the Litvak world is right about the primary importance of learning Torah,

 Even  though I feel the Litvak world is right about the primary importance of learning Torah, תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם that is not to say that I had the greatest time in the Litvak world. The best idea is not to put anyone on a pedestal. The admirable thong about the Litvak world the refusal to admit all of the false doctrines that people claim for Torah are true. Thankfully, they are insistent about straight Torah. But being human means that they do not always [or even very often] measure up to the standards of Torah. Even the roshei yeshivot are flawed human beings -as are the rest of us. But still they refuse to let in all the many insanities  of the religious world.

In every discipline there is the authentic true way, and the host of armies of falsehood that surround it that pretend to authenticity even though they are phonies- pseudo Torah.

This problem could have been avoided if people had been aware of the signature of the Gra on the famous letter of excommunication. But due to lack of faith in the wise, that is ignored

There is a series of positive values, and in every area of value there is a Sitra Achra-a Dark Side which imitates that value, but in fact just to to use the real to justify the phony  however I admit that I think of Rav Nahman as a great tzadik and this approach of the Gra should not be taken as a criticism of him.

[Even though learning Torah is an obligation on everyone,  this is often misunderstood. The Rambam wrote "Just as one is not allowed to add or subtract from the Written Law, So one is not allowed to add or subtract from the Oral Law." So only the books of the sages of the Mishna and Gemara count as "Torah". But I should also mention that learning these books counts as learning Torah, so when one learns Tosphot he is "learning Torah" 

I might mention here that i just noticed today a few books that have come out in the litvak world that are pretty good. I only asked my son Izhak at the end of his life to send to me the Avi Ezri, but now I see there are some other really great books out there-- the Birchat Shmuel, the Kehilat Yaakov by the Stipler, Even Haazel, and even nowadays there seem to be some pretty decent roshei yeshiva. Of course these are all along the lines of Reb Chaim of Brisk. But I do miss my great learning partner David Bronson whose path in learning is more along the lines of an electron microscope, but I have not been able to get to that kind of depth myself, nor have I seen any book that approaches that kind of depth. Still these other books in the Litvak world are very impressive. [i tried to capture some of the depththat i saw in david bronson  in my little book on bava metzia and also my other book on shas, but nothing can compare to hearing it from the first source]  

Gitin page 47. The way the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam.

 It is a startling fact that I realized on my way to the sea.  It is this, the meaning of יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes)[i.e., if he owns land in Israel, that land is not obligated in truma and tithes.]] is an argument between Tosphot and the Rambam-as far as the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam. For in Gitin page 47 we have the argument if יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) or if not. The way Tosphot understands this is that even an idolater can have possession of land in Israel still, that does not make it not Israel anymore. And the Rambam might agree. But the way the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam, if the law was that an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes, that means the land itself becomes not Israel [and has to be reconquered]. How do you see this? In this way: the Rambam says if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel but when the Israeli buys it back, the land is obligated in truma and tithe. The Keseph Mishna comments on this: Even though it seems in many places in Shas that the law is יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) still the Rambam holds that is not the law. Or that that is the law only when the land is in the possession of the idolater. So we see the Keseph Mishna understands the Rambam to mean that the opinion יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות (an idolater has the power to take away the obligation of truma and tithes) if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel

 גיטין דף מ''ז The meaning of יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות  is an argument between תוספות and the רמב''ם,  as the כסף משנה understands the רמב''ם. For in גיטין דף מ''ז we have the argument if יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות or if not. The way תוספות understands this is that even an idolater can have possession of land in Israel still, that does not make it not Israel anymore. And the רמב''ם might agree. But the way the כסף משנה understands the רמב''ם, if the law was that יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות, that means the land itself becomes not Israel [and has to be reconquered]. How do you see this? In this way: the רמב''ם says if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel but when the Israeli buys it back, the land is obligated in תרומה and tithe. The כסף משנה comments on this: Even though it seems in many places in ש''ס that the law is יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות still the רמב''ם holds that is not the law. Or that that is the law only when the land is in the possession of the idolater. So we see the משנה understands the רמב''ם to mean that the opinion יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות if an idolater buys land in Israel the land does not become not Israel

