in musar there is given the idea that midot tovot are the prime obligation. good character. this helps to a large degree in understanding the of what the Torah considers to be of primary importance and what is secondary. but the main effect of musar nowadays is only in the area of hashgafa [world view] but not o much in translating that into action. but even that alone --that establishing a firm foundation of what is important in Torah is also of great importance.
19.1.23
Kant is in need of modification.
Kant is in need of modification. That can be like Kelley Ross or Michael Huemer. i.e. the Friesian school [Jacob Fries, Leonard Nelson] or the intuitionists [Prichard]. You have to start with the realization that Kant was too much influenced by David Hume. Hume limited the scope of reason way too much. He was a teacher of Euclidian geometry and so though that reason can only see contradictions where they exist. He repeats this claim many times without a shred of evidence or proof. Kant accepted this. But reason has another function. It perceives universals. They are qualities that things have in common like trees. the universals that i refer to here are the very things that Kelley Ross calls ''forms'' in his distinction between content and form. That makes up his theory of value where some things like pure mathematical logic are pure form with sentences A and B that have no content but can stand for anything. Then you have math which has more content but less form since it can not be reduced to pure logic are Godel showed us. Then you have music and art which have more content but even less form until you get to God who has no form at all but is pure content. But these areas of perception are what Michael Huemer would bring into the category of area where things are partly known by reason--or being reasonable and empirical perception.
Robert Hanna has pointed out the poverty of modern philosophy and the way forward to Kant, -but that still leaves the problems inherent in Kant. Thus one needs either the Friesian School or the Intuitionists.
18.1.23
I have been thinking about my son Izhak and thought about how the story of Henry II relates to this. For when Henry II realized when he was losing everything that it was the blood of Thomas Becket that was crying out from the grave that was the root cause. So it is with all of us that Izhak was asking help, and no one wanted to help.
But there is also the importance of learning the valuable lessons of his life. For myself I would like to concentrate on learning in depth that he emphasized. I would also like to set time to go through the two Talmuds with the basic commentaries and midrash, but at this point in time that does not seem to be of immediate possibility.] [Why is learning Torah important? You can see the reason in the Yerushalmi כל חפצים לא ישוו בה all the mizvot are not equal to [even] one word of Torah, [chapter I of Peah]. I put in the extra word ''even'']
[I should also add that Physics and Metaphysics is a part of learning the Oral Law as Ibn Pakuda hints to and the Rambam write openly in the Yad (Mishne Tora) and the Guide.]
17.1.23
The problem with mysticism
The problem with mysticism is that it attaches itself to Torah. When you have people that are true tzadikim that may have mystic intuitions that is not Torah, even when these intuition are true, [which mot often they are not]-still that is not Torah.
[I do believe Rav Nahman had great insight and was a great tzadik. But "Torah" does not mean insight. Torah means the Written Law and the Oral Law as contained in the two Talmuds and Midrash. "Torah" is not open to anyone adding to it at whim. But that is exactly what the religious do.]
16.1.23
One thing I understood from my son, Izhak is that one ought not add to the commandments in regard to the chapters vayikra Leviticus 18 and 20 and that adding to these prohibitions means subtracting.
As regards to the actual subject--adultery means sex with a married woman. You can see this in vayikra Leviticus 18 and 20. Chronicles I chapter 2 verse 46
[See responsa of the Radvaz and Maharam of Egypt.--beside the already well known treatment of this in Rambam, Ramban, Raavad and in the Shulchan Aruch.]
Rav Nahman did not hold of learning philosophy at all even, -- of the great sages of Israel, To some degree that make sense. But utter ignorance leaves one to prey of the many glittering ideas out there that with the most cursory examination fall to pieces. You need sense to know what to learn.
My suggestion is Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Kant, Leonard Nelson [a Jew that started a new sort of approach to Kant.]
[rav nahman was right about everything else. in particular he said not to learn the guide of the rambam and i can see his point.
what is more I would like to recommend the two treaties of government by john locke
I realize taking a chapter of a book on math or a page of gemara 400 times is a lot if you do not know the context. Even 40 times. So what i have been thinking is to take one section and read it straight through 4 day in a row. if at that time nothing i clear--go to the previous section. [you can not always start at the beginning because it is material you have already learned. ]
14.1.23
Lashon Hara, [slander, or even saying what is true about others unless 7 conditions are satisfied.]
There is a lot of stuff going on in the world which i would write about but for the problem of lashon hara [slander]. And this is a delicate issue because of the severity of the issue. I might be required to warn someone about hanging out with the wrong sorts of friends, but if my words are not accepted --,is that lashon hara?
And the whole issue tend to be forgotten on the larger scale. So I try to mention only the positive things that I and others ought to concentrate on--learning Torah "beiyun" in depth with lots of review. Going through the Gemara with Tosphot, Maharsha, Hidushei Reb Chaimof Brisk, Mathematics Physics, exercise, coming to Israel etc.
i mean to say, if you are careful about Lahon Hara, what else is there to do but to learn Torah?
[7 conditions: for benefit, not to cause more harm than what would be in a court, to see it yourself, to not judge it except by the law of the Torah and not to rush to judgment, to rebuke beforehand, no other way to reach that benefit.]
12.1.23
Haywires in the American Democracy
There is something going haywire in the American democracy. I think the reason is it needs a firmer foundation in theory. For the basic model was put together in an ad hoc fashion with theory coming only later. It is based largely on the English model of government--the Magna Carta and Provisions of Oxford. Only after James II fled, and William and Mary became the monarchs, did the theory arise that the government is supposed to be for the people, not visa versa.
The American Constitution is just a slightly modified version of English law.
