13.12.15
12.12.15
I thought Schopenhauer took care of the problem of Evil by simply saying human good is not on the agenda of the "Will." And later he had some kind of second thoughts in which he added that the Will has some kind of higher agenda in which the Good is the goal.
Personally I think the Rambam did the best job by having השגחה פרטית "Divine watching out for" be directed towards higher intellects. It is an elegant solution which is Neo Platonic in showing how gaining the higher intellect is important. (This was the basic idea during the Middle Ages and was abandoned I think for poor reasons.)
God and Job obviously agreed with Schopenhauer as is seen from the end of the book of Job. In fact that is teh whole point of the book. Also I saw this in Psalms. I forget where but one obvious place is Psalm 72 [in the Hebrew and English numbering. In Russian and Ukrainian it would be Psalm 73.]
I wrote about this before but I saw a certain Mark Friedman also wrote what looks like a good treatment of this problem so I thought to mention the issue again.
Mark Friedman says: "Many philosophers, especially those working in the Kantian tradition, hold that persons have dignity as a result of their personal autonomy, and that respect for this attribute is a paramount value. At least for them, a world with free will is “better” than almost any possible world without it."
This seems to me to be a good answer to this question. I think Leah a friend of mine mentioned this answer once when she was talking with her mother in Safed. At the time I did not think much of it but now it makes a lot more sense to me than it did then.
Personally I think the Rambam did the best job by having השגחה פרטית "Divine watching out for" be directed towards higher intellects. It is an elegant solution which is Neo Platonic in showing how gaining the higher intellect is important. (This was the basic idea during the Middle Ages and was abandoned I think for poor reasons.)
God and Job obviously agreed with Schopenhauer as is seen from the end of the book of Job. In fact that is teh whole point of the book. Also I saw this in Psalms. I forget where but one obvious place is Psalm 72 [in the Hebrew and English numbering. In Russian and Ukrainian it would be Psalm 73.]
I wrote about this before but I saw a certain Mark Friedman also wrote what looks like a good treatment of this problem so I thought to mention the issue again.
Mark Friedman says: "Many philosophers, especially those working in the Kantian tradition, hold that persons have dignity as a result of their personal autonomy, and that respect for this attribute is a paramount value. At least for them, a world with free will is “better” than almost any possible world without it."
This seems to me to be a good answer to this question. I think Leah a friend of mine mentioned this answer once when she was talking with her mother in Safed. At the time I did not think much of it but now it makes a lot more sense to me than it did then.
An interesting essay about Israel I do not comment on this for many reasons. One is that people's minds are either pro Jewish or anti Jewish before any argument. And immune to argument. This divide has little to do if the person is actually Jewish or not. Being Jewish is perfectly compatible with being anti-Jewish, and being gentile is perfectly compatible with being pro-Jewish. These are independent variables.
Another reason is I am trying not to look at news anymore. It just makes me upset. Also I think it might be forbidden.
I should mention that I try to judge people based on their actions. The groups they are apart of can provide some initial data, but that is not determinate.
Another reason is I am trying not to look at news anymore. It just makes me upset. Also I think it might be forbidden.
I should mention that I try to judge people based on their actions. The groups they are apart of can provide some initial data, but that is not determinate.
11.12.15
against science
And to some degree this was an attitude that was common to yeshivas in NY when I was there. Rav Miller wrote a few books attacking evolution that showed that he felt comfortable attacking science though he certainly did not understand it. And that attitude is still common among philosophers of science.
Other people threw in the towel and developed strong cases of Physics Envy. So they created pseudo science that go by the name of real science like psychology or economics.
I am not comfortable with any of these attitudes. And yet this anti science approach did help me stay in yeshiva and learn Torah. That is this attitude gave me a kind of justification that i needed to concentrate on Talmud and later on Luriac kabalah.
Still at some point I started suspecting that this attitude was not Torah based.
This may have started when I saw the frum world is crummy. I thought then that it must be they are not really keeping the Torah properly. The attitudes of the frum no longer interested me unless they could be shown to be derived from the Torah.
I learned in Israel that this anti science attitude was not a part of the Lithuanian yeshiva world there.
I also became aware that this attitude was not that of the Rambam either. Then as far as I recall I looked at the Duties of the Heart and saw that his attitude also was one with the Rambam. So I decided this attitude of being anti science was mistaken.
One woman, Chaya Tova told me that her son (who had diabetes and was learning in kollel) on the side had become expert in all the texts relating to diabetes. She was from a regular religious home and her father taught Talmud in Bnei Brak. She was no baalat Teshuva. And she said this anti science attitude was not at all accepted in Litvak communities.
However I should mention that the years of concentrating on Talmud were well spent. Even with the time and effort I put into it I never could have come to any kind of basic understanding until many years later. Talmud is not a four year program. It is more like a twenty year program to become even barely proficient.
And to some degree this was an attitude that was common to yeshivas in NY when I was there. Rav Miller wrote a few books attacking evolution that showed that he felt comfortable attacking science though he certainly did not understand it. And that attitude is still common among philosophers of science.
Other people threw in the towel and developed strong cases of Physics Envy. So they created pseudo science that go by the name of real science like psychology or economics.
I am not comfortable with any of these attitudes. And yet this anti science approach did help me stay in yeshiva and learn Torah. That is this attitude gave me a kind of justification that i needed to concentrate on Talmud and later on Luriac kabalah.
Still at some point I started suspecting that this attitude was not Torah based.
This may have started when I saw the frum world is crummy. I thought then that it must be they are not really keeping the Torah properly. The attitudes of the frum no longer interested me unless they could be shown to be derived from the Torah.
I learned in Israel that this anti science attitude was not a part of the Lithuanian yeshiva world there.
I also became aware that this attitude was not that of the Rambam either. Then as far as I recall I looked at the Duties of the Heart and saw that his attitude also was one with the Rambam. So I decided this attitude of being anti science was mistaken.
One woman, Chaya Tova told me that her son (who had diabetes and was learning in kollel) on the side had become expert in all the texts relating to diabetes. She was from a regular religious home and her father taught Talmud in Bnei Brak. She was no baalat Teshuva. And she said this anti science attitude was not at all accepted in Litvak communities.
However I should mention that the years of concentrating on Talmud were well spent. Even with the time and effort I put into it I never could have come to any kind of basic understanding until many years later. Talmud is not a four year program. It is more like a twenty year program to become even barely proficient.
Concerning the Guide of Maimonides and the letter of the Ramban in defense of it.
My learning partner just received from the USA the book in English of Chaval.
In that book is the letter of the Ramban (Nachmanides) to the sages of France about their ban on the Guide of the Rambam (Maimonides). I don't know what it says but I think it must be very important to see how someone of the stature of the Ramban (Nachmanides) understood the Guide.
What I mean to say is that the Sages of France were the people that were still continuing the work of the original Baali Hatosphot. As soon as the Guide came out in Hebrew a cousin of Nachmanides went to the sages in France and asked them to make a ban on the book. And they obliged. Then Nachmanides wrote to them asking them to rescind the ban.
What makes this interesting is that the Nachmanides has no problem attacking the Rambam constantly in his commentary on the Five Books of Moses. And he had a very different world view. He was in fact the last of the true mystics until the Ari. So how he understood the Guide and why he defended it must have great significance.
The Ramban {Nachmanides} states in that letter that one who separates himself from the Guide or the Sefer HaMada is as one who separates himself from the Source of Life. So even if on individual points the Ram'ban had no problem disagreeing with the 'Rambam still he is clearly as emotional and upset about the ban on the Rambam as one could possibly be. (Chavel writes there that there is nothing in all of Jewish literature the reflects the depth and intensity of emotion of that letter.)
In that book is the letter of the Ramban (Nachmanides) to the sages of France about their ban on the Guide of the Rambam (Maimonides). I don't know what it says but I think it must be very important to see how someone of the stature of the Ramban (Nachmanides) understood the Guide.
What I mean to say is that the Sages of France were the people that were still continuing the work of the original Baali Hatosphot. As soon as the Guide came out in Hebrew a cousin of Nachmanides went to the sages in France and asked them to make a ban on the book. And they obliged. Then Nachmanides wrote to them asking them to rescind the ban.
What makes this interesting is that the Nachmanides has no problem attacking the Rambam constantly in his commentary on the Five Books of Moses. And he had a very different world view. He was in fact the last of the true mystics until the Ari. So how he understood the Guide and why he defended it must have great significance.
The Ramban {Nachmanides} states in that letter that one who separates himself from the Guide or the Sefer HaMada is as one who separates himself from the Source of Life. So even if on individual points the Ram'ban had no problem disagreeing with the 'Rambam still he is clearly as emotional and upset about the ban on the Rambam as one could possibly be. (Chavel writes there that there is nothing in all of Jewish literature the reflects the depth and intensity of emotion of that letter.)
10.12.15
The Lithuanian yeshivas are afraid of the Trojan horse effect. They are worried that a newly religious person might contain a hidden virus. Often this is correct. But from what I have seen the effect goes the opposite way also. Often people try to attract rich secular Jews by bearing gifts and seeming nice.
שונא מתנות יחיה It says in Mishlei, "He who hates gifts will live.". It seems to me to be wary of gifts. I also see that the Lithuanian yeshiva world is right for largely ignoring baali teshuva or marginalizing them. The truth is there often is something that is a bit off. Leaving their parents to find the light and the truth and the way seems to by definition indicate something wrong.
Though I am a baal teshuva in the way that I was born into a Reform home and began to learn at Litvak yeshivas. But a good deal of my troubles came from fanatic baali teshuva. But not all my problem were from that direction. A lot came from sanctimonious religious teachers. {U know what I mean.} But by an large they were also baali teshuva that just sucked up to the system.
In any case, it is difficult to understand how to learn and keep Torah. But you know something is off when people ignore the fifth commandment in order to join some cult.
That is not keeping Torah by any definition.
So what I recommend is for people to learn Torah and keep Torah. But not to support groups that ask for money to make people do teshuva [become religious] because by and large they are doing great evil and harming families and lying about what the Torah says. I think these organizations should frankly be banned as being cults.
