10.1.18
9.1.18
the path of the Gra definitely includes Astronomy, Mathematics and Music
I wanted to mention that the path of the Gra definitely includes what in the Middle Ages was called the Seven Wisdoms. That includes Astronomy, Mathematics and Music.
And once I asked Rav Eliyahu Silverman (who was the head of the Yeshiva on the Path of the Gra) if that included Engineering. [I was referring to a book that] given to me from Hebrew University on Electrical Engineering. And he said yes.
But since not everyone is very good at that my suggestion is based on the Musar Book אורחות צדיקים which brings the idea of learning fast. He has a long essay there in the Gate of Torah about learning fast--saying the words and going on that is called דרך גירסה
And once I asked Rav Eliyahu Silverman (who was the head of the Yeshiva on the Path of the Gra) if that included Engineering. [I was referring to a book that] given to me from Hebrew University on Electrical Engineering. And he said yes.
But since not everyone is very good at that my suggestion is based on the Musar Book אורחות צדיקים which brings the idea of learning fast. He has a long essay there in the Gate of Torah about learning fast--saying the words and going on that is called דרך גירסה
the letter of excommunication that the Gra signed is legally valid
Even though the letter of excommunication that the Gra signed is legally valid, and in fact people that ignore it come under the curses that are listed for anyone is transgresses a oath (or in this case a חרם); still I do not feel that Breslov comes under that category. The reason is while I was wandering around the Old City of Jerusalem I stumbled upon a book that brought the original documents word for word. [That included the other letters of excommunication, and also the statements of the witnesses that were collected in Villna and written down.]
But as the actual issues of Breslov, I think that there should be made a distinction between ideas that the Ran held strongly with and ideas that were less sure [or more doubtful what he actually meant]. I.e. there were things he held very strongly were correct like the saying the ten psalms.
The idea that transgressing a חרם [excommunication] is the same kind of thing as transgressing an oath I got from the regular commentaries of the Rambam right on the page in Laws of Oaths. And the general warnings about transgressing an oath are pretty explicit.
But as the actual issues of Breslov, I think that there should be made a distinction between ideas that the Ran held strongly with and ideas that were less sure [or more doubtful what he actually meant]. I.e. there were things he held very strongly were correct like the saying the ten psalms.
The idea that transgressing a חרם [excommunication] is the same kind of thing as transgressing an oath I got from the regular commentaries of the Rambam right on the page in Laws of Oaths. And the general warnings about transgressing an oath are pretty explicit.
8.1.18
A cure for one's spirit and body.
Faith in the wise gives good advice for all human problems. Some wise men were expert in certain areas but not all areas. Other wise men were good in different areas. Therefore faith in all the wise gives good advice for all problems.
Why I bring this up is that it occurred to me concerning a disciple of Reb Israel Salanter, that is Isaac Blazer. In the beginning of his book אור ישראל (Light of Israel). Over there he brings the idea that learning Musar [Mediaeval Ethics] is a cure for one's spirit and body. [It is easy to miss this but if you look there you will see that is what he says.] (He brings the idea from Maimonides.)
Musar itself as a movement seems to have lost its momentum. Still the basic idea is sound --that the medieval sages had the best idea of what the actual requirements of Torah are.
The best idea today I think to get a good idea of what Torah requires from one is to learn the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach and the books of the Gra and the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter like Navardok etc.
Why I bring this up is that it occurred to me concerning a disciple of Reb Israel Salanter, that is Isaac Blazer. In the beginning of his book אור ישראל (Light of Israel). Over there he brings the idea that learning Musar [Mediaeval Ethics] is a cure for one's spirit and body. [It is easy to miss this but if you look there you will see that is what he says.] (He brings the idea from Maimonides.)
Musar itself as a movement seems to have lost its momentum. Still the basic idea is sound --that the medieval sages had the best idea of what the actual requirements of Torah are.
The best idea today I think to get a good idea of what Torah requires from one is to learn the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach and the books of the Gra and the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter like Navardok etc.
Closing of the American Mind
Philosophy has relevance for politics as noted by this article [Abbeville Institute]
There they are criticizing a South [Southern States] bashing book based on sloppy research and sloppy ideas about natural law.
Getting world view issues straight has seemed to me to be important for a long time, but academic philosophy I began to notice even while in high school was a dead end.--and as John Searle put it so well about 20th century philosophy "it is obviously false."[Both British and Continental.] Allan Bloom also noticed the same thing in his Closing of the American Mind.
