I have heard different explanations for the Holocaust

One that seemed promising to me was Judicial positivism. If you add this to ethical relativism and Nietzsche who was the prime philosopher in Germany from about 1890  and onward, then you get a powerful mix that could contribute to World War Two and the Holocaust. That means that I have sought reason for the Holocaust from the failure of philosophy. Recently it has come to my attention that there is  another more obvious reason-- anti-semitism. At some point it is possible that people just stopping thinking of Jews as worthy of life.

And the cause of antisemitism seems to me to be anti goyism (or anti gentilism). This is what I think is clearly the implication of a verse in Mishlei [Proverbs], "like the face is reflected in water so is the heart of man towards another man."

And the cause of Anti-Goyism I think is bureaucracy. That means to say some people get comfortable in rabbinical  jobs and cease to worry about the implications of their actions. So religious leaders are a similar position as a government bureaucrat. They become comfortable in their positions and cease to worry if their preaching is in any way reflective of the real world. After all they do not need to deal with the real world since they are insulated by their "shtele' [position ]. They are in that way like a government bureaucrat.

This is along way to get around to what is already stated in the Talmud [at the end of Tractate Shabat]--all problems that come into the world only come because of the judges of Israel.


 What passes for morality is in general the evil inclination dressed up in some mitzvah.  Nietzsche picked up on this theme  and held that all human morality comes from the human basement.
I do not think  all morality is from the human basement. Maybe most of it,- but not all. Some morality should be  attributed to the human attic. [The  urge to do good.]

Lev Tahor (Heart of Purity), which was founded by Moshe Helbrans

I knew this fellow. The problem I think is that anyone that people listen to [in any religion] is liable to start thinking of himself as more than what he really is. Moshe Helbrans was a disciple of Rav Shick of Breslov. I have written about him on my blog a few times and I don't feel like repeating it all here. But he was simply a person that people liked to listen to and Rav Shick also liked him very much. Rav Shick had a small group of followers in Safed at the time and I was one of them. Halbrans was the leader of the group appointed specifically by Rav Shick. (I was just some no good for nothing baal teshuva.) And it was all pretty nice. But at some point Halbrans left Rav Shick as I did also. In spite of problems involved with Rav Shick I think it was a mistake for me to leave him. He has a kosher path--except for the anti Israel stuff which he picked up from satmar

Hanuka was the last time our family was together under happy circumstances.

Hanuka  was the last time our family was together under happy circumstances. My mother had been sick but she was home again, and I was staying at home reluctant to go back to NY. But the second night I decided I had to return to NY because Reb Friefeld had made many overt hints that I was to be his future son in law. Mom suggested that maybe I did not really have to go back, but this fact of a possible shiduch/marriage prospect swayed my decision. So my brother David drove me to the airport. Then Mom got sick again and I was home on Shavuot until Sukkot. At any rate Hanuka was always a special time for me.
Today I see the wisdom of my parents, but then I was a very stubborn kid.



. My wife and I went to the Sochnut/Jewish agency to make arrangements for Alyia to Israel. The representative of the Israeli government was a religious Zionist and saw that we were a Charedi  family so he spent the entire meeting trying to dissuade us form making Aliya. After that meeting on the way home I remember my wife crying literally. She was upset and I had no words to comfort her.


 We did go to Israel and it was great. I have no regrets on that account except that I wish I had keep learning Talmud.[Talking with God is important, but you also need to learn Torah to hear what God is saying to you.. Talking with God is only you telling God what you want him to hear, not the other way around.]






[I do not try to use the general approach of the Rambam based on Aristotle, because I think Aristotle is just too problematic. I know lots of people read Ann Rand and secretly use her approach but her approach also I find way too problematic and incoherent.] [Neturai Karta I know uses Nietzsche to form their world view but this also I find to be problematic. Nietzsche had some points but as a logical world view he has much to be desired.]