____________________________________________________________________________
My idea of a proper learning environment is mainly based on the approach of my own parents plus that of the Mirrer Yeshiva in NY. Torah with Derech Eretz (vocation). But Derech Eretz to me does not include any kind of vocation. What I suggest is from the religious standpoint is to avoid religious cults like the Black Plague and as the Gra already noted. Then from the standpoint o vocation I mainly think learning some kind of manual work is important plus natural sciences and outdoor skills. Most of secular education I am against. Only STEM or basic Blue collar work preparation is OK plus survival skills.
שונא מתנות יחיה It says in Mishlei, "He who hates gifts will live.". It seems to me to be wary of gifts. I also see that the Lithuanian yeshiva world is right for largely ignoring baali teshuva or marginalizing them. The truth is there often is something that is a bit off. Leaving their parents to find the light and the truth and the way seems to by definition indicate something wrong.
Though I am a baal teshuva in the way that I was born into a Reform home and began to learn at Litvak yeshivas. But a good deal of my troubles came from fanatic baali teshuva. But not all my problem were from that direction. A lot came from sanctimonious religious teachers. {U know what I mean.} But by an large they were also baali teshuva that just sucked up to the system.
In any case, it is difficult to understand how to learn and keep Torah. But you know something is off when people ignore the fifth commandment in order to join some cult.
That is not keeping Torah by any definition.
So what I recommend is for people to learn Torah and keep Torah. But not to support groups that ask for money to make people do teshuva [become religious] because by and large they are doing great evil and harming families and lying about what the Torah says. I think these organizations should frankly be banned as being cults.
____________________________________________________________________________
My idea of a proper learning environment is mainly based on the approach of my own parents plus that of the Mirrer Yeshiva in NY. Torah with Derech Eretz (vocation). But Derech Eretz to me does not include any kind of vocation. What I suggest is from the religious standpoint is to avoid religious cults like the Black Plague and as the Gra already noted. Then from the standpoint o vocation I mainly think learning some kind of manual work is important plus natural sciences and outdoor skills. Most of secular education I am against. Only STEM or basic Blue collar work preparation is OK plus survival skills.
9.12.15
Sometimes an idea is like a seed. You can plant it into someone and it takes root over time. It can be a trap
Sometimes an idea is like a seed. You can plant it into someone and it takes root over time. It can be a trap or it can be fruitful.
You see this also in philosophy or any of the social pseudo sciences where people hear one idea and that idea acts like a seed that all subsequent ideas gather around to support and provide structure for.
You see this also in philosophy or any of the social pseudo sciences where people hear one idea and that idea acts like a seed that all subsequent ideas gather around to support and provide structure for.
But to see why pushing off Devekut in order to learn Torah is a mistake see the anonymous commentary on the first four chapters of the Mishne Torah of the Rambam where he explains that the purpose of the mitzvot is to come to the higher fear and awe of God. Later I learned that people can learn Torah and still be bad. So I realized my mistake, but it was too late to return to Devekut.)
The orbit of different charismatic lunatics:
The basic layout of the religious world is god-kings. That is people that think of themselves as divine and create a following of groupies naive people. ]
I did have to figure out a basic approach that would make sense to me and what I found was the basic approach of Maimonides and the general constellation of Jewsih philosophers that agreed or disagreed with him. That kind of Monotheistic approach --Reason and Revelation made the most sense to me. And this approach seems to encompass all good things .
I should mention that it is not that I figured this all out on my own. Rather I had great parents and teachers who had a kind of balanced world view. In what I saw in my home and at the Mir Yeshiva I saw a kind of approach to life that I think made the approach of Torah with menchlichkeit much more real than I would have been able to figure out on my own.
_______________________________________________________________________________
There is a lot to discuss here. Examples of ideas that are like seeds are a dime a dozen. Every major system is based on one or two basic ideas and then the whole system is made around them.
(Sometimes a system is based on a few conflicting ideas.) Some examples off hand.
(1) Learning Torah. This was the central idea at Shar Yashuv and the Mir in NY.
(2) Secular Education is the redemption of Mankind. That is the Enlightenment idea.
(3) The Golden Rule.
(4) Ding an Sich. The modest idea of Kant that there is a difference between what things really are and how they seem to be. This idea gave birth to German Idealism and that contained great things and terrible things.
8.12.15
Songs for Hanuka
q76 q75 b105 m C b101 b100 n5 n8 B Yochai Exodus4 n7 bh q78
What I recommend for Hanuka is to begin a session daily in the Written Law and the Oral Law. That is to start a session going through the two Talmuds page by page. After that it is possible to start a more in depth kind of session.
Mainly it is best to learn at home unless you have an authentic yeshiva nearby.
The world of Yeshiva is unlike any world that you can imagine. It hearkens back to the world of Eastern Europe. There is in the great NY yeshivas an amazing atmosphere of Torah. But as a warning to the wise I should mention most places that go by the name of yeshiva are frauds. They might have books and students. But there is a spirit of Torah that they just can't duplicate.
Often yeshivas have a charismatic leader who is the object of worship instead of God. These places should be avoided.
I should mention that I have been looking at blogs on public affairs recently and from what I can tell the problem with the world is that people don't learn the Written and Oral Torah (Talmud). For example I don't think rights for a person to have private property would be an issue after learning Bava Mertzia. I also think that a lot of people's attitudes towards a large variety of topics would be changed for the better by an hour a day of Talmud. [I admit I don't do a fast session anymore. The time I spend is usually on a more in depth kind of learning. But that is because of constraints. If I could I would have a fast session and an in-depth one both. And I would do the same for the natural sciences. But there also my time is constrained. So mainly in the natural sciences I have fast session. And I hope someday to a more in depth kind of learning there also.
What I recommend for Hanuka is to begin a session daily in the Written Law and the Oral Law. That is to start a session going through the two Talmuds page by page. After that it is possible to start a more in depth kind of session.
Mainly it is best to learn at home unless you have an authentic yeshiva nearby.
The world of Yeshiva is unlike any world that you can imagine. It hearkens back to the world of Eastern Europe. There is in the great NY yeshivas an amazing atmosphere of Torah. But as a warning to the wise I should mention most places that go by the name of yeshiva are frauds. They might have books and students. But there is a spirit of Torah that they just can't duplicate.
Often yeshivas have a charismatic leader who is the object of worship instead of God. These places should be avoided.
I should mention that I have been looking at blogs on public affairs recently and from what I can tell the problem with the world is that people don't learn the Written and Oral Torah (Talmud). For example I don't think rights for a person to have private property would be an issue after learning Bava Mertzia. I also think that a lot of people's attitudes towards a large variety of topics would be changed for the better by an hour a day of Talmud. [I admit I don't do a fast session anymore. The time I spend is usually on a more in depth kind of learning. But that is because of constraints. If I could I would have a fast session and an in-depth one both. And I would do the same for the natural sciences. But there also my time is constrained. So mainly in the natural sciences I have fast session. And I hope someday to a more in depth kind of learning there also.
I don't think the Rambam would have agreed with using Hanuka as a reason not to learn Physics or Metaphysics.
He was pretty clear that learning these things is a fulfillment of the commandments to Love and fear God because they bring to an appreciation of God's wisdom that he put into his creation.
One of the lessons however he would have seen in Hanuka was not to do idolatry. That was after all the cause of the original rebellion of the Maccabees. And saying that God is contained in some person in a specific kind of way would be in his view a kind of idolatry. You can hear people saying this and yet they do not think that they are idolaters. I sometimes do not know whether I should speak up or not. While it is true that God made space and time so in one sense there is no place empty of God. But that is simply because space does not apply to him at all. His is מקומו של עולם the place of the world.
He was pretty clear that learning these things is a fulfillment of the commandments to Love and fear God because they bring to an appreciation of God's wisdom that he put into his creation.
One of the lessons however he would have seen in Hanuka was not to do idolatry. That was after all the cause of the original rebellion of the Maccabees. And saying that God is contained in some person in a specific kind of way would be in his view a kind of idolatry. You can hear people saying this and yet they do not think that they are idolaters. I sometimes do not know whether I should speak up or not. While it is true that God made space and time so in one sense there is no place empty of God. But that is simply because space does not apply to him at all. His is מקומו של עולם the place of the world.
misgendered Here is a letter form that mentally ill people can use to hurt other people that treat them as if they are in fact mentally ill.
One thing this shows is that the Oral Law is necessary to understand the Written Law.
While it is admirable that in Western society, great value is placed on compassion for the mentally ill. But this can get out of proportion when power is given to the mentally ill to hurt normal, healthy people.
Appendix: The idea here is that the Oral Law does a good job in explaining the basic meaning of many of the commandments in the Bible. Without the Oral Law it is very easy to get confused about the simple explanation. One can make it all into an allegory if he wants to.
I know that even with the Oral Law, people do this anyway. But with some knowledge of the actual explanations of the Laws of the Torah it is harder to allegorize the commandments into touchy-feely "Be a nice guy" kind of thing.
The best advice that I can think of for this kind of problem is to learn Torah. That is every day to set aside a set time for fast learning [to get through every single last word of the Old Testament, the two Talmuds. That is the way we, the Jewish people, were taught to keep the Law by Moses and the Prophets. That is to say when we were told by the prophets to keep "the Law of Moses" they meant this in a very specific kind of way. That is, when the prophets told us to" keep the Sabbath" they meant a very specific day of the week. They did not leave it up to our discretion. The same goes with all the commandments. Another example is to "honor your parents." The prophets in telling us this, did not mean for us to choose who we want to be our "spiritual parents." They meant our physical flesh and blood parents.
One thing this shows is that the Oral Law is necessary to understand the Written Law.
While it is admirable that in Western society, great value is placed on compassion for the mentally ill. But this can get out of proportion when power is given to the mentally ill to hurt normal, healthy people.
Appendix: The idea here is that the Oral Law does a good job in explaining the basic meaning of many of the commandments in the Bible. Without the Oral Law it is very easy to get confused about the simple explanation. One can make it all into an allegory if he wants to.
I know that even with the Oral Law, people do this anyway. But with some knowledge of the actual explanations of the Laws of the Torah it is harder to allegorize the commandments into touchy-feely "Be a nice guy" kind of thing.
