As  the polices and values of Europe were shaped by revulsion about WWII. While people ought to learn from their mistakes. Still learning from mistakes is a kind of negative learning. For positive values it is still important to go to the Old Testament. But since the basic values of the Old Testament are  not not stated openly it is important to learn Musar--books of Ethics written in the Middle ages whose stated purpose was to find the basic values of the Old Testament and the Talmud and put them in simple form so everyone can understand them.

[Not all of Musar I am very happy with. Almost everyone after the Shatz got a good dose of that poison that went into him and his false prophet. That includes the Ramchal. The way I see it most of everything that came after the Shatz is problemtic exception the people that wrote straight of the Talmud with no connection to  Hashkafa [world view issues]

In yeshiva, world view issues were not emphasized. You really had to piece it together on your own.
The Guide of Maimonides was around in its English edition but most people were not looking at it. Yeshiva was really about Gemara, Rashi, and Tosphot.  World view issues were  ignored.
The Guide for the Perplexed and most of Jewish Philosophy from the medieval period  in any case was addressing issue that most people including myself did not have. I never asked "How can the Torah say such and such? Did not Aristotle prove otherwise?"
All Medieval Jewish Philosophy assumes Aristotelian science to be correct.


As for the Rambam himself in the Guide I also have no problem because I simply understand it like Rav Avarham Abulafia [the most important mystic from the Medieval period] explained it.

In any case for world view issues I have to piece together my own approach based on the Ari [Isaac Luria] and  the Guide of the Rambam and the other Medieval books of Jewish Musar [books on ethics].

Mainly I go with the idea that this world is a world of shadows. It is just the shadows that you see on the cave wall. The real world is the world that is the dinge an sich-things in themselves. And beyond that there is the Ding An Sich, the first cause. And I think the dinge an sich are hidden from pure reason. Over the years I have changed my mind about free will. My mother in law once asked my wife about WWII and Germany. And my wife answered free will. And I was surprised at the time a because I had in my own mind confined free will towards every persons' owns decisions. Now I think she was right that one person's free will can affect other people for good or bad.




In any case, Musar addressed world view issues to some degree. But to do more that that might be impossible. The problem is this: If you would want to deal with these kinds of issues in yeshiva you would have to spend a lot more time on it that is available. Let's say for example you would want to learn the Guide of the Rambam. To do that and have any idea of what he was dealing with you would also have to learn Aristotle and t get an accurate picture you would have to learn the commentaries on him  and the later books of Joseph Albo and Abravenal going back towards the traditional Neo Plato view.

The drawback however of not learning this material is people get drawn to phony mystics and pseudo Torah.

One possible way to address this issue would be at night seder [session] to work on Jewish Philosophy. That is at least to plow through the basic material quickly. The Guide, Saadia Gaon's Emunot VeVeot, Joseph Albo,  Isaac Abravenel, and Yehuda Abravenel.

Introduction: The Torah  allows slavery, and slavery has laws attached to it. One can't do with a slave girl anything he wants. America made a terrible mistake in freeing its slaves and now they are ruling over  everyone else. Americans thought the Torah is bad because it allows slavery. Instead of thinking they were superior to the Torah, they ought to have learned its lessons.]

First of all in the Torah we have five kinds of Guilt offerings.  That is let us say there is a slave woman who has two owners and one of the owners lets her go. So she is half slave and half free. Now if she would be free, one could marry her. But a  Jew can't have sex with a slave woman. So what happens if a Jew has sex with this half free and half slave woman? That is the case of one of the guilt offerings. [The half free slave girl offering in Leviticus.]

The other guilt offerings are for armed robbery, and for using an object that was sanctified for the Temple and few other things. You can look them up at the beginning of Leviticus.

The law concerning a  half freed slave girl is in order for the law of the Torah to apply she needs to do it on purpose but he can do it by accident or on purpose.  That is he depends on her. If she did it by accident, then not only does she not get lashes, but he brings no guilt offering.
Thus if she is underage, neither she nor he is obligated in  anything. But if she is older than 12, and he is under age, she gets lashes if she did it on purpose, and he brings a sacrifice.


[In other words: In Kritut we learn he depends on her. If she is not obligated in makot [lashes] then he does not bring  a guilt offering. So if he is over 13 and she is younger neither is obligated.]

 But if he is less than 13 and she is older, the Rambam says she gets lashes and he brings the guilt offering. The Raavad disagrees and says since he is less than 13 both are not obligated in anything;



 The Rambam is hard to understand How can he be liable, when he is underage?

Rav Elazar Menachem Shach has an idea that might help us to understand the Rambam..

