The Talmud [Sanhedrin 62b] is trying to get Rabbi Zachai to make sense. I am have trouble figuring out in what way there is any problem. The way the Talmud comes out is that R. Zachei said idolatry is liable for an act without intention and Shabat not. The Talmud asks what is idolatry without intention? To Abyee it is serving it from fear or love and to Rava is it "he says it is allowed."
אומר מותר.

What is a case of "he says it is allowed?" The baby that was captured and grew up without knowing Shabat.
So that is Munbaz in Tractate Shabat. This is very reasonable. But the Gemara seems to have a problem with R. Zachei and asks from the question if העלם זה וזה בידו he forgot both Shabat and all the kinds of work. But that question was asked about the two middle parts of the Mishna in Klal Gadol [Shabat chat 7] not about the beginning of the Mishna with the baby that was captured.
So I am having trouble seeing what the Talmud does not understand about Rabbi Zachei.
[Tosphot and the Maharsha do not deal with this problem in Sanhedrin. I am not sure where to look rhis up. Maybe in Shabat in the parallel sugia. Or Kritut. For the moment I am at a lose to know what to do here.]

סנהדרין סב: התלמוד רוצה ליישב את רבי זכאי. ואני מתקשה להבין למה יש קושיה. התלמוד מסיקה שרבי זעאי אמר שגגת ע''ז בלי כוונה חייב משא''כ בשבת. מה זה שגגת ע''ז?לאביי מאהבה ומיראה ולרבא היא אומר מותר. אומר מותר הוא תינוק שנשבה. וזו שיטת מונבז שהוא פטור. זה ישר ופשוט. אבל הגמרא שואלת מן השאלה של העלם זה  וזה בידו.שאז יש חיוב גם בשבת. אבל השאלה הזאת נשאלת רק לגבי הבבות האמצעיות של המשנה בכלל גדול שבת פרק ז'. ולכן קשה לראות מה יש קשה להבין ברבי זכאי.

Appendix:
 I can understand if the Gemara here is going like Abyee. Then everything would be fine. We have a case in idolatry that brings a sin offering, serving from love or fear. Clearly he has some idea that there is such a thing as idolatry. And a similar case on shabat where he knows about shabat but he thinks some act is allowed when it is not should also be liable. So if the Talmud here is thinking like Abyee then there is a legitimate question on Rabbi Zachai.
And come to think of it maybe in fact that is what is going on. Because if the Talmud is thinking like Rava then there seems to be nothing wrong with Rabbi Zachai. One case in idolatry is liable and the parallel case in shabat is not.--the אומר מותר "He says, 'It is permitted'" case.

But I am sure you can see why this is still unsettling. First because "He says 'It is allowed'" is suspiciously close to תינוק שנשבה שמג and it is Munbaz that says that is not liable, not the sages who were against Munbaz.
 So you can see what is disturbing here. I would like Rabbi Zachei to be like Munbaz and like Rava. But in Shabat it was Rabbi Yochanan himself who was going like Munbaz and he is the one here in our Gemara that is  at odds with  Rabbi Zachei. And when the Gemara here is asking on Rabbi Zachei it is doing it from a question of Rava to Rav Nachman. העלם זה וזה בידו a hiding of shabat and work.
In any case no matter what happens in the next few day, I think we can all agree that this Gemara is going only like Abyee.

What comes from the learning Torah is a good question. I think in my case I gained some good character traits. And I think that that is the main thing people get from Torah. I for example do not have inherently good character traits. I have a great deal of ego  and I only learned about the importance of speaking the truth and other good traits from the Torah. But I admit there are people that have inherently good character traits without learning a lot of Torah--but even then it comes from the Torah. My brothers i have always known had inherently good traits but that is because in our home Torah is respected. I feel good traits come from Torah. And further more I think Western civilization comes from Torah and also the wisdom of the Ancient Greeks, but not from just one or the other.

 Furthermore I think holiness comes from Torah. I think by learning and keeping Torah comes a connection with the "Will" (of Schopenhauer) or the First Cause that  one would not have otherwise.


