I did some reading on the History of Spain and the Islamic conquest of Spain. I think this is very important reading because to me it shows what is going on today is not new, but an old and well proven procedure how to take over a country. All Muslims are doing is applying the same strategy that has always worked before. Not frontal assault, but rather softening up a population by a combined strategy of: a) partly showing themselves fine up right people; and b) another part making people afraid to speak up; and c) another part by terror tactics.
 In this regard I recommend to people to learn the history of Spain.
{I did this reading years ago. Not recently. It was in relation to the history of Jews in Spain. So I went back to the Roman period and went on from there. This was very instructive and gave me an ability to see how Muslims were able to corrode the Spanish culture and people.]

Ideas in Talmud The only thing I wanted to add to this notebook this minute is just a comment on Sanhedrin 61. I did not mention in my notes there anything about the Maharsha. But I did go into the argument between Tosphot and the Baal HaMaor. What is significant is that this is the only time I remember seeing the Maharsha quote the Baal Hamaor. And I think in my notes we can see why he does this. I do not remember exactly what he says and I have no way to check. But it seems to me the question in my notes on Tosphot almost has to force us to admit the Baal HaMaor was right.

How can I put this? Clearly what Tosphot was thinking was that when the Gemara limited the scope of השתחוויה השתטחות it meant only quadrant III not its way and not honor. And I guess that it is true that that is all the Gemara says explicitly about what is limited by השתחווייה. But it also adds that unique phrase מה השתחוויה דרך כבוד אף כל דרך כבוד which I think surely must mean that all that can be forbidden by השתחוויה is only the way of honor. So I think we are forced to admit that quadrant IV is left open [its way, but not a way of honor]. And thus there is something for איכה יעבדו  to forbid--that is quadrant IV. So we can see why the Maharsha would have pointed us in the direction of the Baal Hamaor.
_________________________________________________________________________________

 The only thing I wanted to add to this notebook this minute is just a comment on סנהדרין ס''א ע''א. I did not mention in my notes there anything about the מהרש''א. But I did go into the argument between תוספות and the בעל המאור. What is significant is that this is the only time I remember seeing the מהרש''א quote the בעל המאור. And I think in my notes we can see why he does this. I do not remember exactly what he says and I have no way to check. But it seems to me the question in my notes on תוספות almost has to force us to admit the בעל המאור was right.

How can I put this? Clearly what תוספות was thinking was that when the גמרא limited the scope of השתחוויה השתטחות it meant only רביע השלישי not its way and not honor. And I guess that it is true that that is all the גמרא says explicitly about what is limited by השתחווייה. But it also adds that unique phrase מה השתחוויה דרך כבוד אף כל דרך כבוד which I think surely must mean that all that can be forbidden by השתחוויה is only the way of honor. So I think we are forced to admit that רביע רביעית  is left open כדרכה, but לא דרך כבוד. And thus there is something for איכה יעבדו  to forbid, that is רביע רביעית. So we can see why the מהרש''א would have pointed us in the direction of the בעל המאור.

_____________________________________________________________________________

It also seems to me to add an important point in this book. That is the Rambam does not mention flying in Bava Kama 19b.   My thesis is this: The Rambam held flying is a difference [an unusual type of damage as in "half damages of pebbles"]  and thus can only be obligated 1/2 damages. Therefore if there are two owners they both pay at the most 1/2/ If it is not flying, they both pay 1/2 each to get to full damages.


גם נראה לי להוסיף נקודה חשובה.  הרמב''ם אינו מזכיר מצב שהתרנגול עף בבבא קמא י''ט ע''ב. התזה שלי היא זו:  לרמב''ם עפיפה נערכת  כשינוי (היינו כחצי נזק צרורות) ולכן יכולים להיות מחויבים רק חצי נזק. לכן אם יש שני בעלים אחד לתרנגול ואחד לחוט, שניהם מחוייבים לשלם ביחד לכל היותר חצי. אם התרנגול לא עף, שניהם מחוייבים לשלם כל אחד חצי להגיע לנזק שלם.


 רמב''ם כלומר אני מציע בכל מקרה הלכה זו הולכת יחד עם רבי נתן בעמוד נ''ג כי זה וזה גורם נזק שלם, כל אחד משלם חצי. ומה נראה לי להיות ברור בכל מקרה לא משנה מדוע רמב''ם אומר את מה שהוא אומר. אבל לפחות אנחנו יודעים שהוא אינו מזכיר את עפיפת העוף. וזה המצב היחיד שהגמרא אמרה שהיא חצי נזק. זה ידוע לנו. יתר על כן אנו יודעים שהרמב''ם מחזיק עם רבי נתן. אז  אנו יכולים להסיק עוף זה עם חוט הוא מקרה של נזק מלא. וכך אם העוף ואת החוט אחד יש להם בעלים אז כל אחד משלם חצי. ואם זה מקרה של טיסה, הסכום הגדול היותר האפשרי הוא חצי, אז גם שם כל אחד משלם חצי, אבל זה יוצא להיות שכל אחד משלם רבע. ועכשיו אנחנו יודעים מדוע הרמב''ם לא כתב את החוק על עוף מעופף. כי זה יכול בקלות להיות מובן מהחוק שהוא כן  כתב.

