Translate

Powered By Blogger

11.3.16

Musar/Ethics

Israel Salanter's Musar Movement was to get people to learn Musar which means a basic set of medieval books on ethics. That is about just four books. Then in the penumbra a larger set of about 30 books. written during the Renaissance. Then a even wider penumbra of books that got added to that original set by his disciples. Isaac Blasser. Joseph Yosel Horwitz [the Alter of Navardok], Simcha Zissel from Kelm and the Alter of Slobadka.



I was thinking of finding an argument to prove the point of Reb Israel Salanter that learning Musar [Mediaeval Ethics] is important. It occurred to me that we can not know our "self." We can know our "self" exists but not what is going on deep inside. Our motivations--what causes us to act or think things is hidden from us. Not only that when we think we know our motivations we come up with contradictions.. One motivation is wrapped up inside of another. One day we think our motivation is one thing and then next day we find ourselves acting in ways that completely and directly contradict what we thought was motivating us the day before. We know the self exists but we do not know what is going on down there. We however know its surface. It is like an ocean. The depths are hidden but the surface we can see plainly. We know if we feel hot or cold, happy or sad, etc. Reb Israel thought the way to penetrate and effect the self is by learning Medieval  Ethics.

Not by prayer or talking with God as in a conversation. Conversing with God is not that different than talking to yourself. You are only reaching the surface level. You know what you are thinking and feeling an that is what you are commuting to God. There is nothing there that penetrates into the hidden levels of the self to change one from evil to good.

We can know one thing about our "self" we know our commitments. We know of we are committed to the Ten Commandments or not. We know if we are committed to keeping the Moral Law. And this commitment is strengthened by learning Musar.


I am borrowing ideas of Kant here.

On a side note Kant thought the ontological proof was not valid. And this goes along with his idea that pure reason can't penetrate into unconditioned realities. But he did write that as far existence goes of the the dinge an sich--we can know it exists. But we cant know it character. Thus a proof of the existence of God is possible. But he did not think the ontological one was very good. And this to some degree shows why I wrote the above proof at the top of my blog  the first cause idea. [Which I really borrowed from Aristotle. Not his first mover idea but rather this very basic idea itself which I saw one a long time ago at the beginning of his set of books called Physics.]





Music for the glory of God

10.3.16

a nice utube about counter jihad

Trump on utube  another utube from Judge Jeanine [This last one is very impressive]



I am thinking of what kind of argument can I put forward to support Trump.
I think I would have to approach this from several directions. First the Constitution of the USA. But I do not mean the actual document. I mean this more as what you learn in high school about the principles that went into making the Constitution. But then I would have to  draw on the previous thinkers that their works provided the basis for the Constitution. --Pericles, Locke, Montesquieu, Hobbes.

Then I would also have to show that the establishment has violated these principles.  That is both the Democrats and the G.O.P. in a way that the average working class American can feel extremely betrayed.
Jewish worldview issues are not divorced from Plato and Aristotle. Most of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages was highly linked to  Platonic and Aristotelian ideas. Thus it is not possible to understand  what the Rambam and Saddia Gaon and the  Rishonim were saying about the world view of Torah without background in Aristotle and Plato. But I have not done enough work in this area I admit. I am only suggesting this as a proper point of investigation.


The problem is the time issue. How much time can you really spend on this and  learning Talmud and a vocation both? Yet without this knowledge of the world view of Torah, what happens is people unconscionably absorb the world view of their surrounding culture.

It must be remembered that someone can inherit social scripts without being self-aware that they are doing so. Everyone can learn a language simply by exposure, knowledge of grammar is secondary and hard won. Unfortunately, this only makes it even more insidious.

And then when they learn the Rambam or Saadia Gaon it sounds foreign because they themselves have absorbed a false world view that they think is Torah.

It is a sign of enormous self delusion if one thinks he understands the world view of the Torah so perfectly so as to dismiss the Rambam and Saadia Gaon as irrelevant and even outright wrong.

Even though it is a hard book probably the best thing in terms of world view issues is the Rambam's Guide with the commentary of Joseph Albo. [That is the regular traditional one that you used to see around in yeshivas.] But it has that quality that I find in many books that the surface layer is outrageous but if you can peel away the surface the inner core is astounding and relevant. [But you need a lot of confidence ("faith in the wise") to believe that sub-level is there in order to find it.]