  Lets look at Buddhism or the Tao. See the essay The Dark Side of the Tao of Dr Kelly Ross . He gives a good analysis about Buddhism and the Tao  and what their effect is on peoples traits.

I would have to say today the world of Lithuanian yeshivas is like the Rocky Mountains. Breslov takes what the Litvaks throw out and makes it into the roof of the Suka which can be made only of thrown out things.

 What Lithuanian yeshivas do or say makes a difference because they are the gold standard by which everything else is measured. Why do some groups learn? They have to show "we learn Torah too!"  Even Reform and Conservative have to measure themselves by means of the standard set by the Litvaks (Lithuanian Jews). If the Litvaks think something is kosher, that makes it kosher by definition. If they think it is not it makes it not kosher - by definition. Everything has to get past that hurdle. Nothing and no one is exempt, even if they don't like it. Especially if they don't like it.

You want to claim something is Jewish? You say the Chazon Ish said it was OK! Or Reb Moshe. Or Reb Aaron Kotler. You don't say "They learn it in a Breslov yeshiva." You don't say  Reform  Judaism says it is OK.
For example when the Na Nach Breslov  want to show that the "petek" (letter that Reb Odesser thought he received from Reb Nachman) is kosher they go around plastering up copies of the letter of approval (Haskama) that Reb Moshe Feinstein gave to Reb Odesser. Just walk into the synagogue of Reb Nachman in Uman and you will find copies of Reb Moshe's letter plastered all over the place--and most importantly right in the official notices section. That means if you want to say something is kosher you have to get approval of a Litvak Gadol. Without that nothing can even start.
No one says Reb Moshe is kosher because Breslov learns his books. If you want to say a person in Breslov like Rav Cheishen knows how to learn you say he learns at the Mir yeshiva. You don't say someone knows how to learn because they learn in Breslov.

Nowadays the Lithuanian yeshivas are spread out. It is hard to find any one in particular that stands out from the rest.

The greatest yeshivas in the world. Three great NY yeshivas: the Mir, Chaim Berlin, and Torah VeDaath. In Israel it is Ponovitch

In any case I realize that once the greats like Rav Shach and Reb Shmuel Berenbum are gone, then I guess there just is not that much difference between any of the Lithuanian Yeshivas.

But I still would assume it is best to go where the classes are on the highest level. And that probably still is in the NY yeshivas. [I heard about Tifrach, and my learning partner said they learn on a very high level but besides that I don't know about it.] [I did ask also about the well known yeshivas in Jerusalem, Brisk, Maalot HaTorah, etc. but nothing stood out.]
I would have to say today  the world of Lithuanian yeshivas is like the Rocky Mountains. It is like a mountain range with some higher peaks and some lower, but no Mount Everest.
Reb Aaron Kolter and Rav Shach certainly were gedolim. But today? But come to think of it there are a few greats--Reb Naphtali Yeger in Far Rockaway and Rav Nelkenbaum in the Mir in Brooklyn; also Shelomo Haliua who gives the top shiur (class) at Chaim Berlin. Maybe they don't have world wide reputations, but I know for a fact they learn on a world class level.

The Litvaks do seem to throw out people way too much. But that is because they want to retain their reputation of pure virgin olive oil. They throw out anything that can be considered as flawed in any way so as not to lose their quality. No one complains when they buy pure Olive Oil that it is in fact pure. I fact, they expect the company to make sure there is nothing in it that could be less that pure. So it is with Lithuanian yeshivas.
Breslov takes what the Litvaks throw out and makes it into the roof of the Suka which can be made only of thrown out things.

I mentioned my idea how to make the Gra make sense in terms of his idea that night starts after 13.5 minutes after sunset. [Or 18 if you go by a 24 minute mil.].
The problem with this is three medium stars don't come out until 45 minutes after sunset.
[Another problem is all rishonim and also Rav Saadia Geon say like Rabbainu Tam.]
I wrote my idea on this blog a few days ago that this can be explained by the expansion of the universe.
Shimon Baker in a Breslov Shul nearby told me he has another proof for the Gra. The Mechilta on Exodus 12. The first verse says, "This month shall be to you the beginning of the months."
The Mechilta [brought by Rashi] says God did not give Moses prophecy at night. So how could he show the moon to Moses? Answer God talked with him during the day and then right when it became night he showed him the moon.
The moon sets on the first day of the month right after sunset. Therefore when God showed him the new moon it had to be within about 13 to 18 minutes after sunset. On 72 minutes after sunset on the first day of the month there is no moon.


