Gra and Rav Shach with no compromise what so ever.] The trouble is that immediately when people want to start walking on the path of Torah, that is when the Sitra Achra gets them. And gets them for keeps.

So there is a lot of things that people do that they think are mitzvot that they actually will have to repent on.

Music for the Glory of God [These are all in midi format since i could not access mp3 when they were written.]

V-54 A major

V-53 (F Major)  [New version of v-53]

V-49 F Major

V-48 E Minor

V-50 A Minor

[I apologize for the fact that i can not put this into mp3 or into orchestral form. Even the amount of time I have to write this is limited nowadays.] 

People are disappointed with Post Modern Philosophy

Some people are so disappointed with Post Modern Philosophy that they decided to go back to the Middle Ages. I am thinking mainly of Dr. Feser. And to some degree this already the approach of the Litvak Yeshiva World that recognized the superiority of thought of the Rishonim. [Mediaeval sages].
And even outside of Gemara thought the whole Musar movement was based on the idea of the superiority of the Ethic of the Rishonim.

Francis Bacon paved the way for more rigorous thought in the Natural Sciences.

Faith is knowledge that is not implanted, but recognized.

The 'Rambam (Maimonides) has a very favorable attitude towards Aristotle. The Ramban' (Nachmanides) just the opposite.
The Reason with Revelation approach of the Rambam ((Maimonides)) stems mainly I think from Saadia Gaon. The approach of the Ramban  (Nachmanides) however is at least based on Rav Hai Gaon-as far as I  recall.
The fact that both approaches are considered legitimate is mainly due to the efforts of the Ramban  (Nachmanides) himself who defended the Rambam (Maimonides) rigorously and intensely, even though he did not agree with him on major points. This was pointed out to me by David Bronson who was deeply involved in learning all the writings of the Ramban (Nachmanides).

David also pointed out the mystical approach is a direct descendant of the Rambam.

I guess I have to say I go more with the Reason with Revelation approach which to me seems more sturdy. But that is not to say I ignore the importance of the Ramban and the Ari. The Gra also (I should mention) combined both approaches. He saw no contradiction between them. The reason is that there is a limit to reason as the Critique of Pure Reason makes a point of. This point ought to be expanded I think along the lines of Leonard Nelson. But at any rate the point is clear. There are areas where pure reason can not penetrate: the "ding an sich"/thing in itself. And that is where faith takes over--immediate non intuitive knowledge. Things that you know, but not by reason nor by sense perception. (Or to put it better things that you recognize as true, but not by means of manipulating definitions nor by the senses.) [That is knowledge that is not implanted, but recognized.]

There is a difference in approach towards Aristotle between the Rambam (Maimonides) and the Ramban (Nachmanides).

The Obligations of the Heart [חובות לבבות] brings in his introduction the obligation to learn a kind of science that he considers not to be Torah but to be necessary for Torah that is what was called in Arabic אלעלם אלהאהי which to my mind surely means the metaphysics of Aristotle. He was not referring to  mysticism which the Muslims in Spain in his time were not learning.
Clearly this meant to him not just the Metaphysics of Aristotle and Plotinus but also the later commentaries of Al Farabi. []

The Hovot Levavot/Obligations of the Heart also mentions this idea in the section of Service of God where he says people that know Torah but not logic [Aristotelian] will be fooled by the evil inclination to misinterpret Torah since they are not good at logical reasoning. [So we see that both Aristotle's  Logic and Metaphysics are necessary for the service of God.  This would be according to the basic approach of the Obligations of the Heart, Saadia Gaon and Rambam. The Ramban (Nachmanides) obviously would disagree.]

This is also reflected in the Rambam who holds for Torah one needs to know both Aristotelian Physics and Metaphysics.

[However along with Aristotle's Physics I think Modern Physics ought to be added. After all the Rambam did not specifically mention  Aristotle in this connection but rather the subject that the in ancient Athens was called Physics. So he means the subject matter.

The same goes for Metaphysics. I feel along with Aristotle the Rambam must have meant to subject matter.

I was just looking over my notes on Bava Metzia

I was just looking over my notes on Bava Metzia [since I have no sefarim to be able to learn]. It occurred to me that it is possible to understand the Rambam who says the law is המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה in spite of the fact that all stam mishnas in Shas goes like Sumchos. The reason is the Rambam is going like the opinion in the Gemara in BM pg 100 that Sumchos only said his law in the case that each plaintiff is in doubt.--which the Rambam holds is דררא דממונא. Still this does not satisfy everything. For surely the sages hold even in that case המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה.
So it simply turns out that the Rambam is going like Sumchos completely. --and that makes a lot of sense because after all it is hard to push off a whole lot of stam mishnas just because of a braita brought just once in Bava Kama.