The best advice that I can think of for this kind of problem is to learn Torah. That is every day to set aside a set time for fast learning [to get through every single last word of the Old Testament, the two Talmuds. That is the way we, the Jewish people, were taught to keep the Law by Moses and the Prophets. That is to say when we were told by the prophets to keep "the Law of Moses" they meant this in a very specific kind of way. That is, when the prophets told us to" keep the Sabbath" they meant a very specific day of the week. They did not leave it up to our discretion. The same goes with all the commandments. Another example is to "honor your parents." The prophets in telling us this, did not mean for us to choose who we want to be our "spiritual parents." They meant our physical flesh and blood parents.
7.12.15
Moses [Moshe] received the Torah from Sinai
Moses [Moshe] received the Torah from Sinai and gave it to Joshua. That is how Pirkei Avot begins.
The Gra explains "he gave it to Joshua" comes from the verse ונתת מהודך עליו and you will place from your glory upon him. This is because it never says anywhere in the Torah that Moses gave the Torah to Joshua. [Rather it says he wrote the Torah and gave it to the priests.] Rather the Mishna has to be referring to the אור אין סוף the Divine light.
The idea here is this. The way I explained this a few years ago was in reference to the First Temple.
In the period of the First Temple, the Divine light was shinning without differentiation. When the Temple was destroyed most of it went to Athens and only מלכות שבמלכות royalty of royalty remained in Israel. This is how I used to explain this idea of how the light can shine on a person or a people but it not becoming differentiated until later.
This is also how to understand how the Torah was given to Moshe. It means the undifferentiated light.
The idea here is this. The way I explained this a few years ago was in reference to the First Temple.
In the period of the First Temple, the Divine light was shinning without differentiation. When the Temple was destroyed most of it went to Athens and only מלכות שבמלכות royalty of royalty remained in Israel. This is how I used to explain this idea of how the light can shine on a person or a people but it not becoming differentiated until later.
This is also how to understand how the Torah was given to Moshe. It means the undifferentiated light.
Irrelevant variables. These are variables that when the size of the population is increased vanish in effect. Relevant variables are variables that increase in importance when the sample size is increased. I have tried to isolate variables that I think help me over long periods of time. Part of the way I do this is to look at large populations that follow some particular doctrine and see the long range effect of those doctrines. {This is a subject that comes up in Atomic Physics regarding the renormalization group.}
Though you could say this is a subjective process but still it makes sense to me.
Learning Torah [i.e. the Old Testament and Talmud.] I think are relevant variables based on effect on large population sizes.
Some other variables seem to approach zero in significance as the population size grows. That is most cults say if you just do such and such a practice or believe in such and such a doctrine or such and such a person that your whole life will change for the better. Without this process of evaluation it would be impossible to measure the success of these claims.
I should mention that this is not a simple process. There are aspects of Lithuanian yeshivas that do learn Torah that are questionable. Problems do arise that seems to be relevant to the actual system more than to the individuals involved. You do find that when the system does not work for one person or another that the individual is blamed, not the system. And to me that seems intellectually dishonest. I say rather the fault is with the system, not the individual because there are too many people that are disenfranchised by the system for it to be their fault.
That is the reason I focus of Torah with a honest vocation instead of Torah alone. That is I think the system needs modification.
There are variables that are relevant on the individual level and approach irrelevance on the large scale. A person's parents are like that. As a rule they are worthy of gratitude and respect but there are some that are downright destructive.
Some variables work in moderate sizes. Talmud seems to work best in small populations--yeshivas or communities built around a yeshiva. And that is a good thing. Take away the Talmud and the social glue disintegrates. People without Talmud find some charismatic leader to follow who makes them into his groupies and zombies.
But you can't expect a large society to be like that. First of all one of the most precious values is missing--freedom.
And some variables work only on a large scale. On a small scale they vanish into insignificance. It is rather a whole large society built on some great ideals can display amazing compassion which each member would not do.
Though you could say this is a subjective process but still it makes sense to me.
Learning Torah [i.e. the Old Testament and Talmud.] I think are relevant variables based on effect on large population sizes.
Some other variables seem to approach zero in significance as the population size grows. That is most cults say if you just do such and such a practice or believe in such and such a doctrine or such and such a person that your whole life will change for the better. Without this process of evaluation it would be impossible to measure the success of these claims.
I should mention that this is not a simple process. There are aspects of Lithuanian yeshivas that do learn Torah that are questionable. Problems do arise that seems to be relevant to the actual system more than to the individuals involved. You do find that when the system does not work for one person or another that the individual is blamed, not the system. And to me that seems intellectually dishonest. I say rather the fault is with the system, not the individual because there are too many people that are disenfranchised by the system for it to be their fault.
That is the reason I focus of Torah with a honest vocation instead of Torah alone. That is I think the system needs modification.
There are variables that are relevant on the individual level and approach irrelevance on the large scale. A person's parents are like that. As a rule they are worthy of gratitude and respect but there are some that are downright destructive.
Some variables work in moderate sizes. Talmud seems to work best in small populations--yeshivas or communities built around a yeshiva. And that is a good thing. Take away the Talmud and the social glue disintegrates. People without Talmud find some charismatic leader to follow who makes them into his groupies and zombies.
But you can't expect a large society to be like that. First of all one of the most precious values is missing--freedom.
And some variables work only on a large scale. On a small scale they vanish into insignificance. It is rather a whole large society built on some great ideals can display amazing compassion which each member would not do.
Ideas in Talmud Updated Ideas in Bava Metzia Chapters 8 and 9 Updated Title page for Ideas in Bava Metzia
Title page for Ideas in Talmud
I added a few ideas in the Ideas on Talmud and made some minor corrections in spelling in Ideas in Bava Metzia.
I added an old idea in Sukka and also added a comment to make one of the essays in Bava Metzia a little more clear.
I added the comment that a שוכר כשמומר שכר so that in the Mishna on page 97 the renter and owner agree that it was a big אונס --otherwise the renter would have to take an oath. Actually I did not put all that into my note but it might be that I should
The truth is if I could I would put an introduction to the essays to lay out the whole subject before I start my comments--but that would be the same thing as just opening up the Gemara and learning it from scratch for anyone and everyone can do that just as well as I can and even better. In my experience, most people can learn Gemara a lot faster and better than me. It usually takes me a few weeks until even the basic ideas get absorbed into me.
There is a lot to think about in terms of the relationships between what I wrote on BM page 104 and BM pages 81 and 82. I wrote a drop, but there are questions. For example. The way Tosphot looks at Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer on page 81 it seems like Tosphot is thinking that the משכון guarantee is owned completely--not just as a משכון. The reason seems to be that we have קנין for regular acquisitions and קנין for guards. Maybe there is no separate category for acquisition of משכונות?
I later looked at Tosphot on page 82 {BM} and I saw I had to revise my note. Tosphot holds a guarantee is not completely owned. Does that change anything on page 104? I don't know.
Title page for Ideas in Talmud
I added a few ideas in the Ideas on Talmud and made some minor corrections in spelling in Ideas in Bava Metzia.
I added an old idea in Sukka and also added a comment to make one of the essays in Bava Metzia a little more clear.
I added the comment that a שוכר כשמומר שכר so that in the Mishna on page 97 the renter and owner agree that it was a big אונס --otherwise the renter would have to take an oath. Actually I did not put all that into my note but it might be that I should
The truth is if I could I would put an introduction to the essays to lay out the whole subject before I start my comments--but that would be the same thing as just opening up the Gemara and learning it from scratch for anyone and everyone can do that just as well as I can and even better. In my experience, most people can learn Gemara a lot faster and better than me. It usually takes me a few weeks until even the basic ideas get absorbed into me.
There is a lot to think about in terms of the relationships between what I wrote on BM page 104 and BM pages 81 and 82. I wrote a drop, but there are questions. For example. The way Tosphot looks at Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer on page 81 it seems like Tosphot is thinking that the משכון guarantee is owned completely--not just as a משכון. The reason seems to be that we have קנין for regular acquisitions and קנין for guards. Maybe there is no separate category for acquisition of משכונות?
I later looked at Tosphot on page 82 {BM} and I saw I had to revise my note. Tosphot holds a guarantee is not completely owned. Does that change anything on page 104? I don't know.
6.12.15
The most severe mistakes is walking away from the yeshiva world.
See the story about Adam and Eve. There after they ate and were kicked out of the Garden of Eden there were set there fiery angles with swords to guard the pass so that Adam and Eve would not be able to get to the Tree of Life.
But one of the most severe mistakes is walking away from the yeshiva world. That is what you would call the Lithuanian kind of yeshiva world. That is not to say all these yeshivas are perfect. But more or less when one is a part of them I was walking in the way of the Torah in the most simple basic way that was understood by the rishonim. Walking away from that even to join what one thinks were better groups is the result of the power given to the devil to make things glittery and seem full of light when they are in fact full of darkness.
But the Devil never tries the tactic of telling people "Come and let's do a sin." It is always "Let's do a mitzvah." The Devil tries to get one to walk away from Torah by telling him that some other alternative group is keeping Torah so much better. They have so much more life and and so much more strict etc. And they are doing it so much more faithfully. In spite of this knowledge, after one leaves he can't get back to the straight and simple path of learning and keeping Torah.
But one of the most severe mistakes is walking away from the yeshiva world. That is what you would call the Lithuanian kind of yeshiva world. That is not to say all these yeshivas are perfect. But more or less when one is a part of them I was walking in the way of the Torah in the most simple basic way that was understood by the rishonim. Walking away from that even to join what one thinks were better groups is the result of the power given to the devil to make things glittery and seem full of light when they are in fact full of darkness.
But the Devil never tries the tactic of telling people "Come and let's do a sin." It is always "Let's do a mitzvah." The Devil tries to get one to walk away from Torah by telling him that some other alternative group is keeping Torah so much better. They have so much more life and and so much more strict etc. And they are doing it so much more faithfully. In spite of this knowledge, after one leaves he can't get back to the straight and simple path of learning and keeping Torah.
5.12.15
I wrote once a whole book of memoirs. It has thankfully been lost with time. Still my memories contain a good deal of facts that relate to modern issues. For example my experiences with Shelomo Freifeld. It would take a whole new book to go into that. But mainly my point would be this. There are no simple answers. They write books today about him. And they say he was a tzadik. And that might very well be true. But he was more of a rosh yeshiva than a tzadik. And there is avast difference. But I do remember that in his yeshiva there was an amazing spirit of Torah that swept me off my feet. I was so involved in Torah that every second away was like torture.
