to repent on my sins

Since it is right before Yom Kippur and I understand the need to repent on my sins and the need of others also. Yet I realize that just like I am stuck in certain patterns of behavior that may or may not correspond the the Oral and Written Law of Moses it seems that changing my ways in a way that would be objectivity considered as Teshuva [a true return to the way of the Torah] is probably impossible.  This is a problem the Musar books deal with and their suggestion is to bring merit to many. That would probably translate to making yeshivas along the lines of Narvardok that empathizes good character trait [being a mensch] Fear of God, Trust in God and learning Torah.
The idea seems sound to me but there is a drawback that most places called yeshiva are really just private country clubs that learn Torah for show but they are not authentic.

The type of yeshiva I would recommend would be the traditional Lithuanian yeshiva but with this difference.
The only difference would be Physics and Math that the Musar yeshivas did not have in them, and for some reason unknown to me they decided to ignore the Rambam. Maybe it is the same reason the Gra's signature on the letter of excommunication is ignored. Some people just ant to be religious fanatics and the more stupid rituals the better.

[Just to make it clear what I am saying: If you go through books of Ethics you will find that they deal with the problem that sometimes one finds he can't repent. Their idea is that this comes from כל המחטיא את הרבים אין מספיקים בידו לעשות תשובה (from heaven they do not let repent anyone who causes many to sin). And their cure for this problem is כל המזכה את הרבים אין חטא בא על ידו ( no sin comes about through anyone who causes many to do a good deed or a commandment.)]

Then the problem is that what most people do to bring merit to many is usually the source of terrible sin. As a rule it is better for people to pursue selfish ends rather that do things they think are a mitzvah. The most horrible thing come into the world through people that want to help the world. The more sincere they are the worse their effect.

Determinism is self refuting.

three-arguments-against-determinism


https://sydneytrads.com

Determinism is self refuting.

But we wouldn’t say that the snowfall is “true” or “false.”


I should mention that Allen Bloom mentioned briefly this idea. Also John Searle I believe has a book along the same lines. I am not surprised to see a professor at a NY university putting together such an excellent essay.

To have some learning session in Kabalah. There was an opening of Divine Light on me for the years I was in Israel before I pushed it away. So I do have a great deal of confidence in the Ari himself that learning him does prepare the soul for a higher kind of light--if done for the intention of learning Torah.

Because of the fact that young people -when they get interested in Torah also get interested in Kabalah is not a surprise.  They do first need to get the idea that it is kosher. If not for that crucial step, even the most secular Jew would reject the idea of having anything to do with it.

(1) To me the Ari seems important. But a lot of the Dark Side got mixed into the general books of Kabalah especially after the Baal Shem Tov. Not that this as the fault of the Baal Shem Tov, but rather the fact that the basic approach of the Shatz got into all mystic books after the 1700's.
The focus of the Sitra Achra (Dark Side) became the possession of religious teachers, and from there it was easy to subvert the rest of the Jewish people.
(2) Without the Kabala,h the Torah looks to modern eyes rather empty of significance. So it is natural to look for what is going on under the surface. This is the same as when you read Chaucer, you look for the deeper meanings. But in Kabalah people expect they will find the feeling and knowledge of numinous value.

(3) My position on this is that the Zohar is not from R Shimon ben Yochai. But that does not invalidate it. It was common for souls of people to reveal things to the living as we see with Joan of Arc and many others.

(4) I do think the Ari [Isaac Luria] is important but almost nothing that was written in Kabalah after him. The only two schools of thought after the Ari that I consider kosher are Yaakov Abuchatzeira and Shalom Sharabi.

(5) Besides those to schools of though I think everything else is basically from the Dark Side.
[Clearly Yaakov Avichatzaira and Bava Sali held very highly of the Ari and the Remak. The trouble is clearly not from them but from later demonic teachers that got to be commonly accepted as tzadikim who were clearly not so.]

