Joseph Horwitz of Navardok emphasized trust in God

Each of the disciples of Israel Salanter brought a different message into the world.
One disciple Joseph Horwitz of Navardok emphasized trust in God.

In Kings 2 chapter 7 we find Elisha (a prophet) saying tomorrow wheat and barley will be sold for pennies.

The שליש (secretary of the treasury) asked, "How is that possible? If God would make windows in the heavens, could such a thing be?" Shomron [Samaria] was under siege by the Syrians.

Elisha said, "You will see but not eat from it."

Then next day the secretary was trampled and died.

Joseph Horwitz {Navardok} asked why people that ask the same question do not get the same punishment?
He said: "They do. They see others sitting and learning Torah, and somehow God provides for them, but they themselves are sentenced to a life sentence of hard labor."

Trust in God was the message brought by Navardok.

This got mixed up to some degree with learning Torah. But in fact no yeshiva is depending on trust in God except the Mir in NY. All other yeshivas tell a lie that it is  a mitzvah to support them and thus turn the Torah into a means to be making money. [Don't be fooled by their rhetoric. They are definitely looking for ways of conniving and convincing  people to give them money. They definitely are not trusting in God. ]

To some degree I had confidence in God for some time. Then I faltered. Still, I would like to let people know there is such a thing as trust in God,  and He reciprocates when one really has complete trust in Him.


I see most of the world is far from this Navardok approach. That is sad because I see a lot of other approaches and systems being tried. Reb Israel Salanter's the original idea was that the main aspects of Torah are good character, Fear of God and Trust in God. Many other systems are being trying --the USA Constitution, communism etc. Personally I see that Reb Israel Salanter was right. That the main thing about Torah is character and the way to gain good character is by learning Musar.

s17 E Flat Major  s17 in midi

If one believes all people are equal then why did white people create...

If one believes all people are equal, then why did white people create : Euclidean geometry. Parabolic geometry. Hyperbolic geometry. Projective geometry. Differential geometry. Calculus: Limits, continuity, differentiation, integration. Algebra [Euclid and Diophantine],Abstract Algebra, Physical chemistry. Organic chemistry. Biochemistry. Classical mechanics. The indeterminacy principle. The wave equation. The Parthenon.  Air conditioning. Number theory. Romanesque architecture. Gothic architecture. Information theory. Entropy. Enthalpy. Every symphony ever written. The twelve-tone scale. The mathematics behind it, twelfth root of two and all that. S-p hybrid bonding orbitals. The Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. Quantum Mechanics Relativity Quantum Field Theory, String Theory, The purine-pyrimidine structure of the DNA ladder. Single-sideband radio. All other radio. Dentistry. The internal-combustion engine. Turbojets. Turbofans. Doppler beam-sharpening. Penicillin. Airplanes.  Apollo 11,The Space Shuttle, Surgery.  Polio vaccine. The integrated circuit. The computer. Football. Computational fluid dynamics. Tensors. The Bible, The Constitution. Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Homer, Hesiod. Glass. Rubber. Nylon. Roads. Buildings. Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. (OK, that’s nerve gas, and maybe we didn’t really need it.) Silicone. The automobile. public-key cryptography,etc.? Night vision. Lasers.

The reason then has to be exploitation. That is why the idea of exploitation has become so popular among intellectually and morally challenged people. I am not saying the exploitation theory is right. Rather it is more likely that not all people are created equal.

Israel Salanter

Israel Salanter thought people need to learn Ethics. That is you should not expect them to be born with ethics, or to just pick it up from some religious context, but to learn it actively. He was focusing on a certain set of Mediaeval books, but the principle applies across the board. That is even if ethics is mentioned in religious books, that does not automatically help. Ethics has to be learned as subject in itself. Judgybitch: "Do men and women learn the same ethics, or different ones?" Avraham: "It would be the same ones. There are the classical ones and later works built on the classics. But the principles are the same. This is a long story. In any case the books of Ethics that I like the most were the Obligations of the Heart and also two more recent books of disciples of Israel Salanter. One emphasizes trust in God [Level of Man Medragat HaAdam]. But the general gist was more along the lines of fear of God and good character traits. The general idea was to put emphasis on one's obligations, not one's rights." BG "Why would God be a component in treating fellow humans equally? What is wrong with old fashion "mutual respect"? Or, the old adage, do on to others, as u would want others to do onto you. What I find most hypocritical, is women preach this to their children, and yet,..." Avraham rosenblum to BG All true critiques. Like I said this is a long story. I wish I could make it short. There is a connection between fear of God and character. But not fear of God in the way the religious fanatics think of it. [I should mention that my parents sought to instill ethics in my brothers and me as their parents before them.]

This is an argument: Hegel holds that we can come to true morality by logic and reason. So also Michael Huemer [based on the Intuitionists: Prichard, GE Moore, etc.]

Fries holds that morality is in the realm of Dinge An Sich [things in themselves] that we know, but we do not know that we know, and it needs to be dug out like Socrates by careful questioning brought forth knowledge of Geometry of a slave boy.