Rav Elazar Menachem Shach says when we say as a rule that and accident is not liable in punishment the reason is there is something lacking in the act--not just the person. So now we can understand the Rambam. Since she is doing the deed on purpose, and he is underage there is nothing lacking in the deed. [The reason is because slave girl needs to do it on purpose for there to be a punishment, but he does not need to be on purpose.]
This idea of Rav Shach is something that I and my learning partner have been puzzling about. What would be the difference if doing an act by accident would be a lack in the person, not in the deed? What would change in our case? Rav Shach is giving a reason for the Rambam that when he is under 13 and she is above 12 there is  an obligation.That is his being under age does not present a lack in the deed. But that just seems like a different way of saying the same thing. How does this help us?


______________________________________

_________________________________________




One kind of אשם is for having sex with a שפחה חר.
The law concerning a  half freed slave girl is in order for the law of the Torah to apply she needs to do it on purpose but he can do it by שוגג or on purpose.  That is he depends on her. If she did it by accident then not only does she not get lashes but he brings no guilt offering.
Thus if she is underage neither she nor he is obligated in  anything. But if she is older than 12 an he is under age she gets lashes if she did it on purpose and he brings a sacrifice.





רב אלעזר מנחם שך has an idea that might help us to understand the רמב''ם..
But before I can present his idea let me say over briefly the רמב''ם he is talking about.

First of all in the Torah we have five kinds of אשמות. One of them is for a שפחה חרופה. That is let us say you have a slave woman who has two owners and one of the owner lets he go. So she is half slave and half free. Now if she would be free, one could marry her. But a regular Jew can't have sex with a שפחה. So what happens if a Jew has sex with this half free and half slave woman? That is the case of one of the אשמות.

The other guilt offerings are for גזלה,that is  אשם גזלות, and for using an object that was sanctified for the Temple אשם מעילות and few other things. You can look them up at the beginning of ויקרא.

In כריתות we learn he depends on her. If she is not obligated in מכות then he does not bring  a אשם offering. So if he is over שלש עשרה שנים and she is פחות משתים עשרה neither is obligated. But if he is less than שלש עשרה and she is older the רמב''ם says she gets מלקות and he brings the אשם. The ראב''ד disagrees and says since he is less than שלש עשרה both are not obligated in anything;

 The רמב''ם is hard to understand. How can he be liable when he is underage? רב שך says when we say as a rule that an שוגג is not liable in punishment the reason is there is something lacking in the act, not just the person. So now we can understand the רמב''ם. Since she is doing the deed on purpose and he is underage there is nothing lacking in the deed. The reason is because שפחה חרופה needs to do it on purpose for there to be a punishment but he does not need to be on purpose.

____________________________________________________________________________

  קודם כל בתורה יש לנו חמישה סוגים של אשם. אחד מהם הוא לשפחה חרופה, היינו שיש שפחה שיש לה שני קונים, ואחד מהקונים מאפשר לה ללכת. אז היא חצי שפחה וחצי בת חורין. עכשיו, אם היא תהיה חופשית, אפשר להתחתן איתה. אבל יהודי רגיל לא יכול לקיים יחסי מין עם שפחה. אז מה קורה אם יהודי מקיים יחסי מין עם אישה הזאת  חצי שפחה  וחצי חפשית? זה המקרה אחד  של אשם

סוג אחד של אשם הוא לקיום יחסי מין עם שפחה חרופה (חצי משוחררת). את החוק הנוגע  לשפחה חרופה הוא  שהיא צריכה לעשות את זה בכוונה, אבל הוא יכול לעשות את זה על ידי שוגג או בכוונה. כלומר הוא תלוי בה. אם היא עשתה את זה בטעות, אז לא רק שהיא לא תקבל עונש אלא גם הוא  לא מביא אשם. לכן, אם היא קטינה לא היא ולא הוא מחויבים בכל דבר. אבל אם היא  יותר מי''ב והוא מתחת לגיל י''ג היא מקבלת מלקות אם היא עשתה את זה בכוונה, והוא מביא קרבן.



 בכריתות אנו לומדים שהוא תלוי בה. אם היא אינה מחויבת במכות, אז הוא לא מביא קרבן אשם. אז אם הוא יותר משלש עשר שנים והיא פחות משתים עשרה,  היא לא מחויבת. אבל אם הוא פחות משלש עשרה והיא מבוגרת לרמב''ם  שהיא מקבלת מלקות והוא מביא אשם. הראב''ד אינו מסכים, ואומר שאם הוא פחות משלש עשרה שניהם אינם מחויבים בשום דבר.  הרמב''ם קשה להבין. איך הוא יכול להיות אחראי כשהוא קטן?
לרב אלעזר מנחם שך יש רעיון שיכול לעזור לנו להבין את הרמב''ם.

 רב שך אומר כשאנחנו אומרים ככלל כי שוגג אינו אחראי בעונש הסיבה לכך היא שיש משהו חסר במעשה, לא רק את האדם. אז עכשיו אנחנו יכולים להבין את הרמב''ם. מאז היא עושה מעשה במזיד והוא קטן אין שום דבר חסר במעשה. הסיבה לכך היא משום שפחה חרופה צריכה לעשות את זה בכוונה כדי להיות עונש, אבל הוא לא צריך להיות בכוונה.

