Bava Kama 19b and the Rambam

Just a fast introduction. The Rambam about that page of the Gemara is hard to understand That is he does not fit the Gemara at all. What I had to do was to suggest the Rambam had a different version.
 But furthermore I think there is this coming conclusion that is partly based on my own reading of the Rambam. That is I am suggesting anyway that this halacha goes along with Rabbi Nathan on page 53 that- "This and that causes the damage, then each pays a half." And what seems to me to be clear in any case no matter why the Rambam says what he says, but at least we do know he does not mention the chicken flying. And that is the sole situation when the Gemara says it is חצי נזק. This much we know. Furthermore we know the Rambam holds with Rabbi Nathan. So regardless of what I wrote we can conclude this chicken with the string is a case of full נזק. And thus if the chicken and the string each have an owner then each pays a half. And if it is a case of flying, then the largest amount possible is half, so there too each pays a half, but it comes out to be that each pays a fourth. And now we know why the Rambam did not write the law about the flying chicken. Because it can be easily understood from the law he did write.

_______________________________________________________________________________


Just a fast introduction. The רמב''ם about that page of the גמרא is hard to understand That is he does not fit the Gemara at all. What I had to do was to suggest the רמב''ם had a different version.
 But furthermore I think there is this coming conclusion that is partly based on my own reading of the רמב''ם. That is I am suggesting anyway that this הלכה goes along with רבי נתן on page נ''ג that זה וזה גורם   the נזק then  each pays a חצי. And what seems to me to be clear in any case no matter why the רמב''ם says what he says. But at least we do know he does not mention the chicken flying. And that is the sole situation when the גמרא says it is חצי נזק. This much we know. Furthermore we know the רמב''ם holds with רבי נתן. So regardless of what I wrote, we can conclude this chicken with the חוט is a case of full נזק. And thus if the chicken and the חוט each have an owner, then each pays a half. And if it is a case of flying, then the largest amount possible is half, so there too each pays a half; but comes out to be that each pays a fourth. And now we know why the רמב''ם did not write the law about the flying chicken. Because it can be easily understood from the law he did write.

 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.









Ideas in Shas 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.

_________________________________________________


It also seems to me to add an important point. That is the רמב''ם does not mention flying in בבא קמא י''ט ע''ב.   My thesis is this: The רמב''ם held flying is a שינוי  כחצי נזק צרורות  and thus can only be obligated חצי נזק. Therefore if there are two owners they both pay ביחד at the most חצי.  If it is not flying, they both pay חצי each to get to נזק שלם.

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.

So while it is admirable the attempt of Rabbi Avigdor Miller to defend Torah, still his books are not good arguments

World view issues and ethics are hard subjects to address.  The best books that deal with these as far as I can tell are from the Middle Ages. That is there is a set of books from the Middle Ages that deal with world view issues. Mainly that is Saadia Gaon, Maimonides, Crescas, Joseph Albo, and Abravenal. There are also books that deal with ethics. That started with the Obligations of the Heart (Chovot Levavot). After that there were  a few more. Shaari Teshuva by Rabbainu Yona, Orchot Tzadikim, and a few others. These all seem to me to be the best. 

After the Middle Ages logical thinking in these subjects went out the window. People that were good at logic then went into math and physics and the natural sciences. 

So while the natural sciences benefited, ethics and world view issues suffered.

So while it is admirable the attempt of  Avigdor Miller to defend Torah, still his books are not good arguments. If you want to defend Torah you really have to go to the Middle Ages when people were thinking clearly in these matters.

With due respect, Rav Miller did not understand evolution. Genesis and the Big Bang is full of errors in both Torah and Physics. [But in terms of presenting the idea that Torah and Physics are complementary it is an inspiring book. He gets a A for effort.]  No book that has been written in the frum world about ethics or world view rises above comic book level. The mystics are even worse.
 Not one of them has the slightest idea of what the Ari was talking about.

So while defending Torah is a noble and worthwhile task, it does not help the cause to have idiots and schizos doing the work. They damage the cause by means of their support. And they change the Torah to fit their delusions. 

However I should mention the Chafetz Chaim and the Musar books of the disciples of Israel Salanter are excellent.
Shimshon Refael Hisrch is excellent and so are Rav Cook's books.

universals as modes of necessity.morality is a kind of modes of necessity-not the normal type of F=ma. But "ought"

The point is this related to Maimonides. To see universals as modes of necessity hails back to Aristotle. It is a tantalizing prospect to think if there is a Rambam connection with this idea of modes of necessity. It is known the Rambam was neo Platonic leaning towards Aristotle --but not completely.