And that was when I met his son in law Naphtali Yeager. Naphtali had a deep way of learning that I have never seen afterwards. Later I went to the Mir in NY and I was not disappointed. But there was something missing in the Mir that I had felt in Reb Freideld's yeshiva.
But that is all I can really say about this because it all just raises questions in my mind about what was really going on. These are questions I have had ever after and never found any kind of satisfactory answer.
I should mention that Reb Freifeld did not think much of me. Nor did any of my teachers--ever. And their critiques of me were always justified. This is a subject not for now, but I am no tzadik--never was and never will be. But I do love the Torah. And I still think that learning and keeping Torah is the greatest thing on earth. --Even if I can't do it myself.
Some facts about Shar Yashuv, the yeshiva of Rav Freifeld. It was geared to bring people up to speed in learning the Talmud. And it was mainly about "עיון" learning in depth. The idea of בקיאות learning fast was frowned upon. Nor was there any Musar סדר period of time devoted to Musar. השקפה the world view that was advocated was derived from Rav Isaac Hutner.
There was a a Breslov fellow that used to come into the place. David Dun.This person I could never figure out. He would invite me over for Shabat (Friday night) and when I would come to his home after the regular prayers on Friday night no one would be home. There was one bachur there who was connected with Breslov (i.e. Rav Shick). It was from him I got the book of prayers of Reb Natan. But Rav Freifeld did not allow any evangelizing of Breslov in his yeshiva.
And that was when I met his son in law Naphtali Yeager. Naphtali had a deep way of learning that I have never seen afterwards. Later I went to the Mir in NY and I was not disappointed. But there was something missing in the Mir that I had felt in Reb Freideld's yeshiva.
But that is all I can really say about this because it all just raises questions in my mind about what was really going on. These are questions I have had ever after and never found any kind of satisfactory answer.
I should mention that Reb Freifeld did not think much of me. Nor did any of my teachers--ever. And their critiques of me were always justified. This is a subject not for now, but I am no tzadik--never was and never will be. But I do love the Torah. And I still think that learning and keeping Torah is the greatest thing on earth. --Even if I can't do it myself.
Some facts about Shar Yashuv, the yeshiva of Rav Freifeld. It was geared to bring people up to speed in learning the Talmud. And it was mainly about "עיון" learning in depth. The idea of בקיאות learning fast was frowned upon. Nor was there any Musar סדר period of time devoted to Musar. השקפה the world view that was advocated was derived from Rav Isaac Hutner.
There was a a Breslov fellow that used to come into the place. David Dun.This person I could never figure out. He would invite me over for Shabat (Friday night) and when I would come to his home after the regular prayers on Friday night no one would be home. There was one bachur there who was connected with Breslov (i.e. Rav Shick). It was from him I got the book of prayers of Reb Natan. But Rav Freifeld did not allow any evangelizing of Breslov in his yeshiva.
When you need a miracle you should go to the source of miracles directly -to God.
I wanted to say that just before I saw part of it I had been thinking of the problem of simony. That is money for miracles. This is the Jewish world is called a "pideon", that is money you give to a tzadik in hope for a miracle.
When you need a miracle you should go to the source of miracles directly -to God. But the idea of Talking with God in ones's own words is much more important than saying psalms or written prayers.
He said it is impossible to be a kosher person without this kind of approach--that is talking with God in a private place every day. One should go to a forest or someplace in the wilderness and spend the whole day just talking with God in ones own words.given a limited amount of time to talk with God, it is best to go to place where you can be alone and talk with God from your own heart in your own words rather than go to any kind of religious setting.
4.12.15
For the glory of God here is a waltz
q74 [q74 in midi] I am not sure if a waltz has certain rules or not. I can see a minuet does. So this can't be a minuet.
q71 [q71 in midi] q72 6-8 time [q72 in midi] q75 [q75 in midi] n56 [n56 in midi] q73
q71 [q71 in midi] q72 6-8 time [q72 in midi] q75 [q75 in midi] n56 [n56 in midi] q73
I feel like Kant in a specific way. Just like Kant found himself between two schools of thought and found something right in each one--and also something wrong. So also I feel I am in a similar kind of situation. I was in two great yeshivas in NY and saw a lot of what is right about learning the Oral and Written Law. But I also saw what is wrong. But I also grew up in an amazing home environment with my parents and brothers. My parents were the most amazing, wholesome, compassionate, responsible, loving, and sincere people I have ever met. Yet there was something missing-- learning Torah. So what I feel I need to do is to find some middle ground. Torah with work and the natural sciences is my formula.
The Mishna says, "All Torah that does not have work with it is worthless." {Pirkei Avot chapter 2} You can say we "don't poskin [decide the law] that way" because it is a debate between Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai and Rabbi Ishmael. However we do poskin [decide the law] that way. It is an open Halacha in the Rambam.
People ought to learn Torah in the straight Lithuanian yeshiva path. Cancel all classes in pseudo Torah. [And most classes in "Torah" are pseudo Torah. One needs to be extra careful about from whom he or she learns Torah. Sadly most people that present themselves-as teaching Torah are teaching Torah from the Sitra Achra. It is hard to find legitimate Torah nowadays. What might be the best thing is to stay home and get a regular Talmud and go through it yourself--every last word of Gemara. Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam from Lublin. When you learn the actual Oral Torah yourself at least you know you are getting the real thing.]
But they also should work and not be using Torah as a way to get charity money.
The Mishna says, "All Torah that does not have work with it is worthless." {Pirkei Avot chapter 2} You can say we "don't poskin [decide the law] that way" because it is a debate between Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai and Rabbi Ishmael. However we do poskin [decide the law] that way. It is an open Halacha in the Rambam.
People ought to learn Torah in the straight Lithuanian yeshiva path. Cancel all classes in pseudo Torah. [And most classes in "Torah" are pseudo Torah. One needs to be extra careful about from whom he or she learns Torah. Sadly most people that present themselves-as teaching Torah are teaching Torah from the Sitra Achra. It is hard to find legitimate Torah nowadays. What might be the best thing is to stay home and get a regular Talmud and go through it yourself--every last word of Gemara. Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam from Lublin. When you learn the actual Oral Torah yourself at least you know you are getting the real thing.]
But they also should work and not be using Torah as a way to get charity money.
3.12.15
Newton was a straight monotheist
My learning partner noticed that Newton was a straight monotheist. That is he believed in God but not the Trinity. I mentioned that there is a simple proof against the Trinity. It is this: Christianity is committed to two contradictory theses. One is that a=g (God), b=g, and c =g. But a is not equal to b is not equal to c. That is the Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Ghost is God. But the Father is not equal to the Son. The Son is not equal to the Holy Ghost.
But to knock Christianity over this issue does not seem to me to be a good idea. The reason is that I think that Christianity misinterpreted what Jesus was saying. At the time there was no example of a Jewish Tzadik for Christians to understand what he was doing and what he was about.
The idea of "My father and I are one" is a simple expression of דביקות-Devekut -attachment with God. When one feels the light of God on him, and flowing through him, he can say he is "One with God." That does not mean the Trinity. But at the time how could anyone have understood this? The only similar types were prophets, but that was clearly not what was going on.
If not for this mistake, Jesus would simply have become another tzadik in the spectrum of Jewish Tzadikim.
That is not the same as a saint. A tzadik brings something special in the world. And people that follow that tzadik can gain. But they can wreak up the whole thing also.
In any case, the whole thing seems like a distraction from sitting and learning Torah. But this seems like an important enough subject for me to at least state my opinion about it. I have often found that when I need help in some way it is generally Christians that will help. The idea behind this I think is that every tzadik brings something special into the world. Thus the idea of compassion got into people that go along with that belief system. The problems however is the idea that the commandments were nullified. Also there is the problem with worship of a person.
But to knock Christianity over this issue does not seem to me to be a good idea. The reason is that I think that Christianity misinterpreted what Jesus was saying. At the time there was no example of a Jewish Tzadik for Christians to understand what he was doing and what he was about.
The idea of "My father and I are one" is a simple expression of דביקות-Devekut -attachment with God. When one feels the light of God on him, and flowing through him, he can say he is "One with God." That does not mean the Trinity. But at the time how could anyone have understood this? The only similar types were prophets, but that was clearly not what was going on.
If not for this mistake, Jesus would simply have become another tzadik in the spectrum of Jewish Tzadikim.
That is not the same as a saint. A tzadik brings something special in the world. And people that follow that tzadik can gain. But they can wreak up the whole thing also.
In any case, the whole thing seems like a distraction from sitting and learning Torah. But this seems like an important enough subject for me to at least state my opinion about it. I have often found that when I need help in some way it is generally Christians that will help. The idea behind this I think is that every tzadik brings something special into the world. Thus the idea of compassion got into people that go along with that belief system. The problems however is the idea that the commandments were nullified. Also there is the problem with worship of a person.
A nice thing about the Lithuanian yeshiva approach it that it tends to combine numinous holy and powerful experiences of learning and keeping Torah with great intensity along with a remarkable lack of religious delusions. In fact, anything that even seems like grandiosity is rigorously exuded.
To some degree this maybe over done. They tend to err on the side of caution. But judging by how many delusional religious fanatics there are than wander into Litvak yeshivas it seems that they are justified.
This leaves us with the question how to discern between delusion and authentic religious experience?
Probably there is no way.
To some degree this maybe over done. They tend to err on the side of caution. But judging by how many delusional religious fanatics there are than wander into Litvak yeshivas it seems that they are justified.
This leaves us with the question how to discern between delusion and authentic religious experience?
Probably there is no way.
It is impossible to come to authentic Torah without a connection with the Gra. Each tzadik has his special area.
I don't think any saint/tzadik comes into the world for the same reason as another. We try to define these people in certain ways and fit them into some pre-defined category.
But they cant be defined because each one receives a different ray of light from the Divine source.
What makes this confusing is the are the charlatans that .act the act and other types that get their powers from the dark side.
But in any case the concept of a tzadik is a great conceptual tool--especially because there were in the past some people that fit the bill.