A song of praise to God q89 Edited  e33 mathematics mmog j1  js1 b104

kabalah center

People think the kabalah center is a problem because it does not emphasize the aspect of doing mitzvot but in fact that is a good thing. It is when you combine kabalah with mitzvot that delusions about being the messiah begin. So the Kabalah center is the best place for learning authentic Jewish Mysticism. All other places teach the mysticism of Shabatai Tzvi  along with the energies of the Sitra Achra.
 People may not talk about it but this is definitely what they are thinking.
The smart people are able to hide their delusions from the general public and present a spiffy public image.
 If you would take the teachings of Natan, the false prophet, out of the religious world, it would collapse. That is-- all but the Litvak yeshivas. But the rest of it depends highly for its spiritual energy and teachings of Natan. It is not that this was done on purpose. It was basically innocent. You had people going to the wide spread groups the Shatz that were in every town in the Ukraine. Later these same people were the same one that got involved with the Ball Shem Tov. They just brought their understandings of the Ari along with them.

So for people that are interested in the more mystic side of Torah what I recommend is not learning anything later than the Ari and Reb Chaim Vital themselves. You can be guaranteed that everything that came later is, without knowing, using the ideas and energies of the Dark Side that Natan Haazati was sucked into.

I think personally that a better way to get attached with God is by learning Gemara and Musar [basic books of Jewish ethics written during the Middle Ages]. This more "yeshivish" kind of approach I think is a lot more effective in terms of getting to "Devkut."--attachment with God. I can see that some people do this later approach, and still do not seem to get to where you would hope, but still this is an approach which I found worked for me some time ago. Sadly I was not able to keep it up. But if true spirituality is what you are looking for then my impression is nothing beats learning Gemara along with Musar. [I don't do a fast session because of various excuses. But if possible I think one fast session and one slow (in depth) one in Gemara is a good approach.]
[But I admit I can't answer for people that this does not work for. I can only tell over my own experience.]
I terms of Musar I also recommend the books of Israel Salanter's disciples. I find them to be  a great help for me to set me straight.

The Ari, Isaac Luria

There are few that really know the writings of Isaac Luria well. But even among the few that know Kabalah well there is a tendency to go into pretty bad stuff. I have no idea why this is.

It is almost for sure that if you see someone learning Kabalah that they think they are the messiah, or if they have some famous person they follow they are thinking of this famous person as the messiah.

But it rarely stops there. It is amazing to see the worlds of delusion they get into.

This in itself would be a good reason to critical of the Ari's writings except that it seems to me most of the problems come from the teachings of people that came after the Ari and were unknowingly influenced by the Shatz. It is astounding to me to discover most of the most basic teachings that got into the religious world have their origin in Nathan the false prophet of the Shatz. The truth be told, this is not well known because most people have not learned the writings of Natan. If they would and then look at the religious world today, they would see what I mean. It is not subtle but in your face in a way that you can't ignore.

I do not like to dwell on this, but just to conclude I want to say that there is good reason  Lithuanian yeshivas discourage any and all mystic practices and rather concentrate of the Talmud, Musar and learning a kosher vocation.

A nice list of good points I saw on someone's blog.

Liberty

1. I am a Caucasian of Irish and Italian descent, whose parents were immigrants from those lands.
2. My loyalties are to my family and the United States of America. I would defend either or both to the death. Apart from a mortgage and a car loan, I owe nothing else to anyone.
3. What matters most to me about others is their character: their willingness to respect the rights of others and to discharge their proper responsibilities, without whining about any of it.
4. I believe that there is an American culture, and that it is infinitely superior to all the other cultures of the world, past or present. More, I believe that Americans are the finest people in the world -- that no other land produces anything remotely comparable to our general standard of decency, justice, generosity, or good humor.
5. I believe that the races, as conventionally defined, differ in various ways. The importance of those differences is topical and contextual.
6. I believe that the sexes differ in various ways. As with racial differences, the importance of those differences is topical and contextual.
7. I believe that homosexual sodomy is self-destructive, but that, at least in certain cases, sexual orientation can be changed.
8. I believe that there is such a thing as general intelligence, that it is at least partly inherited, and that it varies widely.
9. I believe that the handicapped should receive our sympathy and compassion as individuals to other individuals, but that they are not entitled to more as a matter of right.
10. I believe that laws that mandate preferred treatment for the members of any group, however defined, are both unConstitutional and destructive.
11. I hold these convictions not because anyone else holds them, but because the evidence of my senses and my own powers of reasoning have led me to them.

_______________________________________________________________________

I have to add that I am in agreement with all the above except for the first sentence. My ancestors were all Polish Jews. But outside of that everything else I am in agreement with. My parents were born in the USA and my father served the USA honorably as captain in the U.S. Air Force and afterwards also. 


I looked at that person's blog a few times and he has some very good points and I recommend looking at it. It seems to me to be one of the very best on the Internet.