Please don't take this as a pesak halacha. Even though I have great respect for the Gra, I can't say to go with his opinion against all the Rishonim and the Shulchan Aruch itself which goes like Rabbainu Tam.
I know there are some people who follow the Gra in everything like Rav Zilverman in Jerusalem and that is admirable but I can't say to do that as a general rule. [I might like to, but I can't. ]

Sex  comes from the human attic, not the basement.



 an approach which does not hide sex under a veil of secrecy. Don't  make it something wrong or to be embarrassed about. But rather like atomic energy which can be used properly or improperly.
The subject of sex deserves a thorough treatment. The first place to look is at Yaakov Emden's sidur. There he goes into great length about the idea that sex to bring children into the world has to be on the night of Shabat after midnight. And it is clear that the man and wife have to sanctify themselves in thought and action in order to bring holy children into the world. You can see that this treatment of sex is very different than what you find in the secular world.


Just like sex within the right framework brings holy souls into the world so when it is done wrong does the opposite. At any rate this deserves a longer treatment than what i can do for it right now.

significant of good practices I had been doing when I was part of the Lithuanian Yeshiva World.

(1) Shemirat Habrit. The awareness that sexual purity is the first and foremost prerequisite towards any spirituality what so ever--if the spirituality we are talking about is from the realm of the holiness and not the opposite.
(2) Joy. I became aware that service to God must be with joy.
(3) Israel. Torah teachings gave me a lot of encouragement to get up and make aliya to Israel.
And that in itself led to all kinds of good things. [A lot of things opened up for me.]
(4) Talking with God . This was for me an amazing channel while I was in Israel. There was a nearby forest while I could go to and spend whole days doing this.

I think if I had keep up my Talmud learning along with these other good things that I would have been a lot better off. But as I said, I did not go into it with balance.

Breslov was kind of a sore point in Meor Chaim. Rav Ernster had invited Breslov baali teshua into the four buildings given to him by the Israeli government. And they were kind of a pain for him. I am sure he was surprised when I turned out myself to be a baal teshuva . He must have thought I was a regular "Mir Yeshiva Guy." In any case I did not fit into the kollel. And did not want to either. Learning Torah to get a pay check was not my cup of tea. But I think I should have gone there anyway or found some way to do my regular learning.

[The major problem I saw was that people took tests to show they were learning. To me that seemed an open violation of the principle not to use Torah to make money]

In any case, it seems to me that there was a great deal of tension in the kirya [set of buildings] because the baali teshuva/ [newly religious people] were constantly making problems for Rav Ernster and then other baali teshuva turned against me also until I had to leave Israel. Baali Teshuva do tend to be nightmares for everyone around them.
Rav Ernster himself acted in the whole episodes uprightly. Now it is highly uncomfortable for me to go into details, but also a lot of details are unknown to me. Mainly I got the impression of tension and at some point people that had become religious thought it was mitzvah to stone me and my children and that certainly made me uncomfortable enough to leave. Since then I have thought that kiruv [bringing people in to make them into the insane religious world ] is not all apple pie.
To make along story short  baali teshuva  were trouble makers. About a twenty on a scale from one to ten.

Even though I named this blog by the name of the Gra, and the Gra clearly holds learning Torah to be the central mitzvah, I think that a relationship with God has to be a give and take kind of thing. I don't think it can be all just learning what the Torah has to say but there has to be a kind of continuous conversation with God to open ones heart  for the words of the Torah to have  a place to enter.It is for this reason I think at least on weekends people should make a effort to go to some secluded spot preferable in the mountains or some forest in order to talk with God while no one else is around but you and Him.