There were prophets that received one kind of ray of divine light. sometimes prophecy. sometimes miracles.there were people like the Ari that had a different kind of divine light. The Gra had his kind of special connection with Torah. It is impossible to come to authentic Torah without a connection with the Gra. Each tzadik has his special area.
But they cant be defined because each one receives a different ray of light from the Divine source.
What makes this confusing is the are the charlatans that .act the act and other types that get their powers from the dark side.
But in any case the concept of a tzadik is a great conceptual tool--especially because there were in the past some people that fit the bill.
There were prophets that received one kind of ray of divine light. sometimes prophecy. sometimes miracles.there were people like the Ari that had a different kind of divine light. The Gra had his kind of special connection with Torah. It is impossible to come to authentic Torah without a connection with the Gra. Each tzadik has his special area.
2.12.15
I am looking for an argument that can justify learning Torah for its own sake. (When I say Torah I mean authentic Torah. Not what is always presented nowadays as Torah. By "real Torah" I mean the Old Testament and the פירוש המקובל--the traditional books that actually explained the written law according to the way the had been understood--that is the two Talmuds). You can bet that nowadays when ever you hear about someone giving a class in Torah that it is never about authentic Torah. It is always pseudo Torah.
In any case I am still looking for an argument to present here to justify learning Torah for its own sake.--That is to learn Torah without being paid for it. As we find by a guard of a lost object that when he receives a monetary reward for it it is not a mitzvah. That is I am not trying to justify kollels. But I am also not trying to attack kollels.
Consequential-ism claims an act is justified if its consequences are good. But that is not what I am looking for here. I want to claim learning Torah is good- regardless of consequences. This can be hard to say. Do I think even if it has bad consequences that it is still overriding? That seems a bit too far to go. Still what you see in the Gra and his disciple Reb Chaim from Voloshin is that Torah for its own sake is the highest of all mitzvot.
What I am suggesting is that learning Torah for its own sake is, in fact, the highest mitzvah, but that making yeshivas might not be. For all we know someone might be learning Torah for money or some other reason. And that makes it not Torah for its own sake. But if you are learning Torah at home and not for money, then you know why you are doing it.
What is also possible to to take the local place where people congregate, and to make it a place of Torah. That means to set it aside for authentic Torah.
The religious world believes in in its superiority because stringent adherence to rituals but in the meantime forgetting what Torah is actually about.
In any case I am still looking for an argument to present here to justify learning Torah for its own sake.--That is to learn Torah without being paid for it. As we find by a guard of a lost object that when he receives a monetary reward for it it is not a mitzvah. That is I am not trying to justify kollels. But I am also not trying to attack kollels.
Consequential-ism claims an act is justified if its consequences are good. But that is not what I am looking for here. I want to claim learning Torah is good- regardless of consequences. This can be hard to say. Do I think even if it has bad consequences that it is still overriding? That seems a bit too far to go. Still what you see in the Gra and his disciple Reb Chaim from Voloshin is that Torah for its own sake is the highest of all mitzvot.
What I am suggesting is that learning Torah for its own sake is, in fact, the highest mitzvah, but that making yeshivas might not be. For all we know someone might be learning Torah for money or some other reason. And that makes it not Torah for its own sake. But if you are learning Torah at home and not for money, then you know why you are doing it.
What is also possible to to take the local place where people congregate, and to make it a place of Torah. That means to set it aside for authentic Torah.
The religious world believes in in its superiority because stringent adherence to rituals but in the meantime forgetting what Torah is actually about.
Cults are a direct result of the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment point of view was that the scientific method could be applied to human problems to obtain solutions as rigorous and exact as mathematics. This idea lead to the development of pseudo sciences like psychology.
When people start to ask questions about the meaning of life it is almost inevitable for them to to be approached by cults.
Cults are relatively easy to spot. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck then it probably is a duck. One of the most telling ways is the emphasis on the appearance of being a part of a legitimate religion and the rituals.
When people start to ask questions about the meaning of life it is almost inevitable for them to to be approached by cults.
Cults are relatively easy to spot. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck then it probably is a duck. One of the most telling ways is the emphasis on the appearance of being a part of a legitimate religion and the rituals.
1.12.15
False Leaders מנהיגים של שקר
leaders that lead people astray are very common. they have spiritual power to hurt people that do not want to be their followers.
You can see this idea illustrated most clearly in the events surrounding Adi Da [a guru]. He was one of the best examples. He had great spiritual powers and was also a jerk and quite evil. One of his closest disciples broke away and exposed the events that were going on there. That disciple was killed in a plane crash a short time after that.
How do people get involved in cults? There are consciousness traps. There is some idea that get inside one's head and acts like a seed. It grows and absorbs collects all the surrounding material and it grows.
I don't have a general answer for this cult problem. And I also do not even know the general conditions for an answer. However I might as well explain my own approach that is my own answer to the cult problem. My approach is that which you can find in authentic Lithuanian yeshivas. That is Talmud with traditional books of Musar. This path is connected to the path of the Gra. It is holistic. It encompasses everything about a human being.
This is not a blank check for Litvak yeshivas . It is just my own approach and also I suggest this to others. But I mean this suggestion in a tentative way. I know that in complex human relationships and change of variables is bound to have unforeseen consequences.
I think today learning Jewish Philosophy is very important. [That mean medieval Jewish philosophy, Saadia Gaon, Maimonides, etc. However the actual book of the Rambam in philosophy I found too hard. But David Hartman wrote a great introductory text.]
I should mention that Lithuanian yeshivas were tailor made to be safe havens from cults. That explains the reason they are so ready to throw out anyone that does not fit into the mold. They are not just into learning and teaching authentic Torah. They rigorously exclude pseudo Torah. And the more successful they are in excluding pseudo false Torah to that same degree they succeed in learning and keeping authentic Torah, This is the reason why Ponovitch is the top yeshiva in the world, Rav Shach would not stand any nonsense.
The trouble with Litvak yeshivas is the aspect of depth. To stick with Torah one needs some kind of justification that goes beyond Jewish philosophy. That is one needs more that intellectual justification. It has to be holistic. The trouble with philosophy especially after the Middle Ages is that it is all about "I" (the self). It's entire domain is the region between the empirical I and the abstract metaphysical "I". And God is a reasonable postulate. God is the beginning and end, the first cause and the final teleological cause. And the existence of the "I" is a reasonable postulate.
You can see this idea illustrated most clearly in the events surrounding Adi Da [a guru]. He was one of the best examples. He had great spiritual powers and was also a jerk and quite evil. One of his closest disciples broke away and exposed the events that were going on there. That disciple was killed in a plane crash a short time after that.
How do people get involved in cults? There are consciousness traps. There is some idea that get inside one's head and acts like a seed. It grows and absorbs collects all the surrounding material and it grows.
I don't have a general answer for this cult problem. And I also do not even know the general conditions for an answer. However I might as well explain my own approach that is my own answer to the cult problem. My approach is that which you can find in authentic Lithuanian yeshivas. That is Talmud with traditional books of Musar. This path is connected to the path of the Gra. It is holistic. It encompasses everything about a human being.
This is not a blank check for Litvak yeshivas . It is just my own approach and also I suggest this to others. But I mean this suggestion in a tentative way. I know that in complex human relationships and change of variables is bound to have unforeseen consequences.
I think today learning Jewish Philosophy is very important. [That mean medieval Jewish philosophy, Saadia Gaon, Maimonides, etc. However the actual book of the Rambam in philosophy I found too hard. But David Hartman wrote a great introductory text.]
I should mention that Lithuanian yeshivas were tailor made to be safe havens from cults. That explains the reason they are so ready to throw out anyone that does not fit into the mold. They are not just into learning and teaching authentic Torah. They rigorously exclude pseudo Torah. And the more successful they are in excluding pseudo false Torah to that same degree they succeed in learning and keeping authentic Torah, This is the reason why Ponovitch is the top yeshiva in the world, Rav Shach would not stand any nonsense.
The trouble with Litvak yeshivas is the aspect of depth. To stick with Torah one needs some kind of justification that goes beyond Jewish philosophy. That is one needs more that intellectual justification. It has to be holistic. The trouble with philosophy especially after the Middle Ages is that it is all about "I" (the self). It's entire domain is the region between the empirical I and the abstract metaphysical "I". And God is a reasonable postulate. God is the beginning and end, the first cause and the final teleological cause. And the existence of the "I" is a reasonable postulate.
30.11.15
I wanted to re-post this about my Dad. I wanted to put in on my site here on his yarzeit but better late than never.
I know I should have posted something about my fathers military record on June 6, D-day. I am sorry I did not so at least for today I am putting it here. The reason I have not mentioned it much is that it always seemed to me that what he accomplished after World War II eclipsed what he did during WWII.
He enlisted on October 12, 1942 when he was 24 years old. He attended the Yale Airplane Maintenance Engineering Class 44-33. According to his enlistment record, he was qualified in arms—carbine and was an expert with a pistol and a sharpshooter. He was an aviation cadet for maintenance engineering. He was discharged so that he could receive a commission as a second lieutenant. This record indicates that he was called to active duty on November 4, 1943.
He entered active duty on July 20, 1944, and was an aircraft engineering officer 4823. His medals were the American Campaign Medal, Army of Occupation Medal and World War II Victory Medal. He served 1 ½ years in the US and almost 8 months in Europe. He left active duty on September 29, 1946. His serial number was 0 872 281. He was promoted to captain just before he left the US Army, and served in the US Army, Headquarters and Base Service Squadron 413th Air Service Group 40th Bomb Wing United States Air Forces European Theater. In the US, he served at Great Bend , Kansas and was in charge of maintaining 6 B-29 aircraft for the unit. He supervised the work of 75 enlisted men. In Europe, he was a civilian personnel officer. He served 8 months in the European Theater of Operations (France, Germany and Switzerland ) with the 413th Air Service Group and was in charge of 1500 German civilians, supervising 1 officer and 20 civilians. He spoke German fluently at the time.
[He was responsible to decide whether to hold a German for war crimes or not. So besides the specific Germans that he was in charge of, he had to sign the release forms of thousands of Germans. That he why he decided eventually to shorten his name from Rosenbloom to Rosten. I think this was someone's idea of a great joke--to have a Jew sign the release papers of Germans.
