[טוב לאדם שלא נברא. ועכשיו שנברא מה יעשה?יעסוק בתורה The Gemara says [from Hillel] it would be better for a person not to be born. But now that he has been born what to do? Learn Torah.]

 [טוב לאדם שלא נברא. ועכשיו שנברא מה יעשה?יעסוק בתורה The Gemara says [from Hillel] it would be better for a person not to be born. But now that he has been born what to do? Learn Torah.]
 At any rate, what I wanted to suggest today was something  have mentioned before--that the path of my parents was actually pretty close to the four point seder of the Rambam. The Written Law. The Oral Law. Physics. Metaphysics. But my parents would have added learning a vocation plus outdoor skills.
But in terms of the Oral Law, I think the best thing is the Avi Ezri which is a very underestimated book. For it is the kind of book that teaches one how to learn better than anything else I have seen. [Other than that for an introduction into the Law of Torah Shimshon Refael Hirsh's Horev is great.]  ]
The Physics thing I think the Rambam would agree today would be Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory. He would agree, I think, that Aristotle's Physics is not all that accurate.
Metaphysics I also think he would agree to include Kant, Hegel, and Thomas Reid. [It is hard to know what he would decide about the differences between Hegel  and the Kant-Fries School that started with Leonard Nelson. [The actual Guide of the Rambam itself I also think is important to learn.]

[Quantum Field Theory is complex and hard. Still it seems to me to be important because it is the way to combine Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. It seems inevitable. Therefore it must be considered as a part of Nature that one is obligated to learn according to the Rambam.

I also want to mention that Quantum Field theory and the Oral Law in depth are things that people say ought to wait until one is prepared. Yet as one gets older his ability to absorb new material lessens. And in Shar Yashuv the approach was to plunge immediate into learning in depth.]
I also believe that String Theory is important to learn. But that should wait until one has mastered QFT.] String Theory is similar to QFT in that QFT underwent difficulties and even the people that put in the basic idea were really to give up on it until Feynman and other post war physicists came along.] 

U-85 D Major  [No ear phones so I can not really hear how this sounds. So please forgive my mistakes. I can barely hear it through the speaker but not very well.] 

u-85 in midi format  u-85 nwc

political systems

In considering political systems few people acknowledge the different strokes for different folks applies. When there are  lot of people with no moral conscious, a system like the USA is really just not workable. That is why Russia had to have either the czar or the USSR. In areas around the Russia Empire like the Ukraine, there are simply too many people that are criminals and are proud of it  What works for White Anglo Saxon Protestants can not work in the Ukraine [or any of the republics]. They need a strong central government and a strong police presence.  The more money they put into their police force to make it more efficient the better.

I see libertarian writings as being kind of naive in terms of the Ukraine. They write as if  a John Locke democracy would work in Ukraine as well as in the USA.  You can tell they never spent any time in the Ukraine.

It is astounding how much time and effort is spent in the USA about law and economics. The reason is simple. Most people in the USA obey the law because that is the kind of people they are. This obviously can not work in the Ukraine. What gets people to obey the law in the former republics of the USSR is the police and Fear. And even today not just in Communist China, but also in the former republics of the USSR, the systems and infrastructure that work were all built by the communists. And the buildings also and everything else included.

[It is odd that people admit the role of DNA in everything except politics.]

The signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication

The signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication can be defended on a few accounts. One is purely legal. A חרם excommunication has legal authority. That is it has no legal authority from the state. But from conscience. It is like many other moral principles that can not be enforced by the state, and yet are still obligations.
[Still I feel it is clear that Reb Nahman was not included and furthermore I also feel that he was a true tzadik with important insights and advice. You have to see the actual language of the excommunication to see why.]

Another way it can be defended is understanding that the Sitra Akra [Dark Side] ought to be isolated and separated and expelled. The Torah excludes idolatry rigorously. Monotheism is the basic belief system of the the Old Testament.
But a third way is this: Any system that contradicts itself, makes people insane. attempts to bring others into it web of lies, ought to be sent back to the underworld from which it emerged.