John Locke lacks the glitter of the gothic dialectic of Hegel and Marx.
And sadly enough the Frankfurt School also brings a corrupted version of Kant to support their ideas.
I could suggest a version of Kant called the Friesian school based on Leonard Nelson, But after things have gone so off the rails, it is hard to imagine that anything could help. [Allan Bloom had suggestions in his Closing of the American Mind, but it seems too late for that. ]
11.1.23
my son's [Izhak (also known as Nahman)] emphasis on learning in depth.
I was thinking about my son's [Izhak (also known as Nahman)] emphasis on learning in depth. It occurred to me that in the Gemara there is the mention of four hundred times review of every lesson. [That is in the story of one teacher who used to learn every lesson 400 times with his student. One time the student was distracted, so the teacher taught him the same lesson again another 400 times.] [A voice rang out from Heaven, Because of that merit, he can have either one of two things: (1) all of his generation will merit to the world to come or (2) he will live for 400 years. In the end he got both.] And there is another place where it is mentioned that one person used to learn for himself every lesson 40 times. And in fact I recall that lots of review helped me in many cases--e.g. when I was learning the book of Rav Chaim of Brisk and in physics [Joos's famous book Theoretical Physics]. [In that physics book, there were for me two sessions--one chapter I did forty days in a row. But most of the book, I did the approach of ''saying the words in order and going on''. ]
[However, there is also value of "bekiut" (fast learning) as done in Litvak Yeshivot in the afternoon and evening. You can see this in one of the great Musar books Ways of the Righteous. אורחות צדיקים
I might mention that Izhak was making preparations to come to Israel, but died before his plans were realized. To me it seems that coming and settling in Israel is important, as you can see in parshat hayira [chap on fear of God in Deuteronomy. Plus the State of Israel is important. Rav Moshe Feinstein and Reb Aaron Kotler said about Israel דינא דמלכותא דינא the law of the state is the law.[Bava Batra 35]
10.1.23
Kant and Leonard Nelson
I was at the beach and talking to people there about the importance of Kant and Leonard Nelson. I mean it is not as if these students are not learning hard things. One girl had read Hegel's Phenomenology. --[If anything at all of Hegel, I think that should be the last.]
[Nelson built on Jacob Fries. This approach has a third source of knowledge besides reason or sence perception; that is ''immediate non intuitive knowledge.'' But it is not infallible it jut gives the categories of Kant as starting axioms that can be modified by evidence --like space and time.]
But the interesting thing is that one girl was complaining that Leonard Nelson's works are not in Hebrew,-- and that is a valid complaint. After all even when they {Springer Verlag}got around to publishing his stuff, it is all in German. Can you imagine that even in English, they only published minor works.
But just for now with my barely functional keyboard, let me give the basic outline.--but forgive me for leaving out the details. The basic point is philosophy in the last 100 years got to be a mess. Marcuse is juvenile. --''Just tear down everything, and utopia will magically appear,'' is his alchemy thesis--really, [And that is the "woke" (i.e. asleep), just Marcuse repackaged. ]] Analytic philosophy was harder to see the flaws until Jeremy Katz. then recently Robert Hanna dealt it the final blow in his book The Fate of Analysis: Analytic Philosophy From Frege To The Ash-Heap of History, and Toward A Radical Kantian Philosophy of The Future, by Robert Hanna, [https://againstprofphil.org/category/not-an-edgy-essay/page/15/].[I think now you need to buy the book. I had read it when it was still on line.] Existentialism was refuted by a child in the audience of one of the great names who was saying, ''What my words mean to me is not what they mean to you.'' So the child asked the natural question, ''So why are you talking? i.e. he is talking because presumably he want to say something, not nothing.
So like Robert Hanna says, ''Forward to Kant''. But then you get into the original problem in Kant, and so the modification of Leonard Nelson is needed.
[I also went into the development of philosophy of the Middle Ages which for us Jews was neo-Plato until the Rambam who turned towards Aristotle. That Aristotelian turn came from the Islamic world which had one school that was totally into Aristotle. Then soon after the Rambam, Thomas Aquinas also went to Aristotle. But this move towards Aristotle did not hold up under the scrutiny of Bishop Berkley [about the question how perception works,] that led to the conflict between the rationalists and empiricists until Kant found a solution to that dilemma.
My son. Isaac ben Avraham. was extraordinary in terms of desire to help others and the trait of forgiveness. But I forget the exact circumstances when I saw this, so I did not write about it. I think one event was was we were living together (in the neighborhood of Zichron Moshe) in Yerushalaim when there was some hurtful act of someone that I was angry about, but Isaac said that there was no point in bearing a grudge. Also, at some point, I was learning the Avi Ezri on Shas of Rav Shach in Uman and lost it, so he sent to me another four vol. set. But later I lost that again --and he sent to me another set. And so on and so forth many times. I would lose the books I had to learn [because of all kind of difficult circumstances I fell into] and every time he would send another copy to me.
8.1.23
my son izhak ben avraham held with in depth learning.
The thing of the Litvaks is learning in depth. I had a friend who became the acting rosh yeshiva of Chaim Berlin Yeshiva in N,Y. that told me once he saw no point in ''bekiut'' [fast learning-saying the words and going on.] This point was brought home to me over the years --first by Motti Freifeld in Shar Yashuv and later then in Uman when my own learning partner David Bronson refused to "go on" until he got the subject perfectly.
I believe this started with the Gra because it is the most obvious and characteristic thing about the Litvak world that goes with the Gra. I am beginning to think that this sort of learning in depth is the only possible way to get to the light of Torah.