He had a base in France in which damaged aircraft could come in and be repaired within minutes. He trained different personal to how to check and fix only one small part of the plane. So when a plane came in with damage his whole crew swarmed over the ship and fixed it up in minutes and sent it on its way. This was the reason for one of his medals.
The most interesting time of Dad’s professional career was when he returned and was at Fort Monmouth and then his very secret work at Hycon, Ford Areospace and created the camera of the U-2, and on the highly secretive SDI Star Wars project.
Much of this information I found out after he was gone. As a father I knew him as a very simple person that loved me, my brothers and my Mother very deeply.
He never talked about his work of his WWII experiences. The peak of living for him was taking us all to the beach on Sunday, and going into the mountains of Southern California skiing once or twice a year. We could not go to the beach on Shabat because I had to spend my time learning Hebrew and Torah.
After seven years working on SDI [star wars] he left TRW and began private business and also he invested in the Stock Market.
This was the general path in those days of Torah with "Derech Eretz", (the path of the world). Torah and work as two sides of the same coin--but not any work but some work for the benefit of others. I can't explain this but my brother used the word that I think describes it best "Balance."
A word that describes it is Yiddish is to be a "mensch"
He invented a machine called the "copy-mate" which was an extra sharp kind of zerox machine based on focusing of x rays. And he marketed it for about five years until the American military swooped down and recruited him for SDI. So from what I can tell it seems his major contributions to the American Military were night vision and focusing of infra red -- and laser communication between satellites. He might get honorable mention for the U-2 camera but there apparently were two teams for that and I am not sure whose actual camera was used in the end.
He enlisted on October 12, 1942 when he was 24 years old. He attended the Yale Airplane Maintenance Engineering Class 44-33. According to his enlistment record, he was qualified in arms—carbine and was an expert with a pistol and a sharpshooter. He was an aviation cadet for maintenance engineering. He was discharged so that he could receive a commission as a second lieutenant. This record indicates that he was called to active duty on November 4, 1943.
He entered active duty on July 20, 1944, and was an aircraft engineering officer 4823. His medals were the American Campaign Medal, Army of Occupation Medal and World War II Victory Medal. He served 1 ½ years in the US and almost 8 months in Europe. He left active duty on September 29, 1946. His serial number was 0 872 281. He was promoted to captain just before he left the US Army, and served in the US Army, Headquarters and Base Service Squadron 413th Air Service Group 40th Bomb Wing United States Air Forces European Theater. In the US, he served at Great Bend , Kansas and was in charge of maintaining 6 B-29 aircraft for the unit. He supervised the work of 75 enlisted men. In Europe, he was a civilian personnel officer. He served 8 months in the European Theater of Operations (France, Germany and Switzerland ) with the 413th Air Service Group and was in charge of 1500 German civilians, supervising 1 officer and 20 civilians. He spoke German fluently at the time.
[He was responsible to decide whether to hold a German for war crimes or not. So besides the specific Germans that he was in charge of, he had to sign the release forms of thousands of Germans. That he why he decided eventually to shorten his name from Rosenbloom to Rosten. I think this was someone's idea of a great joke--to have a Jew sign the release papers of Germans.
He had a base in France in which damaged aircraft could come in and be repaired within minutes. He trained different personal to how to check and fix only one small part of the plane. So when a plane came in with damage his whole crew swarmed over the ship and fixed it up in minutes and sent it on its way. This was the reason for one of his medals.
The most interesting time of Dad’s professional career was when he returned and was at Fort Monmouth and then his very secret work at Hycon, Ford Areospace and created the camera of the U-2, and on the highly secretive SDI Star Wars project.
Much of this information I found out after he was gone. As a father I knew him as a very simple person that loved me, my brothers and my Mother very deeply.
He never talked about his work of his WWII experiences. The peak of living for him was taking us all to the beach on Sunday, and going into the mountains of Southern California skiing once or twice a year. We could not go to the beach on Shabat because I had to spend my time learning Hebrew and Torah.
After seven years working on SDI [star wars] he left TRW and began private business and also he invested in the Stock Market.
This was the general path in those days of Torah with "Derech Eretz", (the path of the world). Torah and work as two sides of the same coin--but not any work but some work for the benefit of others. I can't explain this but my brother used the word that I think describes it best "Balance."
A word that describes it is Yiddish is to be a "mensch"
He invented a machine called the "copy-mate" which was an extra sharp kind of zerox machine based on focusing of x rays. And he marketed it for about five years until the American military swooped down and recruited him for SDI. So from what I can tell it seems his major contributions to the American Military were night vision and focusing of infra red -- and laser communication between satellites. He might get honorable mention for the U-2 camera but there apparently were two teams for that and I am not sure whose actual camera was used in the end.
Israel Salanter
The main idea of Israel Salanter was to start a movement in which people would learn books of ethics (i.e specifically Medieval ethics). My complaint about this is that ethics without world view is nothing. The reason is I think what ever people do right or wrong stems from their world view. Therefore I suggest adding one ingredient to Rav Israel's program and is the books of medieval Jewish philosophy. That would be mainly Saadia Gaon's Emunot VeDeot, the Guide, Joseph Albo and Crescas's Or HaShem, Ibn Gavirol.
But this is just a suggestion. When it comes to complex situations the effect of some policy change will always be unforeseen. When policy changes are suggested it is rare to find people that hold the change to be provisional. But here I want to make it clear that this is just a suggestion. And that negative and positive effects will always result from any policy. My suggestion her is based on the idea that the benefits outweigh the risks.
Also my idea seems very obvious to me. I can't see how people can learn Talmud and Musar without having some kind of ideas about the basic justification for that system. Or how that system applies in practical daily life.
What I have seen is that people that teach Musar supply world views that come from the crowd rather than from the Torah.
Today I think these medieval books of Jewish philosophy are worth more than any books of mysticism or השקפה Haskafa.
But this is just a suggestion. When it comes to complex situations the effect of some policy change will always be unforeseen. When policy changes are suggested it is rare to find people that hold the change to be provisional. But here I want to make it clear that this is just a suggestion. And that negative and positive effects will always result from any policy. My suggestion her is based on the idea that the benefits outweigh the risks.
Also my idea seems very obvious to me. I can't see how people can learn Talmud and Musar without having some kind of ideas about the basic justification for that system. Or how that system applies in practical daily life.
What I have seen is that people that teach Musar supply world views that come from the crowd rather than from the Torah.
Today I think these medieval books of Jewish philosophy are worth more than any books of mysticism or השקפה Haskafa.
29.11.15
Trust in God
The Altar of Navardok (Joseph Horvitz of Navardok, a disciple of Israel Salanter) was into making yeshivas. This was a secondary theme in his life. The major theme was trust in God with no effort.
The kinds of yeshivas he made were what you would call Lithuanian that were loosely following the path of the Gra.
The yeshiva experience is holistic. It is not just learning Torah but it is living Torah.
And it tends to be an answer to the Enlightenment. On the Enlightenment there were two approaches: for and against. And in the USA the world view is universally that of pro. That is the idea that education is the redemption of mankind. Those that were against the Enlightenment thought education is not the redemption of mankind. They used reason to argue against reason.
But the type of education they were thinking of was divorced from Faith. And that was approach of the Enlightenment in the Jewish world also.
The Enlightenment was largely interested in secular education. {And it was not mostly political as Allen Bloom thought. But it had a political element.}
Georg Hamann within the group of German Idealism was the most powerful anti enlightenment thinker and brought out some great points.
But going back to the kind of thought we see in the Rambam and Saadia Gaon it is hard to see a conflict between Reason and revelation. Just the opposite--neither can exist without the other.
And this synthesis is what the Lithuanian yeshivas strove for. But not in an intellectual way but rather as living the Torah in a holistic way.
Given all this you would think I would recommend yeshivas. At least authentic ones. The trouble is cults. They masquerade as the real thing. They have found it profitable to present themselves as authentic.
I try to combine reason and faith. I try to learn a little Torah and a little natural sciences every day. And I also pray to God in my own words when I need something. And when I am walking on the street I also talk with God and explain my problems to him and ask for help.
But I am not holding myself as a good example for people. If I could I would be learning Torah in Ponovitch or Brisk. But because of bad decisions I am not in the yeshiva world. [However even if I was in the Yeshiva world I would still learn Natural sciences as per the Rambam.]
The kinds of yeshivas he made were what you would call Lithuanian that were loosely following the path of the Gra.
The yeshiva experience is holistic. It is not just learning Torah but it is living Torah.
And it tends to be an answer to the Enlightenment. On the Enlightenment there were two approaches: for and against. And in the USA the world view is universally that of pro. That is the idea that education is the redemption of mankind. Those that were against the Enlightenment thought education is not the redemption of mankind. They used reason to argue against reason.
But the type of education they were thinking of was divorced from Faith. And that was approach of the Enlightenment in the Jewish world also.
The Enlightenment was largely interested in secular education. {And it was not mostly political as Allen Bloom thought. But it had a political element.}
Georg Hamann within the group of German Idealism was the most powerful anti enlightenment thinker and brought out some great points.
But going back to the kind of thought we see in the Rambam and Saadia Gaon it is hard to see a conflict between Reason and revelation. Just the opposite--neither can exist without the other.
And this synthesis is what the Lithuanian yeshivas strove for. But not in an intellectual way but rather as living the Torah in a holistic way.
Given all this you would think I would recommend yeshivas. At least authentic ones. The trouble is cults. They masquerade as the real thing. They have found it profitable to present themselves as authentic.
I try to combine reason and faith. I try to learn a little Torah and a little natural sciences every day. And I also pray to God in my own words when I need something. And when I am walking on the street I also talk with God and explain my problems to him and ask for help.
But I am not holding myself as a good example for people. If I could I would be learning Torah in Ponovitch or Brisk. But because of bad decisions I am not in the yeshiva world. [However even if I was in the Yeshiva world I would still learn Natural sciences as per the Rambam.]
28.11.15
Trust in God and Navardok-real Torah
I think this is the Yarzeit of Joseph Yozel Horvitz--the Altar of Navardok.
He was a disciple of Israel Salanter. It might be worthwhile mentioning a few things about him. First of all I think the Stipler Rav was his son in law. [That is the author of the Kehilat Yaakov.]
