There is one time when a head covering is required as is brought in מסכת סופרים, and that is when one takes out the Torah scroll and reads it in the synagogue,-- and even that is never brought down in the gemara nor in the later poskim. So it is hard to know why people get so frantic if you walk into a shul without a head covering. It  has no source in halacha. It is just a sign of a deeper problem,  -- that  nothing they do has any source in Torah. The only people that are making an effort to keep Torah as it says [and not add or subtract] are the Litvaks that follow the path of the Gra and Rav Shach.

[In pictures of Jews in the Middle Ages, there is not one showing any Jew wearing a "Kipa". The only people who wore "kipot" were the pope and bishops.-as they do today. 

תוספות בתחילת קידושין

The Mishna says a woman is acquired by means of money or something worth money. Tosphot asks "How do we know?" Tosphot answers because we learn the worth of money is like money from a Hebrew Slave.  כסף ישיב לבעליו לרבות שווה כסף. When one redeems a Hebrew slave he must give money to the owner. The sages say that from extra wording of this verse we learn that one can redeem a slave also with property that is worth money. But in the opinion o the Rambam, this does not apply to an owner who is an idolater. He can receive only actual money for his Hebrew slaves.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Rav Shach asks on the Rambam how does he answer the question of Tosphot in the beginning of Kidushin: why should שווה כסף [something worth money] buy a bride? Tosphot answers because we learn the worth of money is like money from a Hebrew Slave.  כסף ישיב לבעליו לרבות שווה כסף The Rambam could not use this answer because it only applies to a Israeli owner. But to the Rambam,  an owner that is an idolater can only accept money--silver , not anything that is worth money. ואין גזירה שווה לחצאים

One might answer that the Rambam holds קידושי כסף is מדברי סופרים words of the scribes and so they can formulate  the law in any way they like. That would mean they can make it to include שווה כסף/ However that is not an answer to this question because when the Rambam writes that  קידושי כסף הם מדברי סופרים he means  that when the Sanhedrin derives a  law by means of the thirteen principles by which the Torah is explained. a later Sanhedrin that sees things differently can change that law. That does not mean it is a גזירה law by decree. Rather, it means the first Sanhedrin sees  it as a law from the Torah and the second one does not. And we go by the Gemara which holds we learn קיחה קיחה משדה עפרון

However, I still have one question. The Rambam holds שווה כסף can buy something because it is קניין חליפין and אין אישה נקנית על ידי קניין חליפין. How do we know the Rambam holds שווה כסף can buy something because it is קניין חליפין Rav Shach point this out because in הלכות מכירה פרק א  the Rambam discuses קניין כסף and later in פרק ה' הוא כוב כל המטלטים קונים זה את זה and there he deals with קניין ליפין  

_____________________________________________________________________________

  רב שך שואל בשיטת הרמב''ם איך הוא עונה לשאלת תוספות בתחילת קידושין: למה שווה כסף קונה אישה? תוספות עונים כי אנחנו לומדים ששווה כסף ככסף מעבד עברי. זה הפסוק: כסף ישיב לבעליו לרבות שווה כסף. עם זאת הרמב''ם לא יכול להשתמש בתשובה זו כי היא שייכת רק לבעלים ישראלים. אבל לרמב''ם, בעלים שהוא עובד אלילים יכול לקבל רק כסף - כסף, ולא שום דבר אחר ששווה כסף. גזירה שווה לחצאים אין.  .היה אפשר לענות שהרמב''ם מחזיק קידושי כסף זה מדברי סופרים ולכן הם יכולים לנסח את החוק בכל דרך שהם רוצים. זה אומר שהם יכולים לנסח את הגזירה לכלול שווה כסף. אולם כאשר הרמב''ם כותב שקידושי כסף הם מדברי סופרים הוא מתכוון שכאשר הסנהדרין מדייק חוק באמצעות שלוש עשרה העקרונות שעל פיהם מוסברת התורה סנהדרין מאוחר יותר שרואה את הנושא אחרת יכול לשנות את החוק הזה. זה לא אומר שזו גזירה. אלא זה אומר שבית דין הגדול הראשון רואה בזה חוק מהתורה והשני לא. ואנחנו מחזיקים כמו הגמרא שלומדים קיחה קיחה משדה עפרון  אבל עדיין יש לי שאלה אחת. הרמב''ם מחזיק שווה כסף יכול לקנות משהו כי זה קניין חליפין ואין אישה נקנית על ידי קניין חליפין. איך נדע שהרמב''ם מחזיק שווה כסף יכול לקנות משהו על ידי שהוא קניין חליפין?הסיבה היא כפי שציינו רב שך כי בהלכות מכירה פרק א' הרמב''ם דן בקניין כסף ואחר כך בפרק ה' הוא. כותב "כל המטלטים קונים זה את זה", ושם הוא עוסק בקניין חליפין