I admit that do not myself have the intellectually ability to come up with my own unified approach.and there are plenty of areas in which I use idea from the Intuitionists like Dr. Michael Huemer in Colorado and Prichard and also Aristotle and the Rambam. [I have mentioned before what problems I see in some of these world views. Against Kant the best rival is Prichard, but [to turn the tables] it seems to me that there were some issues that Prichard clearly did not think out, as opposed to Kant.] [for example he thought that to Kant no action is right unless motivated by the moral imperative. That obviously is not Kant's view. To Kant no action is good unless motivated by the moral imperative]

Pesachim 29b

Tosphot- -the commentary on Talmud has many layers of depth. The first layer is the the one which after you get what Tosphot is saying there seems to be some obvious question . That is the first layer you need to get past in order to start understanding Tosphot properly.
Just for a example of this first level. Pesachim 29b
In the Talmud there is an argument what happens if one eats leavened bread that belongs to the Temple on Passover. Is he required to bring a sacrifice? This is a debate. Rav Ashi says the reason for the one who says one must bring a sacrifice is because he hold one can derive pleasure from leavened bread on Passover.[That is everyone, not just the Temple.] [So he was נהנה (had pleasure) from הקדש (something that belonged to the Temple) so he brings a sacrifice]
Rav Ashi says that everyone is agreeing that one can't redeem the leavened bread on Passover. But the reason one brings the sacrifice is that since the leaven only has holiness of monetary value, it can be used to lite one's stove. That is the first level of Tosphot which seems to not make sense. Leaven seems more like holiness of body that can't be redeemed.
The next level is to understand that to the Temple, the leaven does have monetary value. So it makes sense to say it has holiness that applies to monetary value on Passover itself. We do not find that even on Passover that the Temple can't derive benefit from leaven. So it makes sense to say the Temple can sell it to be used to lite ones stove.

During the 60's the U.S.S.R. needed American wheat to feed their population. Here is an anecdote on a Russian web site.
[Historical note: this actually happened. The USA did send wheat to the USSR at the height of the cold war to save them from starvation.]

The General Secretary of the Communist Party and the President of the USA (Kennedy) are in a summit meeting. The General Secretary asked the President  to send wheat to save the lives of starving Russians.  The President agreed.

Then the General Secretary mentioned that they have a problem with producing  good tractors. Can the Americans send tractors also? The President agreed.

Then the General Secretary mentioned it seems that there was also a shortage of cattle in the USSR. Can the Americas send cattle? The president agreed.

Then the General Secretary mentioned that the are having trouble implementing a perfect Communist society. Can the Americans send over some advisers to help with that also?

In other words, the Ari is a highly Neo Platonic system that seems to reflect deep understanding of the metaphysical nature of the world

Though I do not have a theory worked out for this, I have noticed over the years connections between Mathematics and the Kabalah of the Ari [Isaac Luria]. The most obvious connection is in Vector Bundles, Homology and Homotopy. But I have never written about this because they seemed to be two separate areas of value. 


But when I started working on Category Theory, the connections became more obvious.

As a general introduction to this topic let me mention several areas of particular interest .

From Emanation we map from different spheres to lower level spheres. But we lose content. Only the spheres of Emanation are Divine as stated openly in the introduction to the Tikunai HaZohar.(באצילות איהו וחיוהי חד ולא בעלמין תתאין) and the Ari himself brings this Tikunai Zohar. [and the Remak, Moshe from Cordoba, also in his magnum opus the Pardes]

In Category Theory there is a well defined system to map from mathematical structures like rings or topological spaces like spheres to lower or higher levels. To me the connection seems obvious. Though I can imagine that this connection is ignored in academia for the sad reason that most of 20th century LA/P Philosophy [Linguistic Analytic] has been an attempt to deny the validity of metaphysics. Only recently has philosophy stated to climb out of their hole by the books of people like Jerold Katz that have exposed the intellectual bankruptcy of 20th century philosophy.
In the map from a sphere to the union of two spheres [(S^n) Psi to S^n/S^n-1 seems to be related to the idea of connection or joining (זיווג) between spheres in kabalah] The difference is that spheres in kabalah have numinous content while mathematical structures do not. But outside of that the connections seems clear.




