interpretations of the New Testament

There are many interpretations of the New Testament. So I might be excused if I suggest my own.
My idea is to some degree based on the  Rav Isaac Luria. And some have suggested it beforehand. A "tzadik" [saint]. But not an average tzadik [saint]. What do I mean "not average."  In the Rav Isaac Luria you find certain tzadikim [saints] have a high source for their soul. For example Abraham the Patriarch in Kindness of Emanation.

[It would be going too far to suggest this on my own without any support. So I bring as support the Ari himself and also Rav Avraham Abulafia.]

The Rav Isaac Luria himself did not write much. What we have from him is from Reb Haim Vital. Rav Vital has about three books in which he writes the ideas of the Rav Isaac Luria on the Five Books of Moses. In the end of Genesis in all three books he hints to this idea.

Also Rav Abulafia deals with this in scattered places. [If you piece it all together the picture that comes out is clear.] ]

My basic idea is based on an idea of the Rav Isaac Luria that after the "breaking of the vessels" and the period of correction began, the light of foundation was contained in the vessel of kindness of Emanation.

[For some background, I might mention that the Rashba was very much not in favor of Rav Abulafia. But I think Rav Abulafia can be depended on as Rav Vital does bring his unifications in the end of his Musar book Gates of Holiness. [I.e. in volume four].] [Also you can find his books quoted in the Pardes.]
I might add that "son of man" ought to refer to  the son of zeir anpin זעיר אנפין.

u99 music file

U-99 F major Midi file [I can not convert to MP3 anymore. Sorry. If you can do it yourself this would be for strings, horns, flute, timpani.] In general the last part in most pieces are for strings on top with timpani. the timpani is usually saved for this last part. the beginning sections can be for flute, oboe or french horns. but since i am not writing any more music i do not know how i might have put this in orchestra form --but i just  want togive some hints to how it might be done.

Rav Shach [of Ponoviz]

Rav Shach [of Ponoviz] points [in the Avi Ezri] out that there are a lot of crazy world views flying around that are just waiting and hoping to grab young people. And he suggests that the only advice to be protected from them is by learning a lot of Torah.

So what would he say about the four fold program of the Rambam to learn the (1) Written Law, (2) Oral Law (3) Physics (4) Metaphysics?

I heard that Rav Shach held that people ought to simply sit and learn Torah until marriage, and only after marriage to worry about making a living. But that was not exactly what the Rambam was thinking about. The interest of the Rambam in Physics and Metaphysics had nothing to do with making a living. [In any case, I would have to say that Metaphysics nowadays is not exactly what the Rambam was thinking about. To me it seems clear he meant Plato, Aristotle and Plotinus. The Rambam's interest in these two subjects were because he held by learning them one fulfills the commandments to love and fear God.]


I should mention that because of personal failings  in my own traits, I did not "make it" [be successful] in the yeshiva world. These are the same traits that indicated to Reb Freifeld of Shar Yashuv that I was really not a good prospect for his daughter. Even so, from afar off, I can see the greatness of siting and learning Torah -- even though I am far from it myself.  So if  God grants to me even a minute or a second or just one word of learning Torah, I value it about rubies.

u98 music file

U-98 in midi - E Flat then A major then E flat u-98 nwc

u-2 mp3  u-2 midi

The Reformation and Enlightenment were the double headed sledge hammer to destroy. What took the place of what they destroyed was Communism and Socialism.

We do not just know about our (1) sensations or know things by (2) deductive  logical reasoning. It does not take a genius to figure out that pain is not the same thing or the same kind of thing as the point of a sword.
Thus Idealism Berkley is a non starter.

What seems to me is that after Descartes, the system of Aristotle  about the mind and sensations fell because of lack of credibility. It was hard to know what to replace it with.

At the same time Aristotle was falling in terms of some areas, the Reformation took place.

The Reformation did create a vacuum that was just begging to be filled.
The Reformation and Enlightenment were the double headed sledge hammer to destroy. What took the place of what they destroyed was Communism and Socialism.


[Thomas Reid did a good job in showing the fallacies of idealism. Hobhouse did a nice job in demolishing the socialist state. But I would not have paid much attention to either writer if I thought there was much good anyway in Idealism or Socialism.]

Allen Bloom dealt with this issue [what is human nature and its connection to politics] to some degree in his book the Closing of the American Mind. I think he was saying the the Enlightenment with its faulty understanding of human nature brought the world to what it is now,

You don't always belong where you think you belong.

A priest in the Temple in Jerusalem has certain jobs that only a priest can do. A Levi has other kinds of jobs that only a Levi is allowed to do,  E.g. singing, playing instruments, opening the gates, etc.

A priest who does the job of  Levi is subject to a debate on what the punishment is. Death by Heaven or only a regular לאו prohibition.

But a Levi who does the job of a priest there is no doubt. The punishment is death by heaven.

[הלכות כלי המקדש ג:י] To Abyee even a levi who helps another levi is also punished with death from heaven.

From this it is possible to learn that often a person has  a certain place in the world and a certain kind of work that only he should do. It can happen for example that a person loves learning Torah --as all people ought. Still he might not really find his place in the Mir in NY or Ponoviz in Israel. Everyone has their own place that they need to find.

Sometimes a person's place is in the IDF. sometimes it is in Ponoviz or the Mir. You don't always belong where you think you belong.
The American Indians had something called a "vision quest" where one goes out to find their real place in the world.