_________________________________________________________________________________
It is possible to understand the רמב''ם who is פוסק the law is המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה in spite of the fact that all סתם משניות in ש''ס goes like סומכוס. The reason is the רמב''ם is going like the opinion in the גמרא in ב''מ דף ק' ע''א that סומכוס only said his law in the case that each plaintiff is in doubt. That case the רמב''ם holds is דררא דממונא. Still this does not satisfy everything. For surely the חכמים hold even in that case המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה.
So it simply turns out that the רמב''ם is going like סומכוס completely. And that makes a lot of sense because after all it is hard to push off a whole lot of סתם משניות just because of a ברייתא brought just once in בבא קמא.



אפשר להבין את הרמב''ם שפוסק החוק הוא המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה למרות העובדה שכל סתם משניות בש''ס הולכות כמו סומכוס. הסיבה היא רמב''ם הולך כדעה בגמרא בב''מ דף ק" ע''א כי סומכוס רק אמר החוק שלו במקרה שכל תובע מוטל בספק. במקרה זה רמב''ם מחזיק הוא דררא דממונא. אבל ברור שהחכמים מחזיקים גם במקרה כזה המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה. מתברר כי הרמב''ם הולך כמו סומכוס לחלוטין.  כי אחרי הכל קשה לדחוף את סתם משניות רק בגלל ברייתא המובאת רק פעם אחת בבבא קמא..

It is my impression that one can merit to give charity many times every day even if one has no money. That is by praying for the good of Israel. That is because even if you can not help someone directly but by praying for them you can perhaps help them.

The question I have in the Obligations of the Heart in Trust:3. He holds one should trust in God alone without joining anyone else along with God. Then he brings as a proof the events surrounding the end of the life of King Asa. But the verse there says Asa trusted in the doctors instead of God.--not along with God. וגם בחליו לא דרש את השם כי ברופאים Even in his sickness he did not seek the Lord but rather the doctors.

There must be something I am missing here but i can not imagine what it is.

Is learning Torah a good way to make money???

Some people in kollel believe that learning Torah is a good way to make money. I encountered this opinion myself in many. This seems to fly in the face of the well known rule that one is not allowed to use Torah to make money. The odd thing was that they used that idea to convince my wife to leave me since I was learning Torah not for money but for its own sake.

However we do find that people have cast themselves on God to learn Torah and to believe that parnasa [money] would come to them from Heaven--and they succeed in that. The basic idea in a nutshell is that a guy says to himself "I am going to learn Torah no matter what, and I believe God will take care of my needs".
Even though this is famous for being the practice of the Musar Navardok Yeshivas, still you can see this in the Obligations of the Heart also. [Navardok held no השתדלות/ The Obligations of th Heart held Trust with effort.]

In a practical sense what I think about this is  that the basic idea to sit and learn Torah and to trust in God for a living is a good practice --even though I did not merit to this myself. Obviously after I was divorced I was not only not going to be in any kollel but was also a social pariah.  [persona non grata]. So I have had to make do with what ever scraps of Torah I can learn here and there.
Eventually I started seeing that the fact that I am not part of the religious world is a great blessing.
Even if I do not learn much Torah, but at least the little I can pick up here and there is not in order to make money.

in any case the events that happened to me certainly make me wonder what the point of kollel is if people  there are not so nice. Is it not an important aspect of Torah to have good traits?

There is great importance on Rosh Hashanah of avoiding cults

There is great importance on Rosh Hashanah of avoiding cults. Even if they entice by pretending to keep mitzvot, once they worship human beings, the mitzvot do not count. That is what you find in the Gemara about a shofar of idolatry. מכתת שיעוריה. It is considered to be ground up so one does not fulfill the mtzvah of hearing a shofar from it.
The best idea is to go to a place of genuine Torah like a Litvak yeshiva.

[While it is true than some Litvak yeshivas and kollels are run in a way that is less than desirable, still there is a difference between the surface and the substratum. If the substratum is a spirit of authentic straight Torah that should be enough to outweigh the surface problems. That is in any case what I discovered in Shar Yashuv in Far Rockaway and the Mir in NY,--that the substratum was that of authentic Torah.]