[I think John Searle might have been referring to a good suggestion made by Frege to expand the category of a priori. That was a good idea, but sadly led to idiotic post modern philosophy. Dr. Kelley Ross noticed this, and it might be what John Searle also is thinking. ]
In any case to be short I think the best thing in Philosophy is the Kant-Friesian school which I think in Germany is called "the Critical School" because of being based on Kant. [Leonard Nelson's books were apparently printed in Germany which is the beginning of the Kant Fries school]
But I have a lot of respect for Hegel also, and the Intuitionists like Dr Michael Huemer. To me each one seems to be making some great points.
My own feeling about Philosophy is the best idea is the suggestion of the Rambam to learn the Metaphysics of Aristotle and Plato and Plotinus. After that, I think Kant and Hegel are important.
In terms of how philosophy relates to politics, the best thing out there are the Federalist Papers by Madison and Hamilton and others. [They were written to convince NY to accept the USA Constitution.]
[The reason I think philosophy got to be so awful is that mainly idiots go into it and teach it. The best idea is of Allan Bloom. Simply throw out the social studies and humanities departments of all universities.]
[I think John Searle might have been referring to a good suggestion made by Frege to expand the category of a priori. That was a good idea, but sadly led to idiotic post modern philosophy. Dr. Kelley Ross noticed this, and it might be what John Searle also is thinking. ]
In any case to be short I think the best thing in Philosophy is the Kant-Friesian school which I think in Germany is called "the Critical School" because of being based on Kant. [Leonard Nelson's books were apparently printed in Germany which is the beginning of the Kant Fries school]
But I have a lot of respect for Hegel also, and the Intuitionists like Dr Michael Huemer. To me each one seems to be making some great points.
My own feeling about Philosophy is the best idea is the suggestion of the Rambam to learn the Metaphysics of Aristotle and Plato and Plotinus. After that, I think Kant and Hegel are important.
In terms of how philosophy relates to politics, the best thing out there are the Federalist Papers by Madison and Hamilton and others. [They were written to convince NY to accept the USA Constitution.]
[The reason I think philosophy got to be so awful is that mainly idiots go into it and teach it. The best idea is of Allan Bloom. Simply throw out the social studies and humanities departments of all universities.]
7.1.18
Torah with balance.
To me it occurred the thought that the path of my parents {Philip Rosten and Leila} is not that hard to define. One thing that I thought made it hard to define is that it was never expressed openly. But then I realized that there were certain well defined components of it.
It might be hard for me to defend each point, but still the essence was six major points.
(1) Math (2) Physics, (3) Music (4) straight Torah (Litvak) (5) an honest upright vocation (6) outdoor and survival skills.
The reason this was hard for me to realize is that generally they expressed approval of good wholesome things, and disapproval of unwholesome stuff. There was almost never a "you must do" or "must not do such and such."
So to be brief how can I defend each point? Well to start out with Math and Physics. This was something they expressed great approval of in countless ways. But this approval was mainly directed towards me because of my inherent interest. So that aspect of my parents I think was not so much noticed by my brothers;---even though it definitely was very much present.
Music was important to a lesser degree. Even though our home was mainly Reform, still Torah was very important to my parents--the Oral and Written Law. The vocation aspect was something my brothers noticed more than I. The outdoor skills aspect was there, but again not discussed. It would take a longer essay to each with each point.
You could argue on each point because little was said openly. Rather it was just approval or disapproval. To give an example. My father sent my younger brother and me to the Boy Scouts and also always emphasized self reliance, and as a family we went up to the mountains often. Music and the violin was something my father did, but again only showed approval towards me because I showed interest. His main career was as an inventor. That is the first night vision device, and much more stuff plus laser communication for NASA satellites for SDI (more well known as "Star Wars"). So his interest in Math and Physics was quite present but not necessarily expressed openly.
[It goes without saying that family values and being a decent human being were the highest priorities but taught more by example than by words.]
[He had volunteered for the US Air Force and became a captain but did not pursue that as a career. ]
It might be hard for me to defend each point, but still the essence was six major points.
(1) Math (2) Physics, (3) Music (4) straight Torah (Litvak) (5) an honest upright vocation (6) outdoor and survival skills.
The reason this was hard for me to realize is that generally they expressed approval of good wholesome things, and disapproval of unwholesome stuff. There was almost never a "you must do" or "must not do such and such."
So to be brief how can I defend each point? Well to start out with Math and Physics. This was something they expressed great approval of in countless ways. But this approval was mainly directed towards me because of my inherent interest. So that aspect of my parents I think was not so much noticed by my brothers;---even though it definitely was very much present.
Music was important to a lesser degree. Even though our home was mainly Reform, still Torah was very important to my parents--the Oral and Written Law. The vocation aspect was something my brothers noticed more than I. The outdoor skills aspect was there, but again not discussed. It would take a longer essay to each with each point.