Stanford's Robert Sapolsky on Depression

Comment on Islam by a T. Turner:
I could imagine myself saying to any Muslim I might meet casually if I had the guts: "The thing you call a religion tells you to lie to those of us you believe to be in the 'house of war.' I won't lie to you. You are not welcome here, and I don't ever want to be like you or live the way your pedophile, robbing, lying, blood-thirsty 'prophet' told you to live. You may call yourself peaceful and innocent as anyone, but if you can't denounce sharia, jihad and your 'prophet' for the hurtful things they are, then you are a coward or a liar or an enemy."

"In fact, for you to even be in this country, and subscribe to a philosophy that considers this country to be 'the house of war' is treasonous, in my opinion. If this is the house of war, then you are the enemy, and if I had a weapon, I should just shoot you and be done with it."


I have mentioned it before hand but this relates to the issue of the social meme and the  further question of how much of this is biological. See:

Toxoplasmosis

That is: is there a parasite  that affects their thinking and causes the to think murder is praiseworthy? For example there is a barnacle that attaches itself to the back of a crab and injects a hormone that causes the male crab to think it is  a female. Then the male crab digs a hole for its eggs. But it has no eggs. But the barnacle does!



I spoke with a black fellow once in Central Park late at night. He described to me his religious search over many years--him and his wife together.  Part of that account includes  a mosque in NJ. He gave me details of a murder that happened when one member decided to leave Islam. They did not just murder him but his whole family. Until this day the police filed it away as unsolved.

Music for the glory of God

j1 j2 j6 r1 h69 p120 q96 e e33 e36 e69  r27 r26 e71  [In r27 there is some effort to work with dissonances. It is known that Bach did this a lot. Less known is Mozart also did.] [j1 in midi format  j1 in nwc format]

j2 midi j2 in nwc j6 midi  j6 nwc  r1 midi r1 nwc h69 in midi h69[nwc format]  p120 in midi  p120 nwc

q96 in midi  q96 nwc  e33 midi e33 nwc [e36 midi] e36 nwc r27 midi r27 nwc  e71 midi e71 nwc

There is a kind of effort in the Lithuanian yeshiva world to minimize the effects of cults.

There is a certain amount of policing to keep out the hasidic  nuts. That aspect to the people that have been kept out is hurtful, yet they seem to lack the self awareness that they might have been carrying a hidden virus with them--a Trojan horse. But on the other hand the whole thing became a gigantic self serving bureaucracy.  So to learn authentic Torah can be a challenge. The best idea I can come up with is private learning at home. Every day to have a session in Talmud, Musar, and what is called Hashkafa "world view" by which I mean the any of the books of the Rishonim concerning Jewish Philosophy, and to avoid rigorously pseudo Torah.

In fact that last step of avoiding pseudo Torah and cults is probably more important than  the first.

Next on can try to identify places where there is an authentic spirit of Torah and support them and even perhaps try to lend  a hand in building up such places.


Just because most people are unaware of it let me say over the basic list of what counts as legitimate Haskafa: Saadia Gaon's Emunot VeDeot, Rambam's Guide, Crescas, Joseph Albo, Ibn Gavirol,Abarbenal {actually Abravenal in Spanish}, the father and son. Isaac Abravenal and Yehuda

If all this seems a bit hard to relate to, then as an introduction: the  best things are the Chafetz Chaim and Shimshon Rafael Hirsh.

Appendix: Litvaks do not know it but what is a cult? It is an archetype. The leader get absorbed into a certain  archetype. That gives him amazing powers from the sitra achra. People are drawn to him like a magnet. But the archetype is a level lower than human, not higher. It is a lower order of being.
This explains the reason the Gra put that group into excommunication. The trouble is that it is infectious. It is like the Toxo parasite. It takes over the mind.

The question is in Avot. One who learns to teach is given to learn and teach. One who learns to do is given to learn teach and do.

I think that mishna is hard to understand.  I can see the advantage of teaching Torah and also of doing. From what I remember the Gra brings a source for that mishna that might explain it. My thought is Torah has to be learned in order to do it. But what if one has sinned and caused others to sin? Then one needs to do and to learn and teach also. I am not saying this explains that mishna.. I will have to think about that mishna.

 It is connected with the mishna that anyone who is מחטיא את הרבים אין מספיקים בידו לעשות תשובה. anyone who causes the many to sin is not let to do teshuva (repentance). I was surprised to see some books of Musar [Mediaeval Ethics] that I respect bring this down. The first place was in the חובות לבבות. And then Reb Israel Salanter in his letter of Musar and then in the Madregat HaAdam by Joseph Horvitz from Navardok. They all bring down this problem that once one has sinned and caused others to do so he can not do repentance. But then they give a solution to the problem.  המזכה את הרבים To bring merit to many. This seems to me to be very important. It is giving a solution to a problem which seems in solvable. If one can not repent on his sins what hope is there for him? But then they bring this mishna that if one brings merit to the many that serves as a way out of the problem. I think Bava Sali must have been thinking along these lines also. He was once saying words of Torah and it was after the time for the generators to go off line. People were getting ready to leave the hall. He said, "As long as words of Torah are said here, the lights will not go out." And that is what happened. Thus, I see teaching Torah as a way to come to keep Torah.

What is the kernel of what I am saying is that I think that sins stops one from seeing the light. They cause one to  lose the way, and think evil is good, and good is evil. Thus, after one has sinned, and especially caused others to sin, it is virtually impossible to repent. Because if he tries to repent while thinking what is evil is really good,- then all the more he repents, all the more sin he will be doing.

The best advice is thus to learn Torah, with the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach and Chidushei  HaRambam of Reb Chaim from Brisk in order to get an idea of how to understand any given law in the Torah.