[You would normally hope Sefardi synagogues would be immune to this problem but I have seen than that is not the case. The Sitra Achra has penetrated there too ]

The basic way to blow the shofar is actually an argument. The Tekia is one long blast. the sevarim is three shorter ones that would fill up the tekia. The truah is 18 short ones that each set of three would fill up one of the three sevarim. But some say 9 short ones.(The Gemara itself is on the last two pages of Rosh Hashana and brought own by Rav Joseph Karo.)

Also the way to do the shevarim is the starting low and going high as brought in הגהות מיימוניות

It is rare to hear anyone doing this right. The best idea is to get your own shofar.

Concerning lashon hara [slander] some questions and one answer to an old question I heard at the Mir.

Ketuboth page 46 as brought in the Hafetz Haim says מוציא שם רע (One who brings a evil name on his bride.) (Note 1) gets lashes because of לא תלך רכיל (Thou shalt not go about as a tale bearer among your people.). I wonder why. Is not לאו שבכללות (a prohibition that includes more than one thing.)?(note 2) Also a לאו שאין בו מעשה (a prohibition that is not an act but rather a word.)? In my little booklet on Shas I remember I wrote something about לאו שבכללות (a prohibition that includes more than one thing) that also over there in Sanhedrin was not clear when you say it and when you don't.
The person that noticed that is my learning partner but I did mention his name because he said not to bring up his name

The gemara over there gives the exceptions and certainly lashon hara is not one of them!

I also wanted to mention that in the Mir Yeshiva in NY they asked about באפי תלתא this question: who is asking? One of the three! So just tell him not to spread the lashon hara any further and then there will not be three that are making it known. I think the Hafetz Haim himself meant to avoid this problem when he brings the idea that the whole permission of באפי תלתא does not apply if any one of the three are a ירא שמים

(Note 1 ) One who brings a evil name on his bride. He thinks she was not a virgin.
(Note 2) a prohibition that includes more than one thing does not get lashes. And לא תלך רכיל includes lashon hara and rekilut.

straight Torah

There is not enough awareness in the religious world that revelations can be products of the Sitra Achra [the dark side.] People assume that if they have some dreams or visions that they must come from the Realm of Holiness.  And they assume that about famous people also. For that reason I feel that the signature of the Gra on that letter of excommunication   is simply ignored way too much-because of this exact problem. But because it was ignored that gave the Sitra Achra an entry pass into the religious world. So nowadays it is almost impossible to find anywhere in the religious world that has not be taken over by the Dark Side.
[One basic issue that I think the Gra meant to bring up is that any object or even a person can be made an object of idol worship. And when that happens the object is forbidden to be used. It is clear to me that Rav Shach was also thinking along these lines.]



There is almost no longer any concept of what straight Torah means anymore.
 But if anyone would listen to me I would suggest to learn the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach to get an idea of what straight unadulterated Torah from the real of Holiness really means.
[You can get this also from Rav Haim of Brisk's חידושי הרמב''ם also to some degree but I have found Rav Shach explains things a lot more simply an understandably.]

There are a few references to Aristotle in the Musar book Obligations of the Hearts חובות לבבות. Sometimes they are hidden inside hints. One such place is in the Gate of Wholehearted Devotion Towards God. פרק ה section five.There he warns that for people that are knowledgeable in Torah can be tricked by the evil inclination if they do not know Aristotelian Logic because the evil inclination can come and use faulty logic to try to mess up one's understanding of straight Torah.
This idea of the Obligations of the Hearts shows me how and why the religious world got so messed up. They use faulty logic to misinterpret Torah.

Now it is possible to see how important it is to learn Tosphot, and the books of Rav Haim Halevi from Brisk and Rav Shach in order to get to straight Torah.

The first place in the Obligations of the Heart חובות הלבבות  where he says to learn the Meta-Physics of Aristotle in in his introduction. [That would have been well known in Muslim Spain where Rav Behaye ben Joseph Ibn Pakuda was writing but also in Christian Spain where they had the basic works of Aristotle.

The problem of insanity and delusions

In relation to the idea I brought in the previous blog I should add that LM vol I: 25 [ליקוטי מוהר''ן חלק א' סימן כ''ה] [in Rav Nahman's book] deals with the problem of insanity and delusions and I feel it is good to say that section every day for people that are afflicted with these problems.


I think this works a lot better that the pseudo sciences that were created to supposedly help people out of delusions but in fact reinforce them.