But at the Mir in NY there was the afternoon ''bekiut learning'' which also makes sense to me--but only if done along with some sessions that are done in depth.
I might mention that my son izhak ben avraham held with in depth learning.
Other lessons I learned from him: (1) exercise, (2) the importance of following the path of the Gra in every detail--including the signature of the Gra on that letter of excommunication. (4) Not to be hard hearted. like it says in Torah about the brothers of Joseph that he pleaded with them but they were hard hearted and sold him. Also with Naval HaCarmeli who was hard hearted when the men of King David asked for help. In fact, this last lesson seem to me to be the most important one that must learn from the life of my son. (5) Shmrirat Habrit - to keep the laws of the Torah concerning sexual issues like it says in Leviticus chapters 18 and 20. [ And not to add them what is mentioned there.] (6) Coming and staying in Israel. [This is also mentioned in Torah in the verse in Deuteronomy ""Keep the commandment so that you may come to the Land of Canaan and that you may have length of days in the Land. [Parshat HaYira at the end.] (7) He also had inventions which he never published. so, like my dad, he had an interest in mechanical engineering.
7.1.23
Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom suggested throwing out the Humanities and social studies department of universities [unless they get straight]. It is an amazing book tracing the crisis to an essential contradiction in the Enlightenment. But it misses the infiltration of the whole system the universities by the Neo Marxists that is at least one major cause of the problems that he noted.
Allan Bloom also did not note the movement in the time of Kant to simply make universities into tech schools. Before that time they were theological institutions. So many wanted to change them into what we have today with Humanities and social studies departments. The first idea would have been better.
6.1.23
Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri
I would like to recommend review of every lesson in Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach 400 times before going on. This is based on the idea of the Gemara of 400 times review plus the idea of the Gra [the Gaon of Villna] that one needs knowledge of the seven wisdoms before one can know anything in Torah. He said, ''When one lacks knowledge in any of the seven wisdoms, that lack will cause a lack in understanding of Torah a hundred times more.'' [This I recommend for the sake of my son, IZHAK BEN AVRAHAM. And, in fact, Izhak held with lots of review. When I suggested, ''Just say the words and go on'', he did not agree.] The Physics and Mathematics is brought more openly in the Rambam in the Guide for the Perplexed in the Introduction and later in the parable of a king in his country. \
[The Gemara says, ''Anyone who does not review his learning is as if he buries his sons and daughters.'']
My plan is that after 40 days in a row of learning one page or section that then one goes to the previous page if that first one was not clear, or to the next of it was clear. but that whole should be reviewed 400 times.
ALSO to listen to lectures in Math Physics and the Avi Ezri and Rav Chaim of Brisk from experts.
Also I suggest some fast sessions to get through the Avi Ezri in total and through the basic core subjects in Mathematics and Physics, and 1/2 page of Gemara, Rashi, Tophot, Maharsha daily to go for the merit of my son, Izhak.
wake up from ''woke''. Intellect can often lead people astray just as much as being dumb--even more so.
relevant to the new year when people should wake up from ''woke'' neo-Marxism. But I do not know for other how to do so except to close the university humanities and social studies departments.
[i might suggest to learn the philosophical roots of woke in Hegel, Marx, and Marcuse. But that can not work since people can be very smart and still not see mistakes. [''Hegel’s problem is that it is possible to level the charge of insufficiency that he directs at Pyrrhonian skepticism against his own account of the appearance of knowledge.'']
Intellect can often lead people astray just as much as being dumb--even more so. See Rav Nahman's comments on this in his book the Le.M vol. II
See also this insightful essay: https://newcriterion.com/issues/2000/9/the-difficulty-with-hegel
laws of mourning
In laws of mourning the second day of festivals count for one day of mourning according to the Rambam. The Ramban asks on this from the law that a bridegroom who prepared the meal and then his father died first does the seven days of joy and then seven of mourning.. That is even though during the days of joy he must observe private laws of mourning. [That makes a difference since in a case one becomes a mourner one hour before a festival and does even one act of mourning, then the festival nullifies the rest of the days of mourning.
This last point is what Rav Shach brings to reinforce the question of the Ramban.
But I think that three things combine to make the law of the Rambam true. One is that a festival is stronger than the days of joy and thus has power to nullify the mourning completely. See Moed Katan that says a positive command of the multitude nullifies a positive command of an individual. Second.;-the thing that the bridegroom does is private. At no time does he do the open laws of mourning like turning over his bed. Third--nullifying the days of mourning for the bridegroom would mean not having any days of mourning at all
______________________________________________________________
In הלכות אבל the second day of יום טוב count for one day of mourning according to the רמב''ם. The רמב''ן asks on this from the law that a חתן who prepared the meal and then his father died first does the seven days of joy and then seven of mourning.. That is even though during the days of joy he must observe private laws of mourning. [That makes a difference since in a case one becomes a mourner one hour before a festival and does even one act of mourning, then the festival nullifies the rest of the days of mourning. This last point is what רב שך brings to reinforce the question of the רמב''ן. But I think that three things combine to make the law of the רבב''ם true. One is that a festival is stronger than the days of joy and thus has power to nullify the mourning completely. See מועד קטן that says a positive command of the multitude nullifies a positive command of an individual. Second.;-the thing that the bridegroom does is private. At no time does he do the open laws of mourning like turning over his bed. Third--nullifying the days of mourning for the bridegroom would mean not having any days of mourning at all
______________________________________________________________________
בהלכות אבל היום השני של יום טוב של גלות עולה למניין ימי אבל יום אחד לפי הרמב''ם. הרמב''ן שואל על זה מההלכה שחתן שהכין את הסעודה ואחר כך מת אביו עושה תחילה שבעת ימי שמחה ואחר כך שבעה של אבלות. זאת למרות שבימות השמחה עליו לקיים ביחידות דיני אבלות. [זה משנה כיוון שבמקרה נעשים אבלים שעה לפני מועד ועושים אפילו מעשה אבל אחד, אזי החג מבטל את שאר ימי אבלות.] נקודה אחרונה זו היא מה שמביא רב שך לחזק את שאלת הרמב''ן. אבל אני חושב ששלושה דברים מתחברים כדי לבאר שאת דין הרמב''ם אמת. האחת היא שחג חזק מימי השמחה ובכך יש בכוחו לבטל את האבל של יום אחד לחלוטין. ראה מועד קטן שאומר מצווה חיובית של הרבים מבטלת פקודה חיובית של יחיד. שנית.;-הדבר שהחתן עושה הוא פרטי. בשום זמן הוא לא עושה את הלכות אבלות הפתוחות כמו להפוך את מיטתו. שלישית--ביטול ימי אבלות לחתן פירושו שלא יהיו ימי אבלות כלל
5.1.23
i am in mourning for my son Itzchak. Thus i post here two links to my books that he had a large contribution to help me write.