The major point of Navardok was trust in God with doing nothing to get one's needs. You can see this in the book put together by one of his students the מדרגת האדם. I mean trust in God with no השתדלות
I know people are used to thinking of trust with effort. But the idea of Navardok was definitely opposed to this idea. The Altar of Navardok himself I think got this idea either directly from Israel Salanter or found it in an essay written by Israel Salanter where Israel Salanter attributes this idea to the Ramban.[No one knows where this Ramban is.]
But for sure there is at least one definite source for this idea--the Gra on proverbs 3:5.
What this meant for most people following this path was to learn Torah and not worry about "parnasah" [making a living]. But it does not have to mean that. It mainly means to be doing God's will as defined in the Torah and let God take care of the rest.
[I have to add that I think the main problem with the Musar movement is they did not add Jewish Philosophy along with it. That is Saadia Gaon, Rambam, Ibn Gavirol, Albo and Abarbenal. I don't think Musar works to improve character unless it comes with world view issues that are treated in these works of philosophy.
These great people represent real Torah. The sad truth is the Torah has no true representatives today. And the most dangerous and evil are those who claim to speak in the name of the Torah.
He was a disciple of Israel Salanter. It might be worthwhile mentioning a few things about him. First of all I think the Stipler Rav was his son in law. [That is the author of the Kehilat Yaakov.]
The major point of Navardok was trust in God with doing nothing to get one's needs. You can see this in the book put together by one of his students the מדרגת האדם. I mean trust in God with no השתדלות
I know people are used to thinking of trust with effort. But the idea of Navardok was definitely opposed to this idea. The Altar of Navardok himself I think got this idea either directly from Israel Salanter or found it in an essay written by Israel Salanter where Israel Salanter attributes this idea to the Ramban.[No one knows where this Ramban is.]
But for sure there is at least one definite source for this idea--the Gra on proverbs 3:5.
What this meant for most people following this path was to learn Torah and not worry about "parnasah" [making a living]. But it does not have to mean that. It mainly means to be doing God's will as defined in the Torah and let God take care of the rest.
[I have to add that I think the main problem with the Musar movement is they did not add Jewish Philosophy along with it. That is Saadia Gaon, Rambam, Ibn Gavirol, Albo and Abarbenal. I don't think Musar works to improve character unless it comes with world view issues that are treated in these works of philosophy.
These great people represent real Torah. The sad truth is the Torah has no true representatives today. And the most dangerous and evil are those who claim to speak in the name of the Torah.
the Dark Side can impart flavor to bad things
If something is interesting does that mean it is good? Kant is not that interesting. True. And that is a negative I admit. But I also know the Dark Side can impart flavor to bad things. Even more than they would have naturally.
What I suggest is that habit is the ruler. And that one has the knowledge and ability to direct his or hers own will towards things they know are good.
One can direct his will into learning
Math, Physics, learning Torah, etc.
But it helps if there is some kind of numinous [holy] taste in what one is doing. There is luminosity in everything. One can serve God through everything.
Appendix:
This is the quote from that site:
The sublime spiritual sterility of the texts of Kant’s philosophical maturity, for instance, could scarcely provide a more perspicuous glimpse into the personality of perhaps the single most boring man ever to darken a wigmaker’s doorway. The leaden, caliginous bombast of Hegel’s prose was a pure emanation of his grindingly pompous soul. The turgidity of Derrida’s attempts at playfulness were little more than clinical specimens of his insufferable self-infatuation. As a general rule, to put it simply, if one wanders into one’s library in search of mirth, good fellowship, or wit, one does well not to seek out the company of the philosophers.
What I suggest is that habit is the ruler. And that one has the knowledge and ability to direct his or hers own will towards things they know are good.
One can direct his will into learning
Math, Physics, learning Torah, etc.
But it helps if there is some kind of numinous [holy] taste in what one is doing. There is luminosity in everything. One can serve God through everything.
Appendix:
This is the quote from that site:
The sublime spiritual sterility of the texts of Kant’s philosophical maturity, for instance, could scarcely provide a more perspicuous glimpse into the personality of perhaps the single most boring man ever to darken a wigmaker’s doorway. The leaden, caliginous bombast of Hegel’s prose was a pure emanation of his grindingly pompous soul. The turgidity of Derrida’s attempts at playfulness were little more than clinical specimens of his insufferable self-infatuation. As a general rule, to put it simply, if one wanders into one’s library in search of mirth, good fellowship, or wit, one does well not to seek out the company of the philosophers.
26.11.15
Most of what is taught today as exact sciences are pseudo sciences
I am not a fan of pseudo sciences nor of "great books" education.
The trouble with most of what is taught today as exact sciences are pseudo sciences. Even if they can be used for making a living they are still evil. That is psychology, and all it related fields. Obviously they can con people into giving them vast sums of money and have a strong hold over the educational system in the USA even though they have nothing of worth to offer just mirrors and delusions couched in scientific jargon.
People should learn real science and Torah. And when it gets time to get married to learn a honest vocation also. ["Real science" means mainly Physics, Chemistry, Math, Biology. But can include Engineering.]
Torah should be learned thus: a fast session Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam--one עמוד this one side of a page per day. Not a whole Daf. Rather a 1/2 a Daf. That is the fast session. The slow one should be with a learning partner. And that depends a lot on the particular subject.
After one finishes the Talmud then the Ari. (I Luria). But no pseudo Torah. [All supposedly mystic books written after the Ari are pseudo Torah. The exceptions are the books of Yaakov Abuchatzaeia and Shalom Sharabi.]
After one has gone through the Talmud once in the above way, the next thing is to do the Jerusalem Talmud in the same way with all the commentaries on the page. The main thing is to say the words and go on. You will understand much more in this way than if you stayed on every little detail. The you go through the rest of the halachic Midrashim. That is one fast session per day. That takes about 40 minutes if you do it with the Maharsha and Maharam. If you have more time you can do more than a 1/2 a Daf per day. But this seems like a lot already.
There should be another short session in the midrashei hagadah in such a way that after a few years one has finished the entire Oral and Written Law (Old Testament). Every last word. This only seems like a lot because I am not talking about reading novels. If I would say to go through a novel by Tom Clancy in a few days it would seem like nothing to most people. But all of a sudden when it is Torah it sounds like a momentous task.
_________________________________________________________________
The slow in depth learning I can give any kind of guidance on. The normal way of going about it is to be in a authentic Lithuanian Yeshiva. You prepare for the Rosh Yeshiva's class in the morning. Then the class is he giving over his original ideas on the Gemara. It is not just reading over some one else's ideas. That is in any case how things were at the Mir. But to get to be able to do this yourself takes more than the regular four years. It might take twenty or more. It is like in the Middle Ages when apprenticeship could last for twenty of more years until one was a master of the art
The trouble with most of what is taught today as exact sciences are pseudo sciences. Even if they can be used for making a living they are still evil. That is psychology, and all it related fields. Obviously they can con people into giving them vast sums of money and have a strong hold over the educational system in the USA even though they have nothing of worth to offer just mirrors and delusions couched in scientific jargon.
People should learn real science and Torah. And when it gets time to get married to learn a honest vocation also. ["Real science" means mainly Physics, Chemistry, Math, Biology. But can include Engineering.]
Torah should be learned thus: a fast session Gemara, Rashi, Tosphot, Maharsha, and Maharam--one עמוד this one side of a page per day. Not a whole Daf. Rather a 1/2 a Daf. That is the fast session. The slow one should be with a learning partner. And that depends a lot on the particular subject.
After one finishes the Talmud then the Ari. (I Luria). But no pseudo Torah. [All supposedly mystic books written after the Ari are pseudo Torah. The exceptions are the books of Yaakov Abuchatzaeia and Shalom Sharabi.]
After one has gone through the Talmud once in the above way, the next thing is to do the Jerusalem Talmud in the same way with all the commentaries on the page. The main thing is to say the words and go on. You will understand much more in this way than if you stayed on every little detail. The you go through the rest of the halachic Midrashim. That is one fast session per day. That takes about 40 minutes if you do it with the Maharsha and Maharam. If you have more time you can do more than a 1/2 a Daf per day. But this seems like a lot already.
There should be another short session in the midrashei hagadah in such a way that after a few years one has finished the entire Oral and Written Law (Old Testament). Every last word. This only seems like a lot because I am not talking about reading novels. If I would say to go through a novel by Tom Clancy in a few days it would seem like nothing to most people. But all of a sudden when it is Torah it sounds like a momentous task.
_________________________________________________________________
The slow in depth learning I can give any kind of guidance on. The normal way of going about it is to be in a authentic Lithuanian Yeshiva. You prepare for the Rosh Yeshiva's class in the morning. Then the class is he giving over his original ideas on the Gemara. It is not just reading over some one else's ideas. That is in any case how things were at the Mir. But to get to be able to do this yourself takes more than the regular four years. It might take twenty or more. It is like in the Middle Ages when apprenticeship could last for twenty of more years until one was a master of the art
25.11.15
Bava Sali
David Abuchatzeira was murdered by Muslims on the 14th of Kislev. That is why I thought to write a few words about the Abuchatzeira family. The major thing that was special about this family was their idea of education. They had the basic approach that you would find in any Lithuanian yeshiva straight Gemara and Musar and Poskim. But their way of keeping Torah was significantly simplified..They were not reading too much Dante I should say. At at a certain point they would get into the Ari-Isaac Luria. But that went along with a good deal of fasting.
Let me mention a few things as samples of the events surrounding them. Israel Abuchatzeira once was one a bus going going from one town to the next. It go to be time for the afternoon prayer. {Mincha}. He told the person he was with to ask the bus driver to stop the bus so he could get out and pray. The driver laughed at such a ridiculous request. So the fellow returned to his seat. Then Bava Sali (Israel Abuchatzeira) told him to get ready to get off the bus. Then suddenly the engine broke down. They got off to pray as the bus driver got out to see of he could fix the engine. Bava Sali took his own sweet time to pray as was his custom. After he finished they got back on the bus and he told the person his was with to tell the driver he could start the bus now. The driver yelled at him and said can't you see I have been trying to start this thing for the last hour? So he returned to his seat. Bava Sali told him to tell the driver to just put the key in the ignition and see what happens. He did so and the bus started with no problem.