What Freud did was to model the human mind on the pattern of the steam engine and to claim that taking about sex helps people out of their mental problems. [Plus the important idea of blaming people's parents for all their mental problems.] Thus he could make a lot of money by doing nothing helpful. And this fraud continues today as a multi billion dollar industry.

At least saying over that short Torah Lesson in Rav Nahman's book does not cost a billion dollars nor much time. And from what i can tell, it actually works. Plus doing what he says there as a cure for delusions--to give charity to good recipients. [Or as the Boy Scouts have it--to do a good deed every day.] [Charity means not to give to any institution but to people you know are deserving.]

Rav Isaac Luria , to find one's proper spouse.

In the Ari, [Rav Isaac Luria] there are intentions which refer to each month. That means for each month of the year different names of God shine forth and are revealed. The names for Elul are אלף הי יוד הי יוד הי יוד הי. [with vowels thus: Eh Le  Fe - He Ye- Ye We De- He Ye.  Yi Wi Di Hi Yi Wi Ei Yi Hi Yi. (The "i" here is to be said in a way that rhymes with "me". )

These names are usually called by their numerical value 161 and 63.

To intend these names, Rav Nahman says is a correction for sexual sin and also helps to find one's proper spouse.

While the four letter name of God is not allowed to be said and it is a terrible sin to say the four letter name, still I think these expansions are OK to utter or even to sing. That seems to be the approach of Rav Avraham Abulafia when he brings his unifications of the name 72

When I did not have my proper spouse, I said over the two parts of Rav Nahman's book that discusses to intentions of Elul every day [ל''ם חלק א' סימן ו' חלק ב' סימן פ''ז] (LM vol I:6 an vol II:87) plus the two sections of the Torah that he also said were good for that same purpose שירת הים וקרבנות הנשיאים [Song at the Red Sea and the Sacrifices of the Princes in Numbers].
That in fact helped me to find my proper spouse but only after I had been doing that daily for almost a year.



In the Ari also there happens to be a long section on the intentions of the Song at the Sea which I would have gone over every day if I had the time. But since my time was limited I simply said over those four things daily. [That did not start in Elul. In fact I think it was around Hanuka that I began that. I figured that not only could I not find my spouse, but also there seems to be obstacles places in that direction that were not natural. So I figured the whole subject needed some kind of spiritual correction.]

[This idea was based on the idea of finding in Rav Nahman's book the section that deals with one's particular problem and saying that section over every day.]

Genesis and the Big Bang

There is a book Genesis and the Big Bang which did a nice job of showing how Genesis and the Big Bang do not contradict. However I generally think of Genesis more in terms of how Rav Isaac Luria looked at it in which case it is not meant כפשוטו in the literal sense at all. [Most people think Genesis is meant literally but certainly not the Ari nor the Rambam. The Rambam said the whole thing is an allegory.And he used that specific word. It is not just not literal but also it is like Aesops stories. They do not refer to the things in the story at all. [No lion or a fox or a horse,  nor even the tortoise can talk — but through them children may learn the business of life.]

There is  on one hand certain difficulties with Genesis and the Big Bang, so I tend to think that the approach of the Ari makes more sense. [If you are well versed in Torah, the book looks great in physics but weak in Torah. If you are a physicist, the book looks great in Torah and weak in Physics. Still it has done a tremendous service in the task of reconciling Torah with Reason.]

Obviously the Ari [Rav Isaac Luria] is not saying the same thing as the Rambam, but in any case he understands the entire Torah in a mystical fashion. That mystical way of understanding the Torah is the Ari's פשוט פשט (simple and literal understanding of the text.)
In his view the literal sense refers to the sepherot of Creation, but I can imagine that there is a sense of the verses that applies in each of worlds of Emanation, Creation, Formation, and the Physical universe.  In fact , come to think of it, would it not be simpler to say the very first verses of genesis refer to the Condensation צמצום and then to God's saying "Let there be light", referring to the קו וחוט דאור אין סוף? 

Though it is considered well known that Hillel II set up the calendar, still there is no record in the Gemara of his having done so. The Gemara would not have left this important fact out if it was so.]