Ideas in Bava Metzia ch.s 8 and 9
It is a terrible thought to note that he was begging people for help for years and no one wanted to help him. So he just laid down and died. [He was asking his family to come live with him and no one wanted to--even me. At best I wrote to him he should come to me in Israel, but he obviously needed help even to do so. ] I hope that since he had no place in this world, that at least God will find a place for him in the next. Where no one else found a place in their heart for him that God will find a place for him in His and in Gan Eden.
But to say this to family members is hard to decide. Those that know, already know. So why make them feel worse? Those that do not know will just find someone else to blame.[Just like I am doing. Instead of asking ,''Why did I not help?,'' I ask, ''Why others did not help?"]
The problem is that humans -given the right set of circumstances-- can be incredibly kind or incredibly cruel. All I can do now is to dedicate any good deed I will ever do for his sake to have a place in the Garden of Eden. Perhaps also to do review 400 times every lesson in Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach.
The point of concentrating on positive things that I can do, is that if I think overly much about what I did wrong, I am likely to go insane.
4.1.23
I was at the beach and explained to some people there about from where the woke agenda comes from. I traced the lineage to the left Hegelians, Marx, the Frankfurt school and cultural Marxism. But while doing so I was asked about my own philosophical development. I have mentioned this before, but just for now let me repeat. Before and during high school I learned a lot of Spinoza. but I did not want to go into philosophy because I thought modern philosophy was not good. So instead I went to two great Litvak yeshivot--Shar Yashuv and the Mir in N.Y.. But I still continued my philosophical education. In Shar Yashuv I learned Sartre's Being And Nothingness. Eventually I arrived at Kant and the modification on KANT of Fries and Nelson.
I had explained the difference between the rationalists [Spinoza and Leibniz] and the empiricists [Locke and Hume], Reason recognizes truth as opposed to the senses recognize truth. this is different from pot modernism which hold there in truth,
In short I was asked what my philosophy is. I said reason recognizes truth. But I added ''What kind of truth? Universals.'' Then I went into that subject. then to Fries about a third source of knowledge
Learning Torah is a commandment for everyone and therefore by definition is not skilled labor. The religious [frum] try to convince everyone else that they are morally and mentally superior and therefore must be put in charge of everyone else.
I hold with learning Torah, but not as a paid profession. On one hand the stipend is low, but it is not a "skilled labor". "Skilled labor" gets paid more. Learning Torah is a commandment for everyone and therefore by definition is not skilled labor. It is something like English Literature majors. Or Psychology majors. These are the stupid people in college that think they are on par with Mathematics majors and are vastly overproduced. They then can not get jobs, but think they ought to be the people in charge of everyone else because of their imagined superiority. Ditto with religious institutions. They produce too many overly educated idiots that think they are geniuses.
The problem is that too many people try to convince others that the stupid disciplines equal the smart ones. i.e. the politics of resentment. The religious [frum] try to convince everyone else that they are morally and mentally superior and therefore must be put in charge of everyone else.
THE FRUM [RELIGIOUS] PRODUCE NOTHING BUT INTEREST IN THEIR OWN BRAND. -not even morality. They commonly poach and try to steal the wife of the baal teshuva [newly religious] and rape his children,
2.1.23
If one has merited to be in the Litvak World of Torah, it is a terrible thing to abandon that. Even though I see Rav Nachman of Breslov was a great tzadik, it is a mistake to leave the world of straight Torah. One might learn from the great advice of Rav Nachman, but Breslov is different.
My own path into the Litvak world was philosophical interest. But modern philosophy repelled me [as it should]. So it made sense to the path that combined authentic Torah [Gra, Rav Shach, and musar. ]with reason. Reason and faith is the approach of the Rishonim and it continues in the Litvak world.
I might mention that this post is a result of many years of contemplating and seeing what happens to people that leave the Litvak Path. It never ends well.
Reason for the Middle Ages [Saadia Gaon, Rambam, Ramban, etc..] means Plato, Aristotle. Plotinus, But this proved to have problems as noted by the early Enlightenment people like Berkeley. So arose the Rationists as opposed to the Empiricists. Each of these in turn proved problematic, so arose. Kant and a modification of Kant by Fries, Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross. This progression is what is hold with. --as opposed to the other modern philosophy.
other approaches do not make sense, Robert Hanna noted the bankruptcy of Analytic Philosophy. Woke is the Frankfurt neo Marx school. Marx is wrong since the labor theory of value is wrong [even though he did not explicitly say that he was building on that theory still it is the basis of all his work--otherwise there is no ''surplus value'' to extract. .]