\

גיטין דף מ''ז הפירוש של יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות הוא ויכוח בין תוספות לרמב''ם, כפי שמבין הכסף משנה את הרמב''ם. כי בגיטין דף מ''ז יש לנו את הטיעון אם יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות או אם לא. הדרך שתוספות מבינים זאת היא שאפילו שעובד אלילים יכול להחזיק בקרקע בישראל, זה לא הופך אותה לא להיות ארץ ישראל יותר. והרמב''ם אולי יסכים. אבל איך שהכסף משנה מבין את הרמב''ם, אם החוק היה שיש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות, זה אומר שהארץ עצמה הופכת לא להיות ישראל [וצריך לכבוש אותה מחדש]. איך אתה רואה את זה? באופן זה: הרמב''ם אומר אם עובד אלילים קונה קרקע בישראל זה לא הופך האדמה לא להיות ישראל אבל כשהישראלי קונה אותה בחזרה, חייבת הקרקע בתרומה ובמעשר. הכסף משנה מעיר על כך: למרות שנראה בהרבה מקומות בש''ס שהדין יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות עדיין הרמב''ם קובע שזה לא הדין. או שכך הדין רק כשהארץ ברשותו של עובד האלילים. אז אנחנו רואים שהכסף משנה מבין את הרמב''ם שהדעת יש קניין לעכו''ם בארץ ישראל להפקיע מידי תרומה ומעשרות אם עובד אלילים קונה קרקע בישראל האדמה לא הופכת לא ארץ ישראל.

When I was in need, it was never the people I had thought would be for me. Rather it was always the Ukrainians that came to help me.

 On my first Rosh Hashanah in Uman the fellow I was sharing a room [note 1] with left to go pray at the ziun but I was very sick. For some reason, the stress and strain of the trip go to me and i had a high fever and could barely move. Still the fellow I was with could not have cared less. It was specifically the Ukrainian owners of the apartment that looked and saw I was sick and brought medicine and food for me. 

This is just one incident of many along these lines, but I thought I should at least write down one event like this to let people know, that I found the people in Ukraine to be exceptionally kind to me.  

When I was in need, it was never the people I had thought would be for me. Rather it was always the Ukrainians that came to help me.  

Friends I had in Ukraine were real friends--people i could rely on in all circumstances. And this was not just friends be just ordinary people. So I would like to suggest that the Ukraine ought to be supported.

 Even the criminal elements were never that criminal. But I had to leave to get back home to Israel. But i still have fond memories of the amazing people that I met in Ukraine.  

[note 1] The room was in  a large apartment building right next to the grave of Rav Nahman 

I was at the beach and ran into Ronen, a friend who often swims a mile a day. He mentioned some of the difficulties that people face and I said, "At the Mir and Shar Yashuv they held There is no answer except to learn Torah."  And that I believe they are right. But I did not add the Rambam's opinion about Physics and Metaphysics.

Torah however is not all the nonsense that people spout out as Torah. It is the Old Testament and Gemara.

 t59 written May 24, 2017 in Uman [That was a year before I had to escape, since it was becoming exceedingly violent. I barely escaped with my life.] 

 I have no hard data about this but I think most Jews that came to the USA before WWII were mostly interested in STEM.  The natural sciences.  This might have just been the natural tendency. For example, my dad went into STEM. [His parents had come to the USA right after WWI. ] Why? I think it was  the influence of his older brother Alex. But did their parents mention this to them, or was it just something that they wanted to do? Violin also. I know my own father was contemplating either a career as a violinist or in STEM. But after those first generations, the interest seems to have waned. Why is this? I think because people are not aware of the statement of the Gra [brought by his disciple Baruch of Shkolev] that "According to the lack of knowledge in any one of the seven wisdoms, one will lack hundred fold more in understanding of Torah."  

[The seven wisdoms are not actually STEM, but that would be the modern equivalent.]

When I was in Polytechnic learning Physics, I recall a lot of the the professors were Jewish, but what really got my attention was when I had some complicated problem, the professors were not around, I went to a bunch of Asian students. And they solved my problem in an instant. 

 

 What is the problem with השקפה world view. It is too easy to talk about it for hours without knowing anything. And this is the major problem in the religious world.  They can talk endlessly about "Hashkafa" without the slightest idea of Gemara, Rashi and Tosphot.

It is false religion that pretends to be authentic Torah.

Thank God there were people like Rav Kinyevsky or Rav Shach to set people straight about what Torah is really about. But the general religious world follows "Torah Scholars that are demons," [in that memorable phrase from Rav Nahman.] [If Rav Nahman had come into the world just for that phrase, it would be enough.]]תלמידי חכמים שדיים יהודאיים{LeM I:12 and I:28},-- or that other one רברבי עשו [LeM I:8]