הנה בריש פרק איזהו נשך

הנה בריש פרק איזהו נשך איתא דאין נשך בלא תרבית ואין תרבית בלא נשך דאי אוזפי' מאה במאה ועשרים מעיקרא קיימי מאה בדנקא ולבסוף קיימי מאה ועשרים בדנקא אי בתר מעיקרא אזלת הרי נשך איכא ואיכא תרבית ואי בתר בסוף אזלת לא נשך איכא ולא תרבית איכא וכן אי אוזפי' מאה במאה מעיקרא קיימי מאה בדנקא ולבסוף קיימי מאה בחומשא אי בתר מעיקרא אזלת לא נשך איכא ולא תרבית איכא ואי בתר בסוף אזלת הרי נשך והרי תרבית ורב שך כתב הראשונים כתבו שאין ספק וודאי בתר מעיקרא אזלינן שהרי הדין דסאה בסאה אינה אלא מדרבנן ואי בתר בסוף אזלינן הרי יש כאן נשך ותרבית ומדאורייתא הי' צריך שתאסר ובהכרח דבתר מעיקרא אזלינן

The גמרא writes if there is interest on a loan there is also profit to the lender. The reason is this. If the lender gave a loan of hundred for a hundred and twenty and in the end they are worth the same amount, then if you go by the beginning, there are both נשך and profit. If you go by the end, then there is neither one. If the loan was a hundred for a hundred, and the value of the last hundred increased, then if we go by the beginning, there is no נשך nor profit. If we go by the end, there are both.

רב שך זצ''ל writes אבל דעת הרמב''ם קשה שהוא כתב מפורש בפ''ו מהלכות מלוה ולוה ה''ז המלוה את חבירו ומשכן לי' שדהו על מנת שיאכל פירות' שאינה אלא אבק רבית ומשום שאין ברור וזה קשה מסאה בסאה ומאוזפי' מאה במאה והוקרו שהוא רבית קצוצה אי בתר בסוף אזלינן

I think the answer to this is that we do not go by the end. If we would go by the end then in fact משכנתא בלא נכייתא would be דאורייתא.  But we go by the beginning. This is similar to the last case of the גמרא. The last hundred went up in value, and yet there is no נשך דאורייתא if we go by the beginning. The law of משכנתא בלא נכייתא is different because the lender gave the field על מנת שיאכל פירות, but since the fruit will not come automatically, there remains a doubt if there will be any fruit. So it is only אבק רבית

[I admit that I still have to think about this to be certain that this would answer Rav Shakh's question.]






_____________________________________________________________________________



הנה בריש פרק איזהו נשך איתא דאין נשך בלא תרבית ואין תרבית בלא נשך דאי אוזפי' מאה במאה ועשרים מעיקרא קיימי מאה בדנקא ולבסוף קיימי מאה ועשרים בדנקא אי בתר מעיקרא אזלת הרי נשךאיכא ואיכא תרבית ואי בתר בסוף אזלת לא נשך איכא ולא תרבית איכא וכן אי אוזפי' מאה במאה מעיקרא קיימי מאה בדנקא ולבסוף קיימי מאה בחומשא אי בתר מעיקרא אזלת לא נשך איכא ולא תרבית איכא ואי בתר בסוף אזלת הרי נשך והרי תרבית ורב שך כתב הראשונים כתבו שאין ספק וודאי בתר מעיקרא אזלינן שהרי הדין דסאה בסאה אינה אלא מדרבנן ואי בתר בסוף אזלינן הרי יש כאן נשך ותרבית ומדאורייתא הי' צריך שתאסר ובהכרח דבתר מעיקרא אזלינן
הגמרא כותבת אם יש ריבית על הלוואה קיימת גם רווח למלווה. הסיבה היא זו. אם המלווה נתן הלוואה של מאה על מאה ועשרים ובסופו של דבר הם שווים את אותה כמות, אז אם אתה הולך כפי ההתחלה, ישנם שניהם, נשך ורווח. אם אתה הולך כפי הסוף, אז אין אף אחד. אם ההלוואה הייתה מאה על מאה, ואת הערך של המאה גדל, אז אם נלך לפי ההתחלה, אין נשך ולא רווח. אם נלך לפי הסוף, ישנם שניהם. רב שך זצ''ל כותב אבל דעת הרמב''ם קשה שהוא כתב מפורש בפ''ו מהלכות מלוה ולוה ה''ז המלוה את חבירו ומשכן לי' שדהו על מנת שיאכל פירותי' שאינה אלא אבק רבית ומשום שאין ברור. וזה קשה מסאה בסאה ומאוזפי' מאה במאה והוקרו שהוא רבית קצוצה אי בתר בסוף אזלינן. אני חושב שהתשובה לכך היא שאנחנו לא הולכים כפי הסוף. אם היינו הולכים כפי הסוף אז למעשה משכנתא בלא נכייתא תהיה דאורייתא. אבל הולכים לפי ההתחלה. זה דומה למקרה האחרון של הגמרא שהמאה עלו בערך, ובכל זאת אין נשך דאורייתא בגלל שהולכים לפי ההתחלה. החוק של משכנתא בלא נכייתא שונה כי המלווה נתן את השדה על מנת שיאכל פירות, אבל מאז שהפרי לא יגיע באופן אוטומטי, נותר ספק אם יהיה כל פרי. אז זה רק אבק רבית