1.1.23
Ukraine is a confusing place. That is unless you accept the proposition that half the people are saints and the other half are the opposite. [Well,.. the not so great part is less than half.] Because of this, I think it is best to make a deal with Russia. It makes no sense to say that Russia has no case. Anyone who has done business in Ukraine knows what I mean. So for everyone's benefit a peace agreement must be made and kept.
31.12.22
tyranny of the proletariat, or of the modern substitute for the proletariat--blacks and queer
The world is divided between John Locke's liberalism [individual right, individual freedom] against the modern versions of Marxism [tyranny of the proletariat, or of the modern substitute for the proletariat--blacks and queer. ]
The way out of this mess is the mediaeval formula: faith with reason. Sinai and Athens.
But Athens has some problems, so instead I suggest the Kant-Friesian School of Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross. And Sinai and faith also are prone to abuse, so I suggest and emphasis on the Gra and Rav Israel Salanter and Musar.
But how to go about walking the path of the Gra when the whole religious world ha been infiltered by the Dark Side? That I do not know except to try to keep Torah as an individual and avoid the religious.
29.12.22
''The law of the country is the law'' Bava Batra [circa 35] does not mean in a case where it contradicts Torah. So women that get a divorce and then use that as a weapon to bankrupt their x's are violating Torah. Furthermore, they transgress גונב נפש ומכרו מות יומת ["One who steals a soul and sells it shall be put to death."] when they use the court to take the children. And the lashon hara [slander] that they engage in forever after has no conceivable permission. [However, there are times when speaking negatively is ok e.g., when one needs to warn someone not to be around a friend who is having an evil influence.]
28.12.22
There is a great lesson to learn from Henry II. He did not repent because of religious leanings. Rather he realized that things were going terribly wrong in his life. Everything. [His kingdom was being invaded by the king of Scotland. His own family was offering England to the king of France.] At some point it occurred to him that the cause was not this rational explanation or the other. It was just one thing--the murder of Thomas Becket. And so he made his way barefoot and blooded to the cathedral and the grave of Becket, and had the monks beat the living daylights out of him. Five lashes given by each of the hundred monks.
The very next day word came to him that the king of Scotland had been captured.
In the Gemara Yeruhalmi in the first chapter of Gitin [on the mishna that if a kuti is one of the witnesses on the divorce doc. it is okay] is brought the reason why the Kutim [Samarians]were not Jewish--because they intermarried with the priests of the high places--[even though those priests themselves were born Jewish.
This comes from the law that any object that is brought as a gift to an idol, can not be nullified.
Today that religious leaders are themselves worshiped a objects of adoration and praise, thus the people serving and worshiping them lose their soul.
27.12.22
I see the Litvak seminaries for girls in Bnei Brak do not want give graduation diplomas to girls that are after that off to get a secular education. This makes sense to me since the girls would be going into ''education'' which means ''critical race theory''. The humanities and social studies departments of universities ought to be closed. [Allan bloom pointed in 1990 the crisis but now there is no crisis. these two parts of the modern university are poison.]
26.12.22
Friesian school of Leonard Nelson - the best route to take for modern philosophy
The New Friesian school of Leonard Nelson [https://www.friesian.com] needs some clarity in the writings of the frieian.com of Kelley Ross. One major point of clarity that Dr. Ross brings to the subject is that non intuitive immediate knowledge is not infallible. [It can need modification in view of new evidence. --evidence that has stronger prima facia likelihood].
This clarity would have avoided the seeming problem of Special Relativity. [And that is what caused the defection from the group of nelson to the Berlin group of Reichenbach.]
[Another important aspect of Kelley Ross is that he joins Fries with Schopenhauer.]]
You might think that this ought to be obvious but even in Germany where there is renewed interest in Kant, they go off on a tangent with Hermann Cohen and the neo-Kantian which is another dead end.
25.12.22
Problems in modern philosophy
The line of thought of Plato and Aristotle got to be a part of Torah thought in the Rishonim [authorities from the middle ages.] But there are problems in this as pointed out by Berkley and Thomas Reid. Nevertheless, when I saw the problems in modern philosophy, I more or less retreated to the Rishonim. Still the problem remained, though I tended to ignore them. But to get some sort of answer for the mind body problem which remained in the enlightenment until Kant is important. And the developments since Kant seem futile. So to get to some kind of answer for problems that remained in Kant, I think the New Friesian School of Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross seems to be the best. [See this link]
To get an idea of what bothered me about British American ''analytic philosophy" see Robert Hanna. See this link [I had not read Hanna when in high school, but still the problems in analytic philosophy and continental philosophy seemed apparent to me.]
Why did Hegel not seem like the right track? Mainly because the dialectic approach of Socrates is just one sub category of ways that reason gets to the truth of things. [There are lot of ways. We see this in Physics and math where every new discovery come about by some different approach.] And not every idea contain its opposite unless any kind of logic is impossible. "Hot" does not mean "cold". Furthermore the off shoots from Hegel are more like alchemy than any kind of building up anything. the idea of melting down lead to find the core of gold is wrong. So to destroy western civilization in order that the gold underneath becomes apparent does not work.
