Obligations of the Heart [Hovot Levavot]

I noticed that some things in the Obligations of the Heart [Hovot Levavot] need more study.

In the first section Gate of Unity, chapter 5 he says there is a general form that is the sub-layer of accidental forms and forms that are part of the essence. [The last would be like wetness is an essential form for water] That is a new concept I have never heard of.

There also seems to be problems. If some thing has no beginning it can have no end he says as an axiom. But then he derives if it has no end then it had no beginning. That is a kind of logic used by Rava in the Gemara but then the Gemara itself asks on Rava. I brought this up with David Bronson once and he showed me that Gemara. [If it is raining it is wet outside. But if it is wet outside that does not mean it is raining. Someone might have turned on their sprinklers.]

I also noticed the Obligations of the Heart also mentions Creation Ex Nihilo right there is chapter 5.

[That is an essential aspect of Torah. This is contrary to the religious who try to change the approach of Torah without telling people that that is what they are doing. They claim "Everything is God." That is not Torah-besides being false.

Also it is hard to understand why the Obligations of the Heart would in chapter 4 say Aristotle was wrong about the fifth element and then in chapter 5 claim there is the Iyuli?

I assume there is some background he is building on of Post Aristotelian philosophers.

the difference between the holy and the fake is hardest of all.

The problem with the Sitra Achra [the Dark Side] is not well defined. The reason is that every area of value has an equal and opposite area of value that looks in externals to be the same thing.

It takes a kind of special talent in any given area to be able to tell the real thing from the fake.
That is the reason the Sitra Achra has taken over the Jewish Religious world. The warnings of the Gra and Rav Shach went unheeded.


It is perhaps possible to learn to exercise caution by learning from other areas of value where the difference between right and wrong reasoning can be more clear.

The main trouble seems to be this. If u take areas of value to start with pure form with no content [logic] and work up towards content with little or no form, the difference between the real thing and the fake becomes increasingly difficult to tell.

As it is said about talent: It takes a genius or at least a lot of talent to recognize a genius.

So with Formal Logic where the statements can stand for anything, what determines the  right answer is  only the form. But Math is not reducible to logic. It has more content but less form. The right and wrong can not be reduced to pure form. [Godel] So it is harder to tell a true proof from a false one.

Then you get into areas with more content  like the physical sciences and it gets harder to tell.
Then in music, art , human affairs and justice which are more content and less form the real test of quality is harder. The rules are no longer clear.
Then when you get into areas of holiness, the difference between the holy and the fake is hardest of all.

learning math and Physics

Once you accept the idea of my parents and the Obligations of the Heart and the Rambam about the importance of learning math and Physics for their own sake and not just because of talent or making a living then comes the question of how to go about it. (note 1)

My idea is to first do גירסה --say the words from the beginning of the book until the end. Then review that same book four times in the same way. 

(note 1) You can see this idea hinted to often in the Obligations of the Heart and other Musar books from the Middle Ages. Later musar books however ignore or dismiss this idea entirely. My feeling is that the rishonim [mediaeval authorities] got this right.

 [note 2] That was at the beginning of my taking up Mathematics after forgetting it for years. Also in NY that is what I was doing as I was trying to get into higher math. But then with all the running around and lack of concentration and just plain getting old I decided it was time to just do "saying the words and going on" since that was the only way I could hope to get the big picture.

small remnant of people that in fact strive to uphold the Torah for its own sake

באשר משפטו שם פעלו Where judgment is, there should be also be mentioned his good deeds.
AS I mentioned in a few blog posts the religious world is insane. And the more they make themselves out in externals to look godly and holy in their dress, the more you can be certain that God is far from them.

Still there is a small remnant of people that in fact strive to uphold the Torah for its own sake= the Litvak yeshivas like Ponoviz in Bnei Brak and the great NY Litvak yeshivas.
So while I am busy criticizing the insane religious world, I can not help but praise and support the exceptional people that are in fact doing a great job.

Prophecy is called a "burden" in the Old Testament. Some prophets begin their words with"the burden of the Lord." So when I have tried and failed to pick up that burden by myself and failed, I ought to go and help others to pick up that burden and then maybe together we can manage to raise it up.

Monotheism of the Torah. He made the world from nothing. Not from Divine light. He is not the world, nor is the world God.

Monotheism of the Torah is relatively easy to define. That God made the world but is not the world. This is easy to see in all book of Torah from the Middle Ages. However the religious world have been in the habit of denying this and claiming the world is condensed Divine Light.

They do this in a sneaky way by pretending to follow Torah by means of external rituals. They believe these rituals make them right and righteous about everything they do wrong.


The basic system of Torah is that God is one and He made the world from nothing. Not from Divine light. He is not the world, nor is the world God.
Since the religious deny this, I refuse to have anything to do with them. [Not to mention almost everything the religious do is in direct opposition to the Torah].

Furthermore, God has no substance nor form. He made substance and form, but they do not apply to Him. So nothing can have the substance of God since he has no substance. Again this is in direct opposition the the religious. Another reason to stay away from them.

[This point that God has no substance nor form nor even any kind of spiritual substance is a point made by the חובות הללבות Obligations of the Heart in the beginning of his book when proving God is one. That is where he whittles down the number of causes to one First Cause. The step right before that is that God made Form and Substance. The step then that God who made these is not either one, but is their cause, and thus he is One--not a composite. ]

Creation ex Nihilo [from nothing] is not the same as creation from condensed Divine Light.

I have had a few thoughts about the Obligations of the Heart but have not written down as they occurred to me.
One thing that comes up in the beginning of the book and also in the end in the final prayer  is Creation from nothing.
This is not a major theme there, but in the Guide volume 2 this is a major issue.(note 1)  It is one of the prime tenets of Torah that the world was created from nothing-not  from Divine Light. Not from anything. Just God's will.
However the religious that think they believe in Torah, deny this. That gives just one more reason to avoid the religious.

Another theme I saw  in the very end about bringing merit to many. That idea I recall also in the disciple of Israel Salanter  (Rav. Isaac Blazzer).  Also in Joseph Yozel Horwiz of Navardok. In  Navardok the idea of bringing merit to many people was understood to mean the Musar Movement.
[I recall this was also brought up in the famous אגרת המוסר the Letter of Musar that started the Musar Movement.]


The proof in the beginning of the book seems to ignore the fact that there are different kinds of infinity. [א]

Learning math comes up in שער הרישות in the very end.



(note 1) The Rambam makes this the major theme in volume 2 of the Guide.

Torah is an introduction to the commandments of Reason.

The Obligations of the Heart (by Rav Behaye ibn Pakuda) says the Torah is an introduction to the commandments of Reason. That gives me a lot to think about. He explains commandments of the Torah have  a limit. Commandments of Reason have no limit. [שער  עבודת האלוהים פרק ג]

[This actually reminds me of Michael Huemer's idea that reason recognizes objective moral principles. ]
It also has a connection with Kierkegaard's idea that the Torah has in fact things that are hard to understand. But what is clear and unambiguous one must do immediately.

[I am in a house where there is this book Obligations of the Heart and I am astounded at how many fascinating ideas are in it.]