 So now even Maverick Philosopher agrees that there is a separate source of moral information--the conscience. That is what Leonard Nelson calls non intuitive immediate knowledge.

[I am being short here, but just as a brief explanation: Maverick Philosopher is from the Analytic School and this is a huge step for a very important Analytic Philosopher agree with Leonard Nelson and the Friesian School in this area. It is almost dogma by them to say there is no such thing as immediate knowledge 

Another note: immediate  non intuitive knowledge [not through reason nor the five senses] was postulated in order to find a justification for the questions like where, when, [space time], why, [causality] etc. Empirical knowledge was out because of the problem of induction and knowledge of causality  by reason was attempted by Kant, but that was found to be problematic also. Most think that Kant's justification for these categories simply defies  reason.    It was later that this immediate non intuitive was expanded to include faith. But this expansion is significant in that it is really just an improvement of Kant, and not a completely different approach.    

Rav Kinievky said that it is best not to emphasize different aspects of Torah, but instead just to keep Torah plain and simple. He noted that when people emphasize one aspect over others, that is the very thing they fail in. 

But even so I think he would agree with the primacy of the mitzvah of learning Torah.

And I would in fact lie to emphasize that aspect, but I would like to include Physics and Mathematics along with that. 

But I admit that the Rishonim that included Physics along with Torah also included Metaphysics, [i.e. Aristotle's book The Meta-Physics] I have trouble emphasizing philosophy. Especially academic philosophy.

The show of religiosity

 One of the problems with Torah Scholars that are demons as mentioned in the Le.M of Rav Nahman of Breslov is in family relations. The problem itelf is mentioned in the Ari in the Eitz Chaim itself. And of course the Gemara itself mentions this in several places.  אם אתה רוה דור שצרות באים עליו צא ןבדוק בדייני ישראל, שכל הצרות הבאות לעולם לא באות אלא בגלל דייני ישראל. The problem is mainly that these sort of pseudo Torah Scholars is that they use their positions of authority to destroy families. This is very common, but is forbidden to mention Lason Hara [the prohibition of slander] is often mentioned. Still at times it is important to warn people that those that make the most effort to make a show of how religious they are, most often have an alternative agenda in mind.  After all you should ask yourself if the Torah itself saysהצנע לכת עם אלקיך  to walk modestly with your God (i e. Do not advertise how walk with God  then why does the religious world make such a point about appearing religious --in exact opposition to the Torah?

. 

 

the vaccine industry

 Food purity and warnings against additives came from a lifelong crusade by a chemist named Wiley. But it was a battle against corporations and Congress. The corporations that were making money by putting formaldehyde into our food did not care about the effects. The parallel to this nowadays in the vaccine industry.

To clarify: Congress was not against him but rather simply refused to pass food purity laws. It was mainly the newspapers and corporations that were against him. So when we but soda we now what is in it and we are not worried about formaldehyde additives Why? Because of Wiley. But who remembers him nowadays?

Myself I admit that I would probably be more susceptible to the Covid-Vaccine-scam if not for the warning of Rav Nahman in the Conversations of Rav Nahman perek 50