But the Torah is not about spiritual experience.

The so called ‘New Age’ movement has been around for a long time now. (To be accurate, since the Garden of Eden). I did not realize the extent. 

 I myself was drawn to mystic goings-on of various sorts.

As I began to learn Gemara [Talmud], I was astonished by how much had changed during my years in the wilderness. 

 I have seen 'new age beliefs' and 'spirituality' from the inside. 

 They believe that those seeking ‘spirituality’ at Eastern Religion psychic fairs are going to the wrong place and should be coming to Torah for spiritual experience.

But the Torah is not about spiritual experience.

The Occult just got to be too much a part of how Torah i presented. [It might be the best idea to simply avoid that aspect for it seems to lead people almost automatically into the Sitra Achra Dark Side.]


[With no offence intended towards the Ari himself, still I think the whole mystic trip is a bad LSD trip.] My concern is with intention to get in contact with the spiritual realm comes evil spirits that trick and deceive and give powers from the Dark Side.


The trouble seems to be השחתת המידות destruction of good character traits when one gets involved. If good character was not an essential part of Torah then this would not matter. But it is. You can see this in the Sefer HaChinuch which brings in easy to understand form all of the 613 commandments of the Torah and good character counts for a lot of them. For example there are two separate commandments about אונאת ממון and אונאת דברים. Not to defraud someone in money and another one not to hurt another person by means of words.

I think it is best to allow the pseudo Torah mystic stuff fall off into oblivion. [You could possibly go back to the Zohar itself to find the beginnings of the problem.]

In the Guide, the Rambam has an approach in which reason and revelation interact and inform each other and modify each other.

My approach is based on Maimonides (Rambam). That is the rules of the Torah are meant to be obeyed-literally. However, in the Guide (מורה נבוכים) (Guide for the Perplexed), the Rambam has an approach in which reason and revelation interact and inform each other and modify each other. 

There was also an approach developed by Saadia Geon that when the literal meaning is impossible (according to Reason) then we must understand it as an allegory.   

The Maimonides approach was of a first level of Natural Law, and then a higher level of Law that can only be known by revelation.


Reform Judaism I think was too much influenced by the Reformation in which the laws of the Torah were considered superfluous. Or perhaps Reform just decided the halacha is like R. Shimon Ben Yochai that we go by the reason for each law.  This come up in Bava Metzia at the end of ch 9 and in Yevamot. And though people think we do not poskin by R. Shimon still there is a contradiction in the Rambam concerning this. And there is a long Mishna Lamelech which I think tries to answer this problem.     

The amount of time and effort that have gone into my two little booklets on Bava Metzia and on Shas surprises me. I would not have thought that it would take the amount of time that it did. And even if I had spent that time, but not have had my learning partner David Bronson, I am certain nothing would have been written.
The whole project started around ten years ago which is when I started learning with David. I had been out of Gemara learning in depth for some period of time so when I sat down with him and started learning again it surprised me greatly the depth of his questions and answers. It reminded me of my first yeshiva Shar Yashuv when I was learning Ketuboth  and heard amazing depth from Naphtali Yeger.

This gave me an insight into Gemara learning and also has a side benefit that I realize how long and how much effort is needed to approach Physics and Math also.

People get the idea in school that if they do not get something right away that they are not fit for it. I realize now that that is wrong Some subjects simply take a long time and lots of effort.

It took a lot of trials also. You have to get through a lot to be able to see the truth and  value of the Torah.

Reb Nachman and Rav Shick's pamphlets

You find at the beginning of Rav Shick's pamphlets that they are "based on Reb Nachman's teachings and they are interspersed with statements from the Old Testament and the Sages."  What is that supposed to mean is a mystery to me.

More than that. The whole religious world holds all kinds of practices that are supposedly based on Torah.

IF YOU CHALLENGE THEM TO PROVIDE SUPPORT they say "it's totally from the Torah! It's one hundred percent from the Torah!". This avoids the real problem, which is that the teaching is merely BASED ON THE TORAH, and not actually Torah.

What's the difference, I hear you ask. Well, have you ever watched a movie that is "based on the novel by...." whoever. And if you have read the novel, you find to your disappointment that the movie that is BASED upon it misses out a lot that is stated, and implies a whole lot more that isn't in the book. It's drawn from the book, it's based on it, but it's NOT the book!

[I have a high opinion of Rav Shick in terms of sincerity. And as an approach to Reb Nachman, it is the only sane one out there. Still because of my respect for him I feel the right to critique him. I would not bother with him otherwise.] 