You could argue on each point because little was said openly. Rather it was just approval or disapproval. To give an example. My father sent my younger brother and me to the Boy Scouts and also always emphasized self reliance, and as a family we went up to the mountains often. Music and the violin was something my father did, but again only showed approval towards me because I showed interest. His main career was as an inventor. That is the first night vision device, and much more stuff plus laser communication for NASA satellites for SDI (more well known as "Star Wars"). So his interest in Math and Physics was quite present but not necessarily expressed openly.
[It goes without saying that family values and being a decent human being were the highest priorities but taught more by example than by words.]
[He had volunteered for the US Air Force and became a captain but did not pursue that as a career. ]
Rav Avraham Abulafia
Though I would not say anything about it without the authority of Rav Avraham Abulafia about Jesus after the fact it is possible to discuss the issue. For one thing the Gemara in Sanhedrin about the fact that God had come down from Heaven and became a physical body in order to give the king of Assyria a haircut.
We also find that saints and Jerusalem and angels are called by the Name of God. [As is brought n Bava Batra פרק הספינהs page 75 side B]
In any case, the Gra said that all the deep secrets of Torah are contained in the midrash [That is the non legal parts of Gemara and the actual midrah. That is Midrash Raba and few other neglected books. The trouble seems to be that there is no place to put Midrash. It is not exactly Musar. Nor is it exactly Gemara. One learning partner I had at the Mir found an elegant solution to this problem - he used to learn Midrash at night after the two regular day time sessions.
So it is possible to ask what is the meaning of the Midrash in Sanhedrin about G-d giving the king or Assyria a haircut. The actual events are well known. The previous king of Assyria had already taken Israel, and then the capital city of Samaria. Then his successor took the cities of Judah, and then the King of Judah sent a bribe to him to "lay off". After that instead of laying off, he sent his armies to take Jerusalem. The attempt to take Jerusalem was unsuccessful to say the least. To me it is not clear where the King of Assyria was at the time. He might have joined his forces outside of Jerusalem or maybe not. In any case, he was occupied with a different war near a neighboring state. Then he went back to his capital city and there the incident the Gemara relates took place. Apparently after two failed wars he was unpopular. He got a haircut to disguise himself. He then was killed by two of his children.
The whole issue of Jesus as understood by Rav Avraham Abulafia really is treated best in the books of Professor Idel at Hebrew University. In those books he concentrates of Rav Avraham Abulafia and gives him a thorough academic treatment--much better than what one could figure out on his own by reading Rav Abulafia. Though in my case it was reading the actual microfilms at HU in around 1992 to got me to see clearly what the approach of Rav Abulafia is. I should mention that even though people nowadays have not heard of him, he is quoted at length in שערי קדושה by רב חיים וויטל the major disciple of the Ari.
[I ought to mention I did not make a major study of Rav Abulafia myself, since at the time his books were published I already had started on other subjects. ]
The place I found his books was in Jerusalem but they might be already in NY.]
We also find that saints and Jerusalem and angels are called by the Name of God. [As is brought n Bava Batra פרק הספינהs page 75 side B]
In any case, the Gra said that all the deep secrets of Torah are contained in the midrash [That is the non legal parts of Gemara and the actual midrah. That is Midrash Raba and few other neglected books. The trouble seems to be that there is no place to put Midrash. It is not exactly Musar. Nor is it exactly Gemara. One learning partner I had at the Mir found an elegant solution to this problem - he used to learn Midrash at night after the two regular day time sessions.
So it is possible to ask what is the meaning of the Midrash in Sanhedrin about G-d giving the king or Assyria a haircut. The actual events are well known. The previous king of Assyria had already taken Israel, and then the capital city of Samaria. Then his successor took the cities of Judah, and then the King of Judah sent a bribe to him to "lay off". After that instead of laying off, he sent his armies to take Jerusalem. The attempt to take Jerusalem was unsuccessful to say the least. To me it is not clear where the King of Assyria was at the time. He might have joined his forces outside of Jerusalem or maybe not. In any case, he was occupied with a different war near a neighboring state. Then he went back to his capital city and there the incident the Gemara relates took place. Apparently after two failed wars he was unpopular. He got a haircut to disguise himself. He then was killed by two of his children.
The whole issue of Jesus as understood by Rav Avraham Abulafia really is treated best in the books of Professor Idel at Hebrew University. In those books he concentrates of Rav Avraham Abulafia and gives him a thorough academic treatment--much better than what one could figure out on his own by reading Rav Abulafia. Though in my case it was reading the actual microfilms at HU in around 1992 to got me to see clearly what the approach of Rav Abulafia is. I should mention that even though people nowadays have not heard of him, he is quoted at length in שערי קדושה by רב חיים וויטל the major disciple of the Ari.
[I ought to mention I did not make a major study of Rav Abulafia myself, since at the time his books were published I already had started on other subjects. ]
The place I found his books was in Jerusalem but they might be already in NY.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)