Belief in God is rational. Everything has a cause. So unless there is a first cause, then you would have an infinite regress. And then nothing could exist. Therefore there must be a first cause. Therefore God, the first cause, exists. QED.
26.8.20
What is going on in the USA is not hard to understand. When the human race was young and let's say you are in a village where the last horse has been eaten. But the next village over you can smell the roast beef they are having every night. And when you go to trade, you see their pretty girls. So someone comes up with a brilliant idea. Lets go over there, kill all the men and take the women and children and Take Their Stuff. TTS.
That is what is going on in the USA. It is not-that young teenagers have been convinced about Communism by deep study. It is rather a way to ease one's conscience about the basic element of human DNA: Let's take their stuff.
The area of review in the thought of Rav Nahman of Uman and Breslov is ambiguous. We know exactly how he held one ought to learn as in saying the words and going on. But that is the "Bekiut" aspect of learning. The fast learning. But what about "Iyun". He clearly held from its importance as you can see in the LeM volume I chapter 78.
One suggestion I have and I have tried a few times myself is that once you get to the end of the book [whether Gemara or midrash or the natural sciences] to go back page by page from the end towards the beginning. This has the advantage that you are doing review before you have had a chance to start forgetting. And forgetting is almost inevitable if you go right back to the beginning once you have gotten to the end. But in this way of review page by page from the end towards the start --that way you are doing review with a short time from when you first learned the material.
25.8.20
We need to rethink the Civil War.
DO HOME OWNERS HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES?
I cannot see the question. In the Torah there is a law הבא המחתרת in Exodus. That is the verse about one who breaks into into the home of someone else -- the owner has a right to shoot them. Self defense does not need Miranda warnings.
So when BLM come into a neighborhood, we know they are not there to sit down and have a chat.
There is a "Yeshu" mentioned in the Talmud who is criticized.
The Rosh [Asher] wrote that that does not refer to Jesus. [The Rosh was a Rishon]. The "Yeshu" mentioned in the Talmud was a disciple of one of the middle "zuggot' pairs mention in Pirkei Avot. [Yehoshua ben Perachia] So that is right in the middle of the second Temple. That is about 150 years before Jesus. Yeshu was not an uncommon name. [Where the Rosh wrote this? I seem to recall seeing it at the end of Gitten but maybe it was somewhere else.]
I mean to say the Talmud says openly exactly who it is referring to--that is the disciple of Yehushua ben Perachia. That means it can not be referring to the Yeshua of the NT.
I might just add the point that "Hagada" even in the Talmud itself is not binding. The idea of the Talmud is to get to the laws of Torah, not stories. That is not to say that the stories are not interesting. Interesting yes but fundamental and binding? No. As the Ramban and other Rishonim already made this point long ago.
I know people think Torah is all about interesting stories. But in fact it is not. It is about laws.