I noticed some connections also between Logic and Kabalah a few years ago but this is mentioned in the "Book of Ideas."

A general observation is that mathematics is usually horizontal. It is only with the advent of Category Theory has it become vertical. And this seems also related to the difference between the philosophy of Plato [vertical ideas or forms] and Aristotle [horizontal]  and both are implicit in the general structure of the world of Isaac Luria. In particular you can see this in the Reshash (רש''ש)--Shalom Sharabi who holds that the entire system of the Ari [which starts out vertical and then morphs slowly into horizontal vessels] will change at some future time--the revival of the dead--when all the vertical world will become horizontal.
There is also some interesting parallels between Isaac Luria and Kant. Kant like Luria divides understanding into two parts (אמא עלאה  ואמא תתאה). For Kant one is empirical, and the other for a priori. The most striking parallel between Kant and Luria is concerning Kant's idea of a function of the mind that accomplishes synthesis between objects of the understanding and empirical objects --the exact idea of Daat דעת
There is also knot theory which explicitly uses a concept from the Ari [ in the title of the book itself].

The Ari himself is positing worlds that exist and were created on higher spiritual planes before this physical universe. Ar first glance this seems obvious. This world seems to have aspects to it that are not physical and seem to be embedded in it. For example the number "2." It does not seem to be something you stumble on as you walk down the street. But it would be hard to argue that it does not exist. The Ari mainly deals with these in between levels between God and this physical universe. And they are not considered outside the limits of experience. In  particular the moral plane, the world of moral law, though not physical is considered to be well within the range of experience.
In other words, the Ari is a highly Neo Platonic system  that seems to reflect deep understanding of the metaphysical nature of the world

There is another connection between Math and kabalah that astounded me when I encountered it.
It is the breaking of the vessels called מיתת המלכים. This refers to the kings of Edom that ruled before king ruled in Israel. [Genesis and in Chronicles.]. This small seemingly insignificant paragraph in the Torah occupies a major extremely complicated and involved subject in the kabalah of Isaac Luria.
There are seven kings of Edom. And this is considered to be the source of the breaking of the vessels and the root of all problems that come into the world.  The root of all catastrophes. And in Catastrophe Theory there are seven kinds of catastrophe in lower dimensions. [Seven major types.]
I noticed this Physics also. But that was a long time ago when I had ideas that I could defend on this subject.
Further look at the subdomains after integral domains. That is all the subdomains after you have the domain that can't be a clock. That is in clock 3^4 =0. The order of spaces under  a domain which is not a clock comes out to be the order of the ten sepherot. So to me it looks like Isaac Luria did have some important insights. [And besides that I should mention  that Yaakov Abuchatzeira calls Isaac Luria "Rabainu" (our teacher) with no other appellation. See for example the Pituchei Chotam of Yaakov Abuchatzaira]

I know that kabalah in general considered related to the Neo-Platonic point of view, but I found my own experiences were more in accord with the school of thought of Kelly Ross and the Freisians.]

I know many people are interested in spirituality. This desire can be channeled into crummy world view systems .
Personally, I went more for The Five Books of Moses and Talmud. But that was simply because I had and have an inherent love of Torah. [This was something I really did not get from my Reform Synagogue. It was more a combination of the influence of my wonderful amazing parents and also a great love of philosophy.] I was not expecting any great revelation of light or Divine experiences.

 I have seen many of the Kabalists in Israel, and for some reason - it does seem to me that most of them got caught up in the phantom  zone [the "Intermediate Zone" [in the terminology of a Hindu mystic.] [Or the Sitra Achra itself.]