Joan of Arc

Henry V was perpetually in debt. Most of his soldiers did not get paid until many years after their service. There simply was not enough money in the treasury.
Still the English paid for Joan of Arc 10,000 francs. Compare that to the price of a horse which in those days was from 10 to 12 francs. The average horse today is about $1000. So in today currency he paid about $1,000,000 for Joan.
She was a threat to English rule in France in a way that the English recognized.


I have a great sympathy towards Joan of Arc I should mention. In fact if we consider her mission as valid [which I do] that would mean the French were wrong for getting rid of the Monarchy.

new moon

I think one should go by the actual new moon which makes now the 9th of Av. That is there is one second when the moon and sun are in conjunction. That is called the Molad. In Tosphot in Sanhedrin 10b the first opinion of Tosphot is that the Molad fixes the time of Rosh Hodesh.


The calendar that is used nowadays was instituted by Meton in Athens. It was adopted during the time of the Geonim but was not used during the time of the Talmud. The whole thing is  a misunderstanding based on the idea of Saadia Gaon of Tradition שמיעה.
He said the calendar is משמיעה from tradition.
What he meant was as he used the concept elsewhere the whole body of oral and written Torah. But what people thought he meant was הלכה למשה מסיני A law to Moses at Sinai. But that is not what Saadia Gaon meant.

That means the calendar is not accurate. It is better to simply go by the actual new moon.

The Gemara in Sanhedrin 10b is also clear in that way. Rosh Hodesh to that Gemara is not dependent on Beit Din. Rather if the beit din declares it at the right time fine, if not then they sanctify the real new moon anyway from heaven.

_________________________________________________________________________________

I think one should go by the actual מולד. There is one second when the moon and sun are in conjunction. That is called the מולד. In תוספות in   סנהדרין דף י'  ע''ב the first opinion of תוספות is that the מולד fixes the time of ראש חודש.


The calendar that is used nowadays was instituted by מטון in אתונה. It was adopted during the time of the גאונים but was not used during the time of the תלמוד. The whole thing is  a misunderstanding based on the idea of סעדיא גאון of  מפי השמועה
He said the calendar is משמיעה from tradition.
What he meant was as he used the concept elsewhere the whole body of oral and written Torah. But what people thought he meant was הלכה למשה מסיני A law to Moses at Sinai. But that is not what סעדיא גאון meant.

That means the calendar is not accurate. It is better to simply go by the actual מולד.

The גמרא סנהדרין י' ע''ב is also clear in that way. ראש חודש to that גמרא is not dependent on בית דין. Rather if the בית דין  declares it at the right time, fine. If not, then they sanctify the real new moon anyway from heaven.


אני חושב שצריך ללכת לפי המולד. יש שניה אחת כאשר הירח והשמש נמצאים יחד בקו אנך. זה נקרא המולד. בתוספות סנהדרין דף י' ע''ב הדעה הראשונה של תוספות הוא כי מולד קובע את הזמן של ראש חודש. לוח השנה המשמש כיום הונהג על ידי מטון באתונה. היא אומצה בזמן של הגאונים, אבל לא היה בשימוש במשך הזמן של התלמוד. כל העניין הוא אי הבנה מבוססת על הרעיון של סעדיא גאון של "מפי השמועה". הוא אמר שלוח מן "שמיעה" (המסורת). כוונתו הייתה כפי שנהג המושג במקומות אחרים בגוף כולו של תורה שבעל פה ובכתב. אבל  אנשים חשבו שהוא התכוון הלכה למשה מסיני (חוק למשה מסיני). אבל זה לא מה סעדיא גאון התכוון. כלומר, לוח השנה אינה מדויקת. עדיף פשוט ללכת לפי המולד. גמרא סנהדרין י' ע''ב ברורה גם ככה. ראש חודש לזה גמרא אינו תלוי בבית דין. במקום זאת אם בית הדין מכריז עליה בזמן הנכון, בסדר. אם לא, אז בשמים הם מקדשים את הירח החדש (ראש חודש) האמיתי בכל מקרה.


ideas in Shas

Race

Race is the beginning of separation of species. This was the spark that kindled the idea of evolution in Darwin when he saw this.  The idea is you take one species and divide it into different areas. The first difference that appears is color. If they stay separated long enough they become two species.

To me it seems that race is not a social construct but a fact of biology and the way nature begins to divide that which ought to be divided. And fighting nature is futile.

Th thing is according to Howard Bloom we should put the center of gravity on the Super-organism and the social meme that unifies it. Based on that we could say even though Sephardim and Ashkenazim have been separated by time and space still since the Torah is the social meme , therefore they can be united. Clearly that is what Bava Sali thought, even though he did sign his name 'with a (ספרדי טהור (ס''ט after it to show that he could trace his lineage to Jewish people before the mixing that began under Arab rule. Still clearly he though the main thing was loyalty towards the holy Torah. That is even though lineage is a big deal still everyone has free will. and one can still choose Torah no matter what his lineage is.


[I focused on color because that seems to be the first marker. Maybe there are others. Color is what got Darwin thinking and I also noticed the same thing. Take a species lets say squirrels and separate it. Put one set into the USA and the other into the USSR. After some time one comes out grey and the other brown. Same with birds in England. There are lots of examples.]