There are dates brought in the responsa of the Geonim before Saadia Gaon that have days that come out not like the modern day Jewish calendar. Therefore the calendar that is in use is not halacha leMoshe MiSinai. [From Moses at Mount Sinai]  It was not in use until sometime right before Saadia Gaon.[It can not be tradition if the early geonim were not using it.]]
But when Saadia Gaon wrote about it, he used the Arabic word that means tradition. The Rambam thought he meant a law to Moses at Mount Sinai when all Saadia Gaon really meant was it was accepted. So the calendar seem to me to be not valid. Thus in figuring out when Rosh Hashana comes out I think it is better to go with Tosphot in Sanhedrin page 10b that says you go by the "molad" [conjunction]. [That means Rosh Hashana comes out the night on Sept 9. [That is Sept 10 is Rosh Hashana.]
[This will depend on your time zone. You have to see when the molad come out in your area. In Israel it turns out to be the night of Sept 9 which makes Sept 10 Rosh Hashana. It all depends on the actual conjunction.

[Though it is considered well known that Hillel II set up the calendar, still there is no record in the Gemara  of his having done so. The Gemara would not have left this important fact out if it was so.]
[The whole thing is just a misunderstanding of what Saadia Gaon meant when he wrote the calendar of his time  was traditional (using the Arabic word).  People though he meant Halacha to Moses from Sinai when all he meant that by his time it was the accepted practice to use it, 

Create new yeshivas that go specifically according to the Gra

There is yeshiva in the old city of Jerusalem that is on the name of the Gra. It occurs to me that to run a yeshiva and create new yeshivas that go specifically according to the Gra makes a lot of sense.
I have been writing about the great Litvak yeshivas in NY and Ponoviz but the Litvak yeshiva path is different from the straight Gra approach.
And I have seen enough of the Litvak world to realize that there is room for improvement. I think the major problems that exist are a result of not following the path of the Gra in more detail. Because of not following the path of the Gra there is lots of room for not nice energies [Sitra Achra energy] to enter.
And the greatness of the Litvak Torah world is anyway from the devotion to learning and keeping Torah with no frills --no additions nor subtractions, so why not just go all the way and simply declare once and for all that: "This yeshiva goes by the path of the Gra. Period. Here in our yeshiva we do not judge others or try to evaluate their paths. But here we go by the Gra. that is our path with no compromise."


[I have had my own share of troubles in the Litvak world, but it seems to me that these troubles were a case of the Litvak world not following the path of the Gra with enough conviction and consistency.]

[I knew the founder of the Yeshiva on the name of the Gra, Rav Zilverman  and his son Eliyahu Zilverman who was the rosh yeshiva for many years. It seems to me they were on the right track. In fact once when the older Rav Zilverman had one son son who was sick -very sick and people said he ought to go to get a blessing from the Gerer Rav, he refused and prayed to God instead.--and was answered.

Sitra Achra yeshivas

The most essential principle of the religious world is: "Use Torah to make money, but do not say that that is what you are doing." It is rare to find authentic Litvak yeshivas that learn Torah for its own sake and only accept money as a last resort in order to be able to learn Torah without interruptions.

It is not hard to tell the difference between the authentic Litvak yeshivas and the Sitra Achra yeshivas that use Torah to make make money or gain power and influence.

I think the main reason why religious leaders are so against Math and Physics is because they are afraid they will exposed as idiots. The stereotype of the dull stupid religious leaders has a real element of truth. Far more than people know.

Even though there is some debate (in the Rishonim) about secular wisdoms, I do not think that there is any debate about learning Physics and Mathematics. Obviously Nahmanides did not share the same high opinion of Aristotle as Maimonides did. But natural sciences I think everyone would agree are important. [In most Rishonim this is implied, but not stated openly. However in the Rambam Maimonides it is stated openly.]]

The way to go about this I think is to start the day with Musar [works on Ethics from the Middle Ages or the disciples of Rav Israel Salanter. And then to plunge into Physics and Mathematics right away in the morning.

[I confess that I do not know how to learn Physics. My education in Shar Yashuv and the Mir was about "how to learn" Gemara which I have already written about. But Physics I have no idea about. Some people are talented in that area and need no advice from me. Others feel if they have no talent they why waste the time? But I feel for those without the natural talent it is still important. And thus to go about it in דרך גירסה saying the words in order from the beginning of the book until the end and then to start again.]

[I think the main reason why religious leaders are so against Math and Physics is because they are afraid they will exposed as idiots. If STEM subjects were a part of Torah learning as the rishonim held it ought to be, then the fact that religious leaders would be known for what they really are. The reason is that it is easy to fake Torah knowledge. But it is impossible to fake Math knowledge.

The stereotype of the dull stupid religious leaders has a real element of truth. Far more than people know.