Uman for Rosh Hashana?

My learning partner David noted that things tend to fall apart when one is not in Uman for Rosh Hashana. This year I did not take his advice and in fact right after Rosh Hashana things fell apart. But I am still not thinking of being in Uman since it has become dangerous. Very dangerous. So the best overall idea I think would be to bring the grave to Israel. The problem with that though it it is not known exactly where the actual grave is. One fellow who paints portraits there told me that a WWII survivor told him that she knew the actual site is not where people think but rather North West about ten yards. from the grave site that is marked. [Actually West but slightly north]

Lithuanian Study hall.

I am very thankful that I am in an area where there is a Lithuanian Study hall. So even though I still do not have the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, I have been able to do a little bit of study in his book.
Once I was going to the ocean and I asked a young fellow who looked a bit like a Litvak if there is a study hall on the name of the Gra in this area. He said No, but he did suggest this other place that is close enough.

Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications

As you can imagine after my arrest my mind has not been settled that much. But because of this I have been thinking along the lines of Rav Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic] about unifications. While he was more into the idea in order to come to to attachment with God, I have been thinking along the lines of  finding the particular verses in Torah and the prophets that relate to my problems and finding the unifications that come out of each verse.

One of the most important aspects of Rav Abulafia is his claim that Jesus was a true tzadik saint even though that certainly was not very politically correct in the Middle Ages.

But he also is quoted by Rav Haim Vital as presenting the unifications that brings one to attachment with God. This was not known since Rav Vital only brings this in the last volume of his Musar book, Gates of Holiness. And that volume was not even printed until recently.

I still have no computer but a friend is letting me write on his. Finally I have access to Rav Shach's Avi Ezri and I have been looking at it along with a drop of string theory and math. {I still learn these mainly by the method of גירסה  just saying the words and going on  as the Gemara brings.}
One thing I noticed in Rav Shach is that he says the argument between R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish about קנין פירות כקנין הגוף דמי [''Possession of the fruit is like possession of the thing''] is not like it sounds. He says [in laws of renting] that the issue is if renting in itself is like possession of the thing.

That is how he answers the question that I brought up in my booklet on Bava Metzia that the Gemara seems to say that the person that is renting owns the fertilizer in the courtyard, while the Rambam [Maimonides] says not.
I would like to delve more deeply into this but in short Rav Shach says the cases that you find in Shas where the renter owes the stuff that is left in the courtyard is where the intention of the renting was for that specific purpose.--in the view of the Rambam. Clearly the Raavad disagrees. Also I might mention that Rav Shach at the end of that chapter leaves off with a question on Tosphot. To me that is a clear invitation to try and answer for Tosphot.







I am still hoping to get a hold of the books of Rav Avraham Abulafia [the mediaeval mystic that I have mentioned a few times] to get a better idea of his approach. But so far things are going with difficulty in Israel. In any case, it is clear to me that Rav Abulafia is much more interested in unifications than the Ari. I lost interest in unifications for a while but recent events have rekindled my interest. That is to find the right unifications that are applicable to my recent problems.







Also since Professor Moshe Idel has done a lot of research into Rav Abulafia I would like to get his books also.[It was in fact looking at Moshe Ideal's Ph.D thesis that gave me a degree of clarity about Rav Abulafia's opinions about Christianity.






[I have also been looking at Heidegger who I find to have a some important points. While philosophers tend to look at what is common to all people, Heidegger brings the idea that that is not as interesting as what makes people different.

V-57 G and c major  v-57 nwc

music file v65

V-65 F Major

"devekut" (attachment with God)

There is an aspect of "devekut" (attachment with God) that comes by learning Torah. And that mainly happens in the context of straight Torah. A slight deviation leaves that effect and even brings one to harm. Now by straight Torah I mean mainly Gemara Tosphot and Rishonim [Mediaeval authorities].
But it can include akhronim also like the Maharsha and the Avi Ezri.

Now why I bring this up is that we see in the Torah itself there is a commandment to be attached to God [Deuteronomy 30:20] and that leaves one wondering how to go about that.
The disciple of the Gra in the Nefesh HaHaim goes into great length showing in fact how learning Torah does bring God's light down into all the worlds. [He brings it from several places in the Chazal].
And I think most people in straight Litvak yeshivas in fact feel this devekut thought it is not talked about at all.
Perhaps the reason it is not talked about is spirituality can get easily sidetracked.
So as a side effect, devekut is certainly there in Litvak yeshivas. But because of the danger that accompanies any overt effort or open effort in spiritual directions, that aspect of learning Torah is downplayed.

I would like also to expand this idea of learning Torah to include the wisdom of God in Creation as most Rishonim say. That means the obligations of the heart and the rambam and others

devekut attachment with God connected with learning the Ari-  learning the Ari is in itself learning Torah.