The trouble seems to be השחתת המידות destruction of good character traits when one gets involved.

the Law of Moses.

Socialism and Communism really are not from the Law of Moses. Not the Oral or Written Law. Someone  mentioned that when people lose their faith (God forbid) then they become socialists. That explanation made a lot of sense to me.  The right to private ownership is much embedded in the Law of Moses.

[Though I was raised as a Reform Jew, clearly there were aspect of Reform that my parents did not hold with like the social justice bit. One way to understand Reform is that Natural Law is a part of Torah.  But Natural Law is  a bit ambiguous --to say the least. When Kant and Hegel got on the scene things became I think even more obscure. I think it was natural to get blown away by Hegel and that is what I think cause a lot of people to go for Socialism. Hegel still is formidable.] In any case I think I would have naturally gravitated towards socialism if not for seeing that the Torah has a different point of view. 


My own view is that Hegel should really not be the focus of attention. Rather when it gets to be time to learn the subject of Metaphysics the best would be Aristotle Plato and Kant. But only after finishing Shas with Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam from Lublin.

Oral and Written Law, Physics, and Metaphysics.

In math we have necessary and sufficient conditions for certain solutions to apply for some differential equation.  In a parallel vein I have the idea that the approach of Maimonides  is necessary and sufficient. That is the Oral and Written Law, Physics, and Metaphysics. [These last two are  necessary because the Rambam considers them to be what the Sages of the Talmud called מעשה בראשית ומעשה מרכבה the Work of Creation and the Work of the Divine Chariot that are both refereed to in the first mishna in the second chapter of tractate Hagiga. The Rambam is not thinking all secular knowledge is a good thing Rather he has a specific reason for emphasis these last two subjects.

His approach to this Physics and Metaphysics is scattered over many places in the Mishne Torah and the Guide and also in the commentary on the Mishna. The basic idea is that while most people think the Gemara is referring to kabalah the Rambam clearly disagrees. Saadia Geon wrote a commentary on Sefer Yetzira and the Rambam was familiar with everything that Saadia Geon wrote. Still niether him nor Saadia Geon thought the Kabalah was the Work of Creation and the Work of the Divine Chariot.

The problem I have is that the religious world seems to me to be "off the derech (path)." The fanatic religious people from Israel seem to me to be clinically insane. But even the more down to earth rational approach of New York seems a bit off. And I can not figure out what the problem is.  At best I have a workable solution for myself. I try to stick with this basic approach of the Rambam which was clearly also the approach of my parents. But in what way the religious world has gone wrong seems to me to be a mystery.

Some people seem to believe the Rambam gives a blank check to all secular disciples.-even those that are obviously pseudo science. Other think the only added things outside of the Oral and written Law are Kabalah. The Rambam clearly disagreed with both of these opinions.

[Incidentally I met a fellow  who had the entire Mishne Torah of the Rambam as one book. I do not remember if it was the Yemenite version of Rav Kapach. He also had with him the letters of the son of the Rambam  print by the Rav Kook Institute, However at this point in my learning the Oral Law I would prefer to learn the Gemara straight with Rashi Tosphot and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach.]

Jewish religious teachers desire control.

Religious teachers desire control.

Their statements are subtle but the reality is to get you to accept their interpretation as a continual revelation from Hashem {God}  and the need for you to come under their control. The religious teachers present themselves as gurus to Jewish people. To people that are supposed by them, unable to know the truth and understand the times by the Law of Moses, but in need of intense and constant clarification by the religious  leadership of what God is saying to us by what He didn't say. 


The trouble is that people are afraid of calling these religious groups by their proper name: cults.


Besides that above mentioned thought I had a few more thing I wanted to say today that are kind of relevant. One is that cults vary by measures. So for example Litvak yeshivas might seems to exercise  some measure of control but that does not make them a cult but rather human institutions that do their best to teach and keep the Written and Oral Law of Moses. That is legitimate. In my first yeshiva Shar Yashuv there were even more aspects of control, but it was not a cult but rather an effective institution designed and built to further the learning and keeping of the Torah. I have to say I think the level of learning was at least as great as the Mir Yeshiva in NY.

The other thing I wanted to add is that sometimes even a rel cult can be a lot better than other cults. It is all a matter of perspective. So if someone is involved in some Buddhist group that does not bother me when I realize there are many much worse things.  

 So I am trying to defend the idea that the Torah was given by God to be necessary and sufficient. No need for frauds. No need for magic "sugulot." No need for Occult teachings.Using mitzvot as "segulot" magic means of getting God to do our will is just as much Occult as witchcraft.