Music for the glory of God

r25 r22

authentic Torah

There is little idea of authentic Torah nowadays. People think authentic Torah is rituals. This gives power to schizo personalities to dominate. After all if Torah is mainly about rituals, then who better to be  a leader that someone who does long hard rituals? That is the nature of the schizo personality.
They love love hard rituals.

Or perhaps an idiot savant who can memorize  a whole library of books without understanding a word? Or who can write tons of religious fanaticism? Hyper-graphia  also being a characteristic of schizo personalities.

Believe me these are all examples of what is considered an authentic Tzadik {saint} nowadays.

Authentic Torah is found only in Litvak yeshivas. And what is that. It is a hybrid. The original idea of a yeshiva was begun by Reb Chaim from Voloshin [disciple of the Gra] . This was a radical departure from anything that had come before. It was an institution independent of the city it was located in. It was in no way subject to the home owners nor the Rav of the city. Its job was to learn Talmud , the Oral Law.
Independently  began the Musar movement [Ethics movement]. The idea there was to learn Musar Ethics. That idea did not take off at all for home owners. But it was by certain yeshivas. Thus certain yeshivas became all about ethics. So at that point we have two kinds of yeshivas. The Gra type for Talmud alone and the Musar type for mainly Ethics and some Talmud. The Modern Litvak Yeshiva is a hybrid of these two types.  Good examples are Ponovitch, Brisk, Mirrer in NY, Chaim Berlin, Torah VeDaat.

If you are near a Litvak place, then learn there. It does not have to be all day. In fact, when I was in Netivot I went to Rav Montag's place for an hour in the morning and an hour at night and Thanks to God made some good progress even in that short time. [Rav Montag is a disciple of Issachar Meir the friend of Bava Sali]
If you are an organized person you could learn a fast session for one hour  and another slow in depth session another hour and that would only take two hours per day and the rest of the day you could go surfing.
[If I had not gone to yeshiva in NY would not know how to learn. It would not make any difference how smart I am. I would have thought all the false paths were OK. ]

The typical spoiled brats of the cult that the Gra signed the excommunication on

Schizo type personalities. Meta magical thinking. Appropriate context. Hearing voices at the right time makes one  a "tzadik" (saint); hearing them at the wrong type one gets called "insane."
Cleanliness over done.
All human societies have great need for schizo type personality. They need the shaman. The basis for Torah to the Rambam is objective morality. The cult that the Gra signed the  excommunication on turns it into the main thing being ritual;-- especially ritual cleanliness.

Obsessive rituals is the core of the cult that the Gra signed the  excommunication on. But what makes the leaders "tzadikim" is the do it at the "right" times. They have enough control over it to make sure it conforms to the social norms that will get them accepted as true tzadikm, and thus get reproductive success and financial security.

Hyper-graphia. Reb Natan was a classic case of  the need to write obsessively and an uncontrollable interest in religious matters.


The problem is that every area of value has an opposite area of value that mimics it. So talent can take one only half way. For example; for every science where good work is being done, there is pseudo science. But people in pseudo science are easily able to fool the public because they are talented. But they can't fool the experts. So it is in every area of value,- including Torah. That is why  some people emphasize the rituals. That is  to be able to fool the public.


So it is important to come to authentic Torah and to avoid fake Torah which mimics it. The schizo personality types of hasidut are never good people. They are not decent people. They are rather good at doing the rituals. That is not authentic Torah.

Hasidim generally are Pre-schizoid personalities. These individuals have visions at the appropriate place and time. The visions are especially effective in the time of uncertainty and crisis. Mild form of OCD. These people follow rituals (in cleaning, eating to allay anxiety.    Epilepsy (temporal lobes). These people have keen interest in philosophy and in writing. They also have little or no sense of humor (hm...), stern. Hypocampus damage/development. These people are hypersensitive to dopamine spikes due to random rewards; prone to see agency behind random events.  Humans are social apes. Peer pressure, group thinking, and sense of belonging all contribute to development of religiosity.

WE LOVE GUYS THAT LEARN TORAH

Every area of value has close to it an area of opposite value that looks externally like a part of the area of positive value. You can see this in science where there is good work being done but also you can see crackpots that know enough to sound credible to fool the layman, but are just confused. So this is the case in every area of value.--including Torah. That is why it is important to use common sense to discern. 

That is why I am thrilled when I see people  that can discern the great authentic Torah quality in the Chafetz Chaim and Musar [ethics].

In "lumdanut" or "Lumdus" [learning deeply] there is also this aspect. But here it is harder for people to tell the real thing from the fake  when they are not themselves good learners. Concerning Rav Shach's book the Avi Ezri, of all books that introduce one to the idea of how to learn, I found it the most powerful and deep.  

WE LOVE GUYS THAT LEARN TORAH