24.12.22
Rambam in Laws of Maaser chapter 2 law 1 and 2. Gemara in Bava Metzia page 88
I have not had time to consider how to express my notion here. But just to do the best that I can right now let me say that there is something hard to understand in the Rambam in Laws of Maaser chapter 2 law 1 and 2. The thing that is hard to understand is from where does he derive the idea that the obligation of maaser depends on one's intention at the moment of smoothing the stack of grain. What I mean by this question is this: He writes when one finishes the work on the grain, if his intention was for his own use, then he is obligated in tithes from the Torah. But if his intention was to sell it. then he is obligated only by a decree. Also, the buyer is obligated from the Torah if he finishes the work himself. But if he bought the grain after the work on it was finished by the seller, then he is obligated only by a decree.
this is based on the Gemara in Bava Metzia page 88 which says that a buyer is not obligated from the Torah but only by decree.
Rabbainu Tam says if the work was finished by the seller that is when the buyer is not obligated. That is similar to the Rambam but Rabainu Tam does not mention intention.
Rav Shach brings some clarity on here. He brings the mishna [maaser I:5] that selling grain makes it obligated but if he is bringing it home then he can eat from it in a casual way until it gets to his home. so to be obligated there needs to be the finishing of the work and also getting to his home. Otherwise it is not "tevel". But that does not explain from where the Rambam derives the idea of intention.
(I am not sure if the Rambam is posek (deciding) like the simple explanation of that mishna. It might be that he explains that mishna as referring to what his intention is at the time of finishing the work, i.e. smoothing of the stack of grain. After all he does not mention that one can eat from the grain until he reaches home. For he write in laws of maaser chapter 3 law 1 that if his intention is to bring the grain to his home, he can eat from it in a casual way. It sounds like he must mean until he reaches home, but it is not clear to me why he does not say this openly.)
_____________________________________________________________
There is something hard to understand in the Rambam in הלכות מעשר פרק ב' הלכה א . The thing that is hard to understand is from where does he derive the idea that the obligation of מעשר depends on one's כוונה at the moment of smoothing the stack of grain. What I mean by this question is this: He writes when one finishes the work on the grain, if his intention was for his own use, then he is obligated in מעשר from the תורה. But if his intention was to sell it. then he is obligated only by a decree. Also, the buyer is obligated from the Torah if he finishes the work himself. But if he bought the grain after the work on it was finished by the seller, then he is obligated only by a decree. This is based on the גמרא in בבא מציעא page פ''ח which says that a buyer is not obligated from the תורה but only by decree. רבינו תם says if the work was finished by the seller that is when the buyer is not obligated. That is similar to the רמב''ם, but רבינו תם does not mention intention. רב שך brings some clarity on here. He brings the משנה מעשר פרק א' משנה ה that מוליכן לשוק makes it obligated, but if he is bringing it home, then he can eat from it in a casual way until it gets to his home. so to be obligated there needs to be the finishing of the work and also getting to his home. Otherwise it is not טבל. But that does not explain from where the רמב''ם derives the idea of intention בגמר מלאכה.
(I am not sure if the רמב''ם is פוסק like the simple explanation of that משנה. It might be that he explains that משנה as referring to what his intention is at the time of finishing the work, i.e. smoothing of the stack of grain. After all, he does not mention that one can eat from the grain until he reaches home. For he write in הלכות מעשר פרק ג הלכה א that if his intention is to bring the grain to his home, he can eat from it in a casual way. It sounds like he must mean ""until he reaches home", but it is not clear to me why he does not say this openly.)
יש משהו קשה להבין ברמב"ם בהלכות מעשר פרק ב' הלכה א'. הדבר שקשה להבין הוא מנין הוא שואב את הרעיון שחיוב מעשר תלוי בכוונה של האדם ברגע החלקת ערימת התבואה. כוונתי בשאלה זו: הוא כותב כשמסיימים את המלאכה על התבואה, אם הייתה כוונתו לאכול אותה, הרי הוא חייב במעשר מהתורה. אבל אם כוונתו הייתה למכור אותו. ואז הוא חייב רק בגזרה. וכן, הקונה חייב מהתורה אם סיים את המלאכה בעצמו. אבל אם קנה את התבואה לאחר שסיים המלאכה בו על ידי המוכר, הרי שחייב רק בגזירה. זאת על סמך הגמרא בבא מציעא דף פ''ח שאומר שקונה אינו חייב מהתורה אלא רק בגזרה. רבינו תם אומר אם הסתיימה המלאכה ע"י המוכר הרי שהקונה אינו חייב. זה דומה לרמב''ם, אבל רבינו תם לא מזכיר כוונה. רב שך מביא כאן קצת בהירות. הוא מביא את המשנה מעשר פרק א' משנה ה ''שמוליכן לשוק'' מחייב אותו, אבל אם הוא מביא אותו הביתה, אז הוא יכול לאכול ממנו בצורה סתמית עד שזה יגיע לביתו. אז כדי להיות חייב צריך להיות סיום העבודה וגם להגיע לביתו. אחרת זה לא טבל. אבל זה לא מסביר מהיכן שואב הרמב''ם את רעיון הכוונה בגמר מלאכה. אגב אני לא בטוח אם הרמב''ם פוסק כמו ההסבר הפשוט של אותה משנה. יכול להיות שהוא מסביר את המשנה הזאת כמתייחס למה שהכוונה שלו בזמן סיום העבודה, כלומר החלקה של הערימה של דגן. הרי אינו מזכיר שאפשר לאכול מהתבואה עד שיגיע הביתה. שהרי כותב בהלכות מעשר פרק ג' הלכה א' שאם כוונתו להביא את התבואה לביתו, יוכל לאכול ממנו בדרך אגבית. זה נשמע כאילו הוא בטח מתכוון ל""עד שהוא מגיע הביתה", אבל לא ברור לי למה הוא לא אומר את זה בגלוי
23.12.22
The illusion that Ukraine is winning is going to evaporate as soon as Russia gets serious.
