27.5.15
I still hold that Scientology is the archetype example of a cult and is still very important to study from that aspect. It is the secular aspect of it that also provides a good subject of study. After seeing it in detail it is easy to see the cultic aspects of one's own group that he thinks is unique in its claims.
I mean, you can't study the cult one is involved in,-- because he is involved in it. And as far as he can tell, there might be some aspects of it that are good. After all why else would he have gotten involved in it? That makes it very important to study Scientology as a pristine example of a cult, and how it recruits and develops, even when it is based on a ridiculous idea.
Elazar Menachem Shach the Rosh Yeshiva of Ponovitch explained what is the essence of idolatry. It is the thought, "This can help." At least as a necessary condition, but maybe not sufficient. That comes directly from the Talmud itself. An idol that fell and broke is nullified because people say if it could not save itself how could it save me. We see from that the essence of idolatry is the thought "This can save." [That is unless the "this" is God.]
And what we learn from Professor Huemer Why are people irrational about politics? is that people can choose to believe irrational things because of the desire for sex, or to fit into a group where they expect to get sex, etc.
This all boils down to the vacuum of knowledge. That is what idolatry and a cult is. The statue is a vacuum of knowledge. It is like something hollow that one can put into it all his imaginations and delusions and he wants to do that because he wants to fit into the group that is following that vacuum of knowledge.
Appendix: Torah differs from idolatry in that the central thought is that God can help. Idolatry is that some other being or mitzvah can help.
Why people are irrational about politics
This is very relevant to the subject of idolatry that I am learning right now.
Idolatry comes up in Sanhedrin pages 60-63 and in Avoda Zara 41.
Rav Shach says we see the essence of idolatry is the thinking that it has power to save.
Is that the only condition? I think it is clear it needs some kind of invisible power to affect things at a distance. Otherwise why is it any different than walking into a store and asking for a loaf of bread.
In any case we see idolatry is not the same as a mistaken world view. These are different subjects.
Michael Huemer's essay deal with why people choose irrational world views. and if we are to understand idolatry we need to understand this phenomenon.
So what we have here is two things: (1) A simple definition of idolatry from Rav Shach. Ability to save. [Based on the Talmud in Avoda Zara that an idol that fell and broke does not need nullification because those that worship it say, "It could not save itself so how could it save me?"]
(2) The idea of Michael Huemer and Bryan Caplan that people can will themselves to believe things that they know are wrong in order to fit in with a group that want to be a part of.
I brought this up in my learning Talmud session yesterday. We were getting to teh end of teh subject of idolatry in Sanhedrin 63. The next mishna is a different subject. So I was trying to sum up some of what we had learned.
He brought up the fact that I had studied Scientology as a very important example of a cult and asked about some of the aspects of it that I had learned about. And also brought up another cult in the USA.
I still hold that Scientology is the archetype example of a cult and is still very important to study from that aspect.
I mean you can't study the cult you are involved in because you are involved in it. And as far as you can tell there might be some aspects of it that are good. After all why else would you have gotten involved in it? That makes it very important to study scientology as a pristine example of cult and how it recruits and develops even when it is based on a ridiculous idea.
And this is the connection between Michael Huemer and Rav Shach. Rav Shach showed us what is the essence of idolatry: the thought, "This can help." At least as a necessary condition but maybe not sufficient. That comes directly from the Talmud itself. And what we learn from professor Huemer is that people can choose to believe irrational things because of the desire for sex or to fit into a group where they expect to get sex etc.
This all boils down to the vacuum of knowledge. That is what idolatry and a cult is. The statue is a vacuum of knowledge. It is like something hollow that one can put into it all his imaginations and delusions and he wants to do that because he wants to fit into the group that is following that vacuum of knowledge.
This is very relevant to the subject of idolatry that I am learning right now.
Idolatry comes up in Sanhedrin pages 60-63 and in Avoda Zara 41.
Rav Shach says we see the essence of idolatry is the thinking that it has power to save.
Is that the only condition? I think it is clear it needs some kind of invisible power to affect things at a distance. Otherwise why is it any different than walking into a store and asking for a loaf of bread.
In any case we see idolatry is not the same as a mistaken world view. These are different subjects.
Michael Huemer's essay deal with why people choose irrational world views. and if we are to understand idolatry we need to understand this phenomenon.
So what we have here is two things: (1) A simple definition of idolatry from Rav Shach. Ability to save. [Based on the Talmud in Avoda Zara that an idol that fell and broke does not need nullification because those that worship it say, "It could not save itself so how could it save me?"]
(2) The idea of Michael Huemer and Bryan Caplan that people can will themselves to believe things that they know are wrong in order to fit in with a group that want to be a part of.
I brought this up in my learning Talmud session yesterday. We were getting to teh end of teh subject of idolatry in Sanhedrin 63. The next mishna is a different subject. So I was trying to sum up some of what we had learned.
He brought up the fact that I had studied Scientology as a very important example of a cult and asked about some of the aspects of it that I had learned about. And also brought up another cult in the USA.
I still hold that Scientology is the archetype example of a cult and is still very important to study from that aspect.
I mean you can't study the cult you are involved in because you are involved in it. And as far as you can tell there might be some aspects of it that are good. After all why else would you have gotten involved in it? That makes it very important to study scientology as a pristine example of cult and how it recruits and develops even when it is based on a ridiculous idea.
And this is the connection between Michael Huemer and Rav Shach. Rav Shach showed us what is the essence of idolatry: the thought, "This can help." At least as a necessary condition but maybe not sufficient. That comes directly from the Talmud itself. And what we learn from professor Huemer is that people can choose to believe irrational things because of the desire for sex or to fit into a group where they expect to get sex etc.