For the public: Jewish thought was neo-Platonic up until the Rambam. The Rambam people think went radically in the direction of Aristotle. But I am not so sure. He also seems neo-Platonic to me. He had great respect for Aristotle but that was anyway the approach of the Neo Platonics. Plotinus had used Aristotle to get a better idea of what Plato was saying.




It is my thinking that if one could manage to put all his efforts into learning a vocation and learning Torah that things will turn out well. But that  takes much effort. 


 Without the will to do the work, not much can turn out right.. One need drive and a vision and to put your drive and vision in the right direction. Torah with a vocation.

Or if one can manage to put all his trust in God, and then to learn Torah all day, that is an even better option. But it means to actually trust in God, not a kollel paycheck. Most people in kollel think that learning Torah is a valid means to make money. This results in the type of cults that are common.
But if one in fact is trusting in God and accepting a kollel check as what it is (charity) then the kollel option seems good to me.


Where do cults come from?
I believe charismatic leaders correctly note that most people are neither skeptics nor self-motivated, and that many are easily duped by gurus because they want someone to show them the way to live a meaningful life and to get support and  a sex life [shiduch] by being attached to their institution. They offer to show their followers the way to true wakefulness, a state of awareness and vitality which transcends ordinary consciousness. The leader attracts  writers, artists, wealthy widows and other questing souls to work  for him in exchange for sharing his wisdom. They offer numerous claims and explanations for everything under the moon, rooted in little more than his own imagination and never tempered with concern for what science might have to say about his musings.



9.3.16

But I got some idea of the world view of Torah by hanging out with my parents and grandparents, Simcha Wasserman [Elchanan Wassermann's son], Reb Shelomo Freifeld the Rosh Yeshiva of Shar Yashuv and Shmuel Berenbaum the rosh yeshiva of the Mir.

The rebuke thing is in fact a difficult subject. It was only recently that I saw in a Musar book called "Even Shelma" אבן שלמה that one should say rebuke even if it will not be accepted. But in any case I have mentioned things to people over many years. So I think I have fulfilled the obligation.

It was in the Shelah [שני לחות הברית] that I first saw this idea of rebuke being an obligation even of you know the person will not accept. 
But to know when or how to rebuke you need to know the Oral and Written Law pretty well to know if something is really right or wrong. And that includes issues of "world view." Because major points of halachah depend on world view. For example when is something idolatry?

 But I got some idea by hanging out with my parents and grandparents, Simcha Wasserman [Elchanan Wassermann's son], Reb Shelomo Freifeld (the Rosh Yeshiva of Shar Yashuv),  Shmuel Berenbaum the rosh yeshiva of the Mir.
But in any case, I have spent some time trying to understand the basic path of Torah. The "World View of Torah" or what is called "השקפה" "World view" was not learned in yeshiva at all. Not in Shar Yashuv nor in the Mir. But I tried anyway to pick it up. When I realized that a lot of claims were made by groups to be keeping the Torah whose main emphasis was to try to show themselves as more religious than others so as to get more charity it dawned on me that these things should not be taken at face value.

The basic issues of world view were first tackled by Saadia Gaon then the Duties of the Heart, Ibn Gavirol, Maimonides, Crescas, Joseph Albo. Most of their works were rejected that thought they knew better. As if we know better than the Rambam of Saadia Gaon what the Torah is about. That takes gall and self delusion.

Reb Shmuel Berenbaum, I knew partly by his classes at the Mir and his shiur klali and the Musar talks that he gave for  a year and by hanging out with him on Shabat and Motzai Shabat at his home.
The same went for Shelomo Freifeld. But Rav Freilfeld did not give classes. but I still hung out with him at his home. [After some years I went to NYU but that was more for the idea of getting a vocation [Physics]. I did not think using Torah for money was a good idea. And in any case I was out of the Yeshiva World at the time. Not that I would not like to be learning Torah. If only I had the merit to do so!
[I used to go to Simcha Wasserman on Shabat. But when it came time to go to Yeshiva I went to NY where the action was. That is where I met Reb Shmuel Berenabum who had the reputation of being the deepest Torah scholar in the world. From what I could tell that reputation was well deserved.