It makes more sense to arrange peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. The illusion that Ukraine is winning is going to evaporate as soon as Russia gets serious. As for the 50 billion dollars, do not worry. The Ukrainian army will not see a cent of it. [Anyone who has had any experience with Ukraine is aware that there is no chance in hell that the money will get to it intended destination.] [But if there will ever be peace talks, they should be more than paper as were the peace agreements in 2014 which were ignored by the Ukraine as soon as they were signed.]
22.12.22
I can see why people have to take tests in high school and college.--That is for for them and for the future kinds of work they will do. You have to know your real abilities rather than what people tell you; like when they say, "You are so good at everything." But I hated tests. And I think the reason is that I do not absorb information like others. I do not "learn". I absorb. That is one reason I found my element in the Litvak world of yeshivot . While of course, I had to take a test before I was accepted at the Mir Yeshiva in NY, still after that, there were no tests. And if you have ever been in a Litvak yeshiva, you know what I mean. The atmosphere is that of intense learning all day and all night. But no tests. Everyone learns at their own pace.
[And I can see why Conversation number 76 in the Conversations of Rav Nahman appealed to me. He said "Say the words in order (of the book you are learning) from start to finish"
20.12.22
the woke movement is based on the Frankfurt School
the woke movement is based on the Frankfurt School but if you point this out the result is denial since none of the woke have heard of Marcuse and the One-D Man. Never the less, it i those ideas that have produced the movement. Just that the ideas are presented as new without citing the sources.
19.12.22
I was on my way to the sea and I heard an Israeli song about ''Ok beit hamikdash [Temple] how can we build you again? With faith and understanding בית המקדש איך נבנה אותך מחדש באמונה בהבנה and it occurred tome that in fact that would be a good idea. in fact there is a specific commandment in the Torah tobuild the beit hamikdah. So why does no one do it? or even want to do it?
18.12.22
Hegel was against this doctrine of Jacob Fries.
A bit too much faith can come under the title ''non intuitive immediate knowledge,'' and I suspect that that was one of the reasons why Hegel was against this doctrine of Jacob Fries [as modified by Kelley Ross and Leonard Nelson].
But there is a way to justify this approach of Fries. Michael Huemer points out the flaw of many philosophical systems-- that is they start out with premises that are shaky at best. And in that way they differ from the exact sciences. While the exact sciences also start with premises, their premises are almost obvious from the start--though they can be modified or changed a evidence against them grows.
In this way faith and reason can work together-- reason can modify faith.
SEE THE web site of Kelley Ross ''friesian.com'' . Why Fries, Leonard Nelson and K. Ross are important is that problems in Kant resulted in many new approaches, many of which led to dead ends. The most fruitful that I can see is this Leonard Nelson's ''The New Friesian School".
A good place to see the problems of analytic philosophy is Robert Hanna [blog at against academic philosophy].
A good place to see problems in Hegel is Hobhouse [The Metaphysical State].
I could go on, but in the end my point will remain the same -that the best thing in philosophy today is Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross's New Friesian School.
רמב''ם הלכות מעשר א' הלכה ט''ו The mishna tractate trumot chapter 4
There is an argument between the Rambam and the Raavad concerning a case when one takes only a fraction of what he is obligated in Truma and maaser [tithe]. [He is obligated to take a tenth for maaser from the Torah, and one fiftieth for truma from from the word of the scribes.] To the Rambam nothing has happened. The act of separating is not valid and he has to separate truma and maaser even from what he took. For an example there is 100 seah of tevel and he takes five seah. He has to take a half a seah on what he took and clearly 9 seah on the stack of grain. To the Ravvad the separation is valid and what he took is valid and on the stack of grain itself he can go and take another five seah because we depend on ''breira''. [ we say what he separates now is thought to have come from the part of the stack that has not yet been fixed].There is a slight proof for the Raavad because Reissh Lakish in the Yeruhalmi holds the mishna that says this law is referring only to truma. so he holds the mishna means that the act of separation is valid and that it can not be valid in the case of maaser and so he says the mishna does not refer to maaser. [The mishna tractate trumah chapter 4 says המפריש מקצת תו''מ מפריש ממנו תרומה עליו אבל לא למקום אחר] so even though the poskim hold the mishna refer to both truma and maaser till the meaning is the the separation is valid.
___________________________________________________________________
There is an argument between the רמב''ם and the ראב''ד concerning a case when one takes only a fraction of what he is obligated in תרומה and מעשר. [He is obligated to take a tenth for מעשר from the Torah and one fiftieth for תרומה from from the word of the scribes.] To the רמב''ם nothing has happened. The act of separating is not valid and he has to separate תרומה and מעשר even from what he took. For an example there is מאה סאה of טבל and he takes חמש סאה. He has to take a half a סאה on what he took and תשע סאה on the stack of grain. To the ראב''ד the הפרשה is valid and what he took is valid and on the stack of grain itself he and takeS another five סאה because we depend on ''ברירה''. [ We say what he separates now is thought to have come from the part of the stack that has not yet been fixed].There is a slight proof for the ראב''ד because ריש לקיש in the ירושלמי holds the משנה that says this law is referring only to תרומה. So he holds the משנה means that the הפרשה is valid and that it can not be valid in the case of מעשר and so he says the משנה does not refer to מעשר. [The משנה says המפריש מקצת תו''מ מפריש ממנו תרומה עליו אבל לא למקום אחר]. So even though the פוסקים hold the משנה refer to both תרומה and מעשר Still the meaning is the the הפרשה is valid.