Th danger is also that people  that learn kabalah think they have Ruach  Hakodesh and or the ability to do miracles. They imagine anything they think come from the realm of holiness.

(6) My own position you have to realize comes from a balance of a lot of things. I really liked the Eitz Chaim of the Arizal which I learned in the Mir Yeshiva in NY [between sessions] before I went to Israel, and in Israel I learned zero Kabalah, but visited the grave of the Arizal. [I mean in NY the basic thing was to learn Talmud and  so I learned the Ari only between sessions--I think. I might have done some during some sessions.] In any case, there was an opening of Divine Light on me for the years I was there before I pushed it away.  SoI do have a great deal of confidence in the Ari himself that learning him does  prepare the soul for a higher kind of light--if done for the intention of learning Torah. If it is done for the intention of getting spiritual powers it definitely causes one to fall into the Dark Side. I also look at the Ari from the standpoint of Kant that there is a an area of value that reason can not know. The realm of the dinge any sich.

Music for the glory of God

s52 C Minor

Socialism or any Rousseau based system I do not like. The way I see it the Constitution of the USA    would work perfectly well if not for the New Deal and the Great Society and black influence. The Constitution grants certain powers to the Federal government and no more. All other powers and right remain for the States or for the individual.
This really goes back to Hobbes that government is in order to protect civil society.

From the aspect of Torah, Socialism has two problems. Two are from the  Ten Commandments. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not covet. From the aspect of Torah the Federal government has a problem because it is limited by contract. The contract in this case being the Constitution. It is in violation of this contract because it has usurped power not given to it and reserved only for the states or individuals.   No one can believe in the Old Testament and still hold with socialism.

I was learning Shabat

I was learning Shabat while engaged to my future wife and spent that year learning Shabat and then Aruvin during my first year of marriage and then Pesachim. While a lot of my learning Shabat was done with Tospot and the Maharsha and Pnei Yehoshua, still some parts I did with a learning partner that wanted to concentrate on Halacha so we did the Gemara, Rashi, and some Tosphot and then the Rosh and Rif and Shiltei Giborim on the Rif and the Tur and Beit Yoseph. When it comes to the laws of Shabat, that is about the only way I have ever heard that gives a clear understanding of the material. 

I am not saying I liked that last approach. It as the approach my learning partner insisted on. But I admit when it comes to Halacha that the only way to understand Halacah is by doing the Gemara with the Tur Beit Yoseph. But if it had been up to me, I would have rather just done the Maharsha,  Pnei Yehoshua and Tosphot. On my own I not only learned the Maharsha, but the book Maharsha HeAroch which combined five commentaries on the Maharsha.

I can not say which approach is better. When I was starting out learning, I combined both approaches. But by the time I got to the Mir, I was pretty set on "Lumdus," = learning in depth  with intense analysis of Tosphot.  Though I was ignorant, still the deeper levels of the Gemara were what interested me. But I guess what happened was at the Mir, the group that was doing  Shabat that year were "halacha oriented" so I just went along with it.


To me "learning" still just means Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam from Lublin. Everything else is extra credit.

[As for the actual laws of Shabat, I am lenient about things like the public domain needing 600,000 as Rashi and Tosphot both say.  Also electricity and writing in English as per the Rema that in Hebrew in the actual prohibition.  Muktze also according the the later Mishna in chapter Beit Shamai where the Gemara turns the mishna around, so the school that allowed mutzah was Beit Hillel. I am not going into these subjects here, but just stating in what areas I am lenient. It is OK to be more strict,-- as long as being strict does not cause one to do less of what he should in obligations between man and his fellow man.

One important point is that there is little reason to be strict unless one knows he or she is taking the strict opinion. But often people think the more strict opinion is the only opinion.  Being overly religious is not a substitute for being a decent human being.] 

Advice by a man of wisdom and experience on the topic of personal safety:

Don’t hang out with stupid people, don’t go to stupid places, don’t do stupid things.