This all boils down to the vacuum of knowledge. That is what idolatry and a cult is. The statue is a vacuum of knowledge. It is like something hollow that one can put into it all his imaginations and delusions and he wants to do that because he wants to fit into the group that is following that vacuum of knowledge.
26.5.15
Fake yeshivas. Pseudo Torah
How can you tell if someone's Torah lesson (homily) comes from the Sitra Achra (the Dark Side)?
You can tell if you see the person is arrogant. If they are arrogant, they receive their Torah lessons and ideas from the side of the demons.
This seems to me to be very relevant nowadays that there are very few teachers of Torah who are not arrogant. At least that is among the teachers of "hashkafa [frum world views]."
Arrogance is in manner, but it also refers to thinking one knows a subject without the proper preparation. World view issues have the odd trait that people without knowing much about Torah can have opinions about Torah issues.
So you don't get many frauds being Math professors. This is the same reason you don't get many frauds in those that teach Gemara, Rashi, and Tosphot. The subject is inherently hard. But world view issues of Torah is different in that people can fake it easily. [It is easy to pretend that kabalah is hard and to pretend to know it. It is hard to pretend the same kind of thing with Math or Physics. The subject matter itself weeds out the phonies, and then they go to yeshiva to pretend to be smart.]
The problem is there are too many fake yeshivas. Now some people ought to be sitting and learning Torah that is Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot. But most can't. It is too hard. But they can't work either. They have no skills. So you get fake yeshivas where people are not learning Torah but pseudo Torah.
The truth be told very few people after the age of eighteen should be learning anything at all. Not Torah and not humanities. They should be flipping hamburgers. Maybe 5% of the people that can be doing STEM or Torah should be. But I know of very few people like that. The rest of the garbage they are teaching is not worth it for the people learning it teaching it or supporting it.
You can tell if you see the person is arrogant. If they are arrogant, they receive their Torah lessons and ideas from the side of the demons.
This seems to me to be very relevant nowadays that there are very few teachers of Torah who are not arrogant. At least that is among the teachers of "hashkafa [frum world views]."
Arrogance is in manner, but it also refers to thinking one knows a subject without the proper preparation. World view issues have the odd trait that people without knowing much about Torah can have opinions about Torah issues.
So you don't get many frauds being Math professors. This is the same reason you don't get many frauds in those that teach Gemara, Rashi, and Tosphot. The subject is inherently hard. But world view issues of Torah is different in that people can fake it easily. [It is easy to pretend that kabalah is hard and to pretend to know it. It is hard to pretend the same kind of thing with Math or Physics. The subject matter itself weeds out the phonies, and then they go to yeshiva to pretend to be smart.]
The problem is there are too many fake yeshivas. Now some people ought to be sitting and learning Torah that is Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot. But most can't. It is too hard. But they can't work either. They have no skills. So you get fake yeshivas where people are not learning Torah but pseudo Torah.
The truth be told very few people after the age of eighteen should be learning anything at all. Not Torah and not humanities. They should be flipping hamburgers. Maybe 5% of the people that can be doing STEM or Torah should be. But I know of very few people like that. The rest of the garbage they are teaching is not worth it for the people learning it teaching it or supporting it.
I think that to come to Torah is a highly difficult task being that the basic organizations that are supposedly there to help one in this direction are in fact are obstacles. What one ought to do is to learn Torah at home or at a legitimate Lithuanian yeshiva. Shuls and synagogues tend to be highly problematic.
If you want to learn Torah you have to do it on your own, or find a place that is devoted to the Torah without any side agenda or hidden agenda.
I am trying to be polite and not offensive. But if I could say over just the basic facts of what I know surely you would be shocked. Because many times people and places that makes the greatest show of keeping the Torah are doing secretly just the opposite. Count on it. [The groups that consider it of primary importance to seem Jewish, are not.]
Take for example the school I was planning on going to. They would go through about 5 books per week. Why I ask can't the same be done with Torah. Take one week to finish the Old Testament in Hebrew. The go through the Babylonian Talmud. Just an hour a day would get you through about seven pages at least if you read slow. That way you finish it in a year. I would like to add Rashi and Tosphot but the first time just the basic Gemara is enough.
But this is not meant to be an all day long project. Not everyone was meant to be reading books all day long. At least not me. Though 4 years in a Litvak yeshiva is important but after that people ought to work.
I think learning each day should be short and sweet. A hour with a learning partner in Talmud in depth. Then one hour of fast learning the Oral and Written Law. An hour of Physics and Math. Then work. [And kollels I should mention I think tend to support people that ought to be working. Not everyone but most. I think supporting kollels is mainly the same as throwing away money down the drain.]
If you want to learn Torah you have to do it on your own, or find a place that is devoted to the Torah without any side agenda or hidden agenda.
I am trying to be polite and not offensive. But if I could say over just the basic facts of what I know surely you would be shocked. Because many times people and places that makes the greatest show of keeping the Torah are doing secretly just the opposite. Count on it. [The groups that consider it of primary importance to seem Jewish, are not.]
Take for example the school I was planning on going to. They would go through about 5 books per week. Why I ask can't the same be done with Torah. Take one week to finish the Old Testament in Hebrew. The go through the Babylonian Talmud. Just an hour a day would get you through about seven pages at least if you read slow. That way you finish it in a year. I would like to add Rashi and Tosphot but the first time just the basic Gemara is enough.
But this is not meant to be an all day long project. Not everyone was meant to be reading books all day long. At least not me. Though 4 years in a Litvak yeshiva is important but after that people ought to work.
I think learning each day should be short and sweet. A hour with a learning partner in Talmud in depth. Then one hour of fast learning the Oral and Written Law. An hour of Physics and Math. Then work. [And kollels I should mention I think tend to support people that ought to be working. Not everyone but most. I think supporting kollels is mainly the same as throwing away money down the drain.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)