Bikini Nuclear tests.

 Since I have not been able to spend much time on learning Torah --though I should overcome the difficulties. But in the meantime I wanted to mention my feeling the Bikini Nuclear tests. The people on those islands were evacuated but later brought back and assured that it was safe to return. They were test mice to see the effects of radiation poisoning. So if you think medical scientists would never use people are guinea pigs, think again. And that brings me to the non existent epidemic to cause people to take tests drugs (called by euphemism "vaccines.)  [Do yourself a bit of reading to understand the many years it takes to develop a real vaccine. There is no question that these are fakes.]

See the Conversations of Rav Nahman (Sichot HaRan) [of Breslov]. [paragraph 50.]

And I might mention that Dr Michael Huemer in one paper deals with the problems of political activists and all other sorts of people like doctors that think they they know more than they do. [In the named 

In Praise of Passivity

by Michael Huemer

 Political actors, including voters, activists, and leaders, are often ignorant of basic facts relevant to policy choices. Even experts have little understanding of the working of society and little ability to predict future outcomes. Only the most simple and uncontroversial political claims can be counted on. This is partly because political knowledge is very difficult to attain, and partly because individuals are not sufficiently motivated to attain it. As a result, the best advice for political actors is very often to simply stop trying to solve social problems, since interventions not based on precise understanding are likely to do more harm than good.

]

pure Litvak Yeshiva approach

 My own experience with the Mir Yeshiva in NY was not very long. And it is sad that I did not have an appreciation for it as much as I should have had. I was just three short years. I did not have a great understanding at the time of the Gra and the herem he signed on. But I did have some grasp of the amazing world of true authentic Torah.

And I do not think I am alone in this. Many people do not really get why the Gra signed on the letter of excommunication. I guess the problem of idol worship does not occur to people to be  a problem.

I could make a suggestion concerning the מנהל רוחני [the person more or less appointed to give the Musar talks.] They do not tend to be as admirable as the rosh yeshiva. They tend to not be able to give the deep sorts of classes that a rosh yeshiva is expected to give.[Along the lines of R. Akiva Eigger or Rav Chaim of Brisk]--or at least to be able to give over the idea of Rav Chaim and the other greats --e.g. Shimon Shkopf, Rav Shach, etc. But neither are they very well versed in Musar itself. They may have learned some Musar, but are usually unaware of the philosophical aspects of Musar. [an example would be the Chovot Levavot which is openly neo-Platonic.]  Or take the Ramchal--certainly a great mystic and there is some hint of this in the Mesilat Yesharim. But the teachers of Musar are often not very well versed in that area either. 

While at the Mir it was easy for me to see the greatness of the roshei yeshiva--in character and in deep understanding of the Gemara and Tosphot. But since I left there, I have never seen anyone that comes within light years of that. [ That is one reason I named this blog after Rav Shach--to give people an idea of an example of deep penetrating analysis of Gemara really means.

[That is not to say there is a case for the pure Litvak Yeshiva approach or even for the Gra alone per se. Rather Balance. Balance is the path of my parents. And one ought to not look at the Reform movement or the Zionist movement as aberration that are unexplainable except as the result of apikorsim heretics,- but rather as a natural result of pressure-the pressure of the insanity of fanatic religious leaders.

 Even with people doing good work in understanding Kant (like Paul Wolff), you still end up with the problem that this approach  has kinks that just do not seem to go away.  You could at that point look at Schelling or Fichte which are not Kantian at all, or you could take the Fries approach which is a modification of Kant. [It is not psychologism-using the mind to explain none mind based facts.]

Or you could take the Hegel approach. But that approach is certainly not to the liking of any Kantians. And at lot there depends on which initial texts one takes. For some reason I read the Logic [that part of the Encyclopedia] first and that fit completely into my understanding of Plato and Plotinus. [Ever since then I have never understood the complaints about Hegel.]  

And you could combine both. After all Hegel is mainly interested in building his Metaphysical system. he does not care about the Mind Body Problem. While Kant [and Fries] are involved in that very much so-- in answering Berkeley and Hume.   