יש ויכוח בין הרמב''ם לראב''ד על מקרה שבו אחד נוטל רק חלק ממה שהוא חייב בתרומה ובמעשר. [חייב ליטול עשירית למעשר מהתורה, ואחד מחמישים לתרומה מדברי סופרים.] לרמב''ם לא אירע כלום. מעשה ההפרדה אינו תקף וצריך להפריד תרומה ומעשר אפילו ממה שלקח. לדוגמא יש מאה סאה של טבל והוא לוקח חמש סאה. הוא צריך לקחת חצי סאה על מה שלקח ותשע סאה על ערימת התבואה. לראב''ד הפרשה תקף ומה שלקח תקף ועל ערימת התבואה עצמו הוא ולוקח עוד חמש סאה כי אנחנו תלויים ב''ברירה''. [אנו אומרים שמה שהוא מפריד כעת נחשב למקורו מהחלק של הערימה שעדיין לא תוקן]. יש הוכחה קלה לראב''ד כי ריש לקיש בירושלמי מחזיק את המשנה שאומרת את החוק הזה, שהכוונה רק לתרומה. אז הוא מחזיק שהמשנה אומרת שהפרשה תקפה ושזה לא יכול להיות תקף במקרה של מעשר, ולכן הוא אומר שהמשנה לא מתייחס למעשר. [המשנה אומרת "המפריש מקצת תו''מ מוציא ממנו תרומה עליו אבל לא למקום אחר"]. אז למרות שהפוסקים מחזיקים את המשנה מתייחסת גם לתרומה וגם למעשר, עדיין המשמעות היא שההפרשה תקפה
17.12.22
It is possible that the problem in the USA is the woke indoctrination that stems from the anti-enlightenment traditions [anti reason], and that the rise of China stems from its adoption of the enlightenment tradition stemming from Hegel. [Marx was after all in the Hegelian tradition.]
See Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind that in fact traces the difficulties in the USA education system to this contradiction between the Enlightenment philosophers and the Anti Enlightenment ones.
The rise of the USA was during the time it was firmly embedded in the Enlightenment with John Locke. But after the 1960's this has all been changing.
Now China and Russia teach their students Calculus and Quantum Mechanics. The USA teaches its students "gender pronouns". Where this will lead to is fairly clear,
16.12.22
to avoid WWIII
I am concerned about the decision in Washington to send Patriot batteries to Ukraine. I am not sure why a war between Russia and the USA does not seem to bother anyone. I thought to avoid WWIII would be on the top of everyone's agenda.
And it is not true that the average Ukrainian does not want Russian rule. I asked Ukrainians in Uman about this over the period of many years, and they always said to me that things were better under the USSR than after Ukrainian independence when things were in a state of lawlessness and chaos.
The Kant-Fries school is important because it shows and corrects many of the flaws in Neo-Kantian thinkers. A side benefit i that it shows a connection between faith and reason.
I see in Germany there are large efforts to go mining and digging into Kant and some of his major commentators: Hermann Cohen [in Germany] Allison, Strawson, Sellars in the USA.
I asked Dr Kelley Ross [of The Kant-Fries School ] and this was his answer:
I wrote: Let me say she [Bauman] is saying that the categories of Kant are not a ''thing in itself''' but rather the structures that make thinking possible.
Dr Ross: "The categories do apply to things in themselves, but we don't know how. Once they are "schematized" with space and time, they make phenomenal objects possible. But then causality, in particular, can mean free will among things in themselves; but the evidence for that only comes with morality.""
I wrote : ""She [Charlotte Bauman] shows there is a difference between the early Hermann Cohen which was like this and the later Cohen that Nelson was disagreeing with."
KR: "As soon as Cohen rejects things in themselves, then really nothing is left of Kantian philosophy. Whether that is "early" or "late" doesn't make much difference to me."
I wrote : "That is as well as I can understand her point of view right now. Why this is relevant to the Friesian school is that in this way the categories are not derived, but given and thus similar to non intuitive immediate knowledge."
Kelley Ross: "Kant thought that the categories are somehow derived directly from the forms of logic, which is what people call the "metaphysical deduction" of the First Critique. This is nonsense. His move is a leap of imagination, not inference, and his epistemology has nothing to explain it. Before Fries, one could only appeal to Platonism for a more sensible explanation.
If the "early" Cohen was more like Kant, he is still stuck with Kant's problems and improbabilities. I doubt that Bauman fixes that up. "
The Kant-Fries school is important because it shows and corrects many of the flaws in Neo-Kantian thinkers. A side benefit i that it shows a connection between faith and reason.
One benefit about the combination of faith a reason is that one can have faith that is false. [just like when reason can be flawed.] When one combines faith reason it is more likely to hit the truth.
One can see what happens in Philosophy by means of the mathematical notion of flabby sheaves. There is loss of exactness in a case where one wants to go from a smaller domain into the whole space. There is then loss of exactness. And this is what happen in philosophy when people do not look at the big picture-or refuse to acknowledge the role that faith plays in coming to truth. [This is hinted at in Torah:אנחנו מאלמים אלומים בשדה ] We were gathering sheaves in the field. For to correct the problem of loss of exactness one must go to the stalks that make the sheaves,--but you do not worry about gluing the stalks together.
13.12.22
The new drone attack inside Russia is no surprise since Ukrainians freely went to work in Russia with no visa until this year. I knew Ukrainian people in Uman that went to work in Russia. The border was open in both direction until recently.. I even knew of a sad case where someone in Uman [Ukraine] was a travel agent and arranged trips for a large gathering and then simply took all the money and disappeared into Russia. Or so he thought, until some of the people he had cheated tracked him down. I forget how that ended, but for sure the cheater was not served tea and cookies
12.12.22
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)