[However in this world, opposite are tied together. Pleasure and pain are opposites but they are tied in such a way that when you reach for one, they other comes along in inextricably. So are wisdom and foolishness. Genius and lunacy. Holiness and the Sitra Akra the Dark Side.
To separate one from the other is one's major task in this world.


[The major ideas of Reb Nahman that I think are important to mention are the Tikun Klali--ten psalms to say on the day one had accidentally spilled his seed in vain. They are 16, 32, 41,42, 59,77, 90, 105 137 150 . Also speaking with God in one's own language as one talks with his or her best friend.]

So a commitment to walk in the way of the Gra does not imply excluding Reb Nahman's good ideas.
And Reb Nahman's idea about the Tikun Klali makes sense in terms of the Ari, Isaac Luria. Though  have not said it for a long time, it still seems to be correct. Spilling seed in vain certainly needs a correction and the actual unifications that the Ari gives for this seem to require a certain flow of the Divine light in order to be effective. But when one has sinned, that seems in itself to cut off the flow of the "Infinite Light." So Reb Nahman's idea is based on solid reasoning

Music for the glory of God

U-84 D Minor

Tur- in order to learn the laws of the Torah

[Second day of the Omer ]
To learn the laws of the Torah I think the best idea is the Tur  [son of the Rosh,i.e.Rav Yehiel ben Asher] with the two commentaries on it by Rav Joseph Karo and the Bach. After that to look at the Taz and Shach.
Now you might notice problems in the Bach. But there is something about the Bach that I find is amazing. And when you read the Bach and after that the Taz, you see that the Taz was mainly written as a commentary on the Bach. If you just look at the Taz and Shach themselves you miss the whole issues that they were coming to solve.

My own experience with the Bach was when I was doing Ketuboth. It was then that I noticed this amazing dimension of the Tur. If you do the Gemara and then the Tur with the Bach and Taz you see they were written essentially as commentaries on the Gemara. Or perhaps better said they bring out aspects of the Gemara that you normally would not see.
And even though I have heard of people that skip the Bach and just do the Tur with Rav Joseph Karo, it still seems to me that by skipping the Bach they are losing a whole new dimension of the learning.


[I had a learning partner in Shabat, and we skipped the Bach. We did the Rosh, Rif, the commentaries on the Rif, and the Tur with Rav Joseph Karo. But I felt even then that skipping the Bach left me feeling empty.]

mystic writings from the Middle Ages

Most mystic writings from the Middle Ages [and Musar also] depend a lot on Aristotle's four elements, his division between substance and form, and the 10 spheres of Ptolemy.  The unstated problem with this is that a great deal of Aristotle' Physics and Ptolemy's spheres do not seem accurate.

So what people do is try to preserve the insights while ignoring the basic world view upon which they depend. In any case,  this makes writings from the Middle Ages problematic in that one is trying to gain the accurate insights, while at the same time ignoring the world view.

Sometimes from the idea that these medieval writers could not have been wrong, one tries to find hints of modern physics in them.

What adds to the difficulty in all this is no one knows the actual Aristotelian system upon which all medieval writings are based. Or even acknowledges the fact. And thus the terms are constantly used in inaccurate ways.

For what happened in history is Descartes came along and the force of his clarity was so great, confidence in Aristotle sank. So we do not think in terms of שכל בכוח  potential intellect as being imprinted by active צורות forms. After Descartes we do not think everything has to have substance and form. For example -the mind.
The problem is all the greater because Post-Descartes thought has not led to anything that could conceivably replace Aristotle in terms of  most of the issues that are raised in these medieval books.

[Litvak Yeshivas as a rule do not think about theology at all. The only time the problem comes up is in Musar seder. Some books of Musar depend  a lot on the mystic writings of the Middle Ages and that seems to invalidate them.]

\\\\


What was done during the Middle Ages was to create a synthesis of Aristotle with Torah. Maimonides was leaning in the direction of Aristotle. Others like Rav Saadia Gaon were leaning towards Plotinus. Today after Descartes, Kant and Leonard Nelson a similar kind of effort is needed.

It is not that the efforts of the Rambam were wasted. Even the Kant-Friesian School is very close to the Neo-Platonic approach of the Rambam. But still the Rambam tends to be kind of mediaeval. Some new effort is needed.