[Incidentally, the Fries approach needed a certain amount of development. Leonard Nelson added a bit of clarity to it [as mentioned in Dr Kelley Ross's web site]. But even more so--the Friesian School of Nelson could not deal with the Special Theory of Relativity and even less with the General Theory of Relativity. That includes Nelson himself and all those who followed him until Gretta Hermann.]

There is an obligation to leave the edge of the field for the poor.

There is an obligation to leave the edge of the field for the poor. That is not to touch it at all. This is called "peah". The amount one must leave is 1/60. 

That left over part is not obligated in the presents given to the priest or the Levite [called truma and maasar.]

Let's say however one just goes ahead and reaps the whole field. The second that he jumped the line and cut down the first stalk of the 1/60 the obligation of peah goes over to  the sheaves. Some part of the sheaves he has to leave as peah so as to get up to 1/60 of the whole field.

But what happens to the first stalk of that started the process in the first place? and what happens to the second stalk of the 1/60 part that was the beginning of the transgression of the  לא תכלה "Do not finish harvesting your field, but leave the corner of your field to the poor." Well the second he harvested that stalk, he transgressed that prohibition. So the questions are is the very first stalk still obligated in truma. (For at first it was obligated in truma since it is not "left over". But now all the reaped field is liable to be peah. Does that include the first stalk? And the difference is what is obligated in truma  is called "tevel". Grain that has not had the presents to the priest and Levite separated rom it and thus forbidden to be eaten.) And what about the second stalk? Is it obligated in truma? For at first it was supposed to be peah. But the second he cuts it the obligation of peah goes over to the sheaves--but now it also is sheaf!! And it is peah? So which one is it? 

Tractate Shabat page 139. I quote: "If you see a generation that troubles come upon it go out a check the judges of Israel.

Tractate Shabat page 139. I quote: "If you see a generation that troubles come upon it go out a check the judges of Israel. For no troubles come upon the world except for he cause of the judges of Israel."

So we see the problem that Rav Nahman was referring to concerning Torah scholars that are demons [LeM vol. I perek 12 and 28] was noticed before. 

 The problem is how to tell who is from the realm of holiness and who is from the Dark Side?

And it is not possible to simply say, "Go and learn Torah, and you will see who is giving authentic advice and who is the fraud" because people need immediate advice and do not have the time to go through the entire Shas before they can reach a conclusion.

But you do have an indication if not an absolute proof.. Who encourages you to learn every day Gemara and Tosphot is from the Realm of Holiness. 

[The Dark Side can not stand that people learn authentic Torah.]

And I can see that ones parents often warn one about this problem. But the religious fanaticism that is in people does not let them listen their parents. This is odd since you might imagine that the fifth commandment of the Ten Commandments ought to make a difference to supposedly religious people.

[Parents are often aware of hypocrisy, while young [i.e eighteen years old] are not aware. The young think in fact it is all about learning Torah for its own sake, not for money and power. o they warn their children. But the children are taken in by the propaganda. Thus it is best to listen to the Torah which already told us to listen to our parents. We might be smart, but they know a thing or two about the ral world.

It is hard to know what to make of all this. On one hand, the importance of Torah is clear. On the other hand the religious world is mentally sick. What could be the meaning? I should mention that I was troubled by this for years until I understood that the religious world an d Torah are two  opposites. 

I really did not appreciate the path of the Gra and the straight Litvak yeshiva

 I really did not appreciate the path of the Gra and the straight Litvak yeshiva. Now I am happy that I also was inspired and gained a great deal from the advice and ideas of Rav Nahman of Breslov, but leaving the context of the straight Litvak sort of yeshiva was a mistake. [At least I can see that now.] So while I can not change the past, I can suggest to others that if they have merited to be in a straight Litvak yeshiva, then "count your blessings." Be grateful. You can learn from Rav Nahman's LeM and other books, but one must not be taken off the straight and narrow because of that.

z46 music file

 z46 A minor