One thing you in Bava Sali--is the idea of authentic Torah. He was not involved with "Tikunim." That is he was not taking any one particular Mitzvah. His was straight learning and keeping Torah. The oral and written law. The פירוש המקובל. That is the explanation of the Written Torah that was received by the sages of the Mishna and Talmud. Things written later are not the oral nor written law. They can at best explain some aspects of the oral or written law but do not override them and when they go off into their own explanation not based on the oral law then they are ספרים חיצוניים-books that the sages say one loses his portion in the next world by reading them. [That means most so called Torah books today are in fact ספרים חיצוניים]. See the Rif and Rosh there on the mishna in Sanhedrin.
Bava Sali was not a fan of the "great books" education. STEM maybe but not secular education outside of the natural sciences or straight forwards learning a vocation.
Let me mention a few things as samples of the events surrounding them. Israel Abuchatzeira once was one a bus going going from one town to the next. It go to be time for the afternoon prayer. {Mincha}. He told the person he was with to ask the bus driver to stop the bus so he could get out and pray. The driver laughed at such a ridiculous request. So the fellow returned to his seat. Then Bava Sali (Israel Abuchatzeira) told him to get ready to get off the bus. Then suddenly the engine broke down. They got off to pray as the bus driver got out to see of he could fix the engine. Bava Sali took his own sweet time to pray as was his custom. After he finished they got back on the bus and he told the person his was with to tell the driver he could start the bus now. The driver yelled at him and said can't you see I have been trying to start this thing for the last hour? So he returned to his seat. Bava Sali told him to tell the driver to just put the key in the ignition and see what happens. He did so and the bus started with no problem.
One thing you in Bava Sali--is the idea of authentic Torah. He was not involved with "Tikunim." That is he was not taking any one particular Mitzvah. His was straight learning and keeping Torah. The oral and written law. The פירוש המקובל. That is the explanation of the Written Torah that was received by the sages of the Mishna and Talmud. Things written later are not the oral nor written law. They can at best explain some aspects of the oral or written law but do not override them and when they go off into their own explanation not based on the oral law then they are ספרים חיצוניים-books that the sages say one loses his portion in the next world by reading them. [That means most so called Torah books today are in fact ספרים חיצוניים]. See the Rif and Rosh there on the mishna in Sanhedrin.
Bava Sali was not a fan of the "great books" education. STEM maybe but not secular education outside of the natural sciences or straight forwards learning a vocation.
Bava Sali
I thought it would be proper to say a few words about David Abuchatzeira, the older brother of Bava Sali. It is after all 14 Kislev on the Jewish Calendar.
The main phenomenon of the Abuchatzeira family was really located in Morroco.. That is where the family lived until the State of Israel was founded.
This family seemed to be blessed with ascetics. That is they would be married but they would be living the kind of life you would associate with a ascetic in other ways. It is hard to explain.
But without going into too much detail let me at least mention that their general path was what you would call straight Torah and Mitzvah. It would be the same thing as you would have in any Lithuanian Yeshiva. The only difference would be that after some member of the family would have gone through Shas a few time they would begin to learn the writings of Isaac Luria and at that point begin to go up in levels of holiness and separation from this world,--but they would still be married.
Though the charlatans called kabalists abound nowadays, still this family was different. They were the real thing. And their powers came from the side of Holiness. {There are plenty of people with powers from the Dark Side, and you need a certain degree of talent to be able to spot them.}
There was a time that you could go anywhere in Israel and just mention the name of Bava Sali and someone would have a story to tell you of how they went to him with some problem and it was magically solved afterwards.
The stories were astounding. And it seemed impossible to say they were all lying or had some agenda.
The main phenomenon of the Abuchatzeira family was really located in Morroco.. That is where the family lived until the State of Israel was founded.
This family seemed to be blessed with ascetics. That is they would be married but they would be living the kind of life you would associate with a ascetic in other ways. It is hard to explain.
But without going into too much detail let me at least mention that their general path was what you would call straight Torah and Mitzvah. It would be the same thing as you would have in any Lithuanian Yeshiva. The only difference would be that after some member of the family would have gone through Shas a few time they would begin to learn the writings of Isaac Luria and at that point begin to go up in levels of holiness and separation from this world,--but they would still be married.
Though the charlatans called kabalists abound nowadays, still this family was different. They were the real thing. And their powers came from the side of Holiness. {There are plenty of people with powers from the Dark Side, and you need a certain degree of talent to be able to spot them.}
There was a time that you could go anywhere in Israel and just mention the name of Bava Sali and someone would have a story to tell you of how they went to him with some problem and it was magically solved afterwards.
The stories were astounding. And it seemed impossible to say they were all lying or had some agenda.
We have the Rambam in laws of accidental sacrifices 7:3 : If one does a work on Shabat and he knows it is Shabat but he forgot that kind of work is forbidden or else he forgot the punishment then he brings a sin offering. Even if he did all 39 he brings 39 sin offerings, Someone asked Avraham the son of the Rambam in what way did he remember it is shabat? {That is needed in order so that this does not deteriorate into a simple case when one forgot it is Shabat and he brings just one sacrifice.}
Avraham said the beginning of the halacha is not connected to the end or he remembered the branches of the work.
The point of Rav Avraham. The end is not connected to the beginning. For all 38 kinds of work he could have forgotten both or just the עונש, but when we get up to the 39th one it can only be he forgot the עונש. If he forgot both and for all 39 works then that is שכחת שבת and he brings only on sacrifice.
The question of the Beit Yoseph of the son of the Rambam is this: Let us start out at the beginning. He he forgot a work and its punishment, or just the punishment he brings one sin offering. Keep going. He forgot 38 works and their punishment or he knew they were all forbidden but forgot the punishment. He brings 38. Then what? It is no longer symmetrical We can't have he forgot 39 and their punishments because in what way did he remember Shabat?
Later note: The question on the Rav Avraham is simple. The Rambam wrote over there in laws of Shabat [7:8] that even if one forgot all 39 kinds of work he brings 39 sin offerings.There is no scenario where he does not know some kind of work but knows its punishment. So when the Rambam says he forgot all 39 that has to mean both the works and their punishment. This is a direct contradiction to the son of the Rambam.
_____________________________________________________________________________
We have the רמב''ם in הלכות שגגות ז:ג : If one does a work on שבת and he knows it is שבת but he forgot that kind of מלאכה is forbidden, or else he forgot the עונש, then he brings a חטאת. Even if he did all ל''ט he brings ל''ט חטאות, Someone asked רב אברהם the son of the רמב''ם in what way did he remember it is שבת? That is needed in order so that this does not deteriorate into a simple case when one forgot it is שבת and he brings just one חטאת.
רב אברהם said the beginning of the הלכה is not connected to the end, or he remembered the תולדות of the מלאכות.
The point of רב אברהם. The end is not connected to the beginning. For all ל''ח kinds of work he could have forgotten both or just the עונש, but when we get up to the ל''ט one it can only be he forgot the עונש. If he forgot both for all ל''ט מלאכות then that is שכחת שבת and he brings only one sacrifice.
The question of the בית יוסף of the son of the רמב''ם is this:
The question on רב אברהם is: The רמב''ם wrote over there in laws of הלכות שבת ז:ח that even if one forgot all ל''ט kinds of מלאכה he brings ל''ט חטאות. There is no scenario where he does not know some kind of מלאכה but knows its עונש. So when the רמב''ם says he forgot all ל''ט that has to mean both the מלאכות and their עונש. This is a direct contradiction to the son of the רמב''ם.
הרמב''ם הלכות שגגות ז: ג אם אחד עושה עבודה בשבת והוא יודע את זה שהוא שבת, אבל הוא שכח שסוג הזה של מלאכה אסור, או שהוא שכח עונש, אז הוא מביא חטאת. גם אם הוא עשה את כל הל''ט הוא מביא ל''ט חטאות. מישהו שאל רב אברהם בנו של רמב''ם באיזה אופן לא הוא זוכר את זה הוא שבת? (למה צריך את זה כך שזה לא יידרדר למקרה פשוט שאחד שכח שהוא שבת שהוא מביא רק חטאת אחת. רב אברהם אמר שתחילת ההלכה אינה מחוברת לסוף, או שהוא זכר את תולדותיה של מלאכות. הנקודה רב אברהם. הסוף אינו מחובר להתחלה. לכל סוגים ל''ח של עבודה יכול חהיות שהוא שכח את המלאכה או רק העונש, אבל כאשר אנחנו מגיעים לל''ט יכול להיות רק שהוא שכח את העונש. אם הוא שכח גם לכל הל''ט מלאכות, אז זה שכחת שבת והוא מביא רק קורבן אחד.
השאלה של הבית יוסף של בנו של רמב''ם היא זו
הרמב''ם כתב בדיני הלכות שבת ז: ח שאם אחד שכח את כל הל''ט מיני מלאכה הוא מביא ל''ט חטאות. אין תרחיש שבו הוא לא יודע איזה סוג של מלאכה אבל יודע את העונש. לכן, כאשר רמב''ם אומר שהוא שכח את כל הל''ט זה שהוא שכח את המלאכות ועונשן. זוהי סתירה ישירה לבן של רמב''ם
24.11.15
I had an unusual path that took me from California to the Mir Yeshiva in NY and then to Israel. On this path I learned Torah--that is the oral and written Torah and towards the last few years in NY I added learning the Ari to me regular sessions.
This path was a synthesis between Reason and Revelation. It was not faith alone. Nor reason alone. It was the kind of path you see in the Musar medieval ethic books.
This path was a synthesis between Reason and Revelation. It was not faith alone. Nor reason alone. It was the kind of path you see in the Musar medieval ethic books.
After some time I fell from this and so I have no information about how one can fix things in his life after they have fallen apart.
There is a time in a person's life when a major life decision has to be made. and he or she knows that their entire future depends on that on decision. My idea is that when we talk about sin that this is connected to this major life decision. Though you may not know which is the right way at the time later it does become clear which way was right and which way not.
I usually think of sin as being a daily kind of thing, Lashon Hara, gossip, Bitul Torah, etc. But I think these areas of major decisions are the more determining areas in which sin is relevant.
So how does one go about making the right life decision?
I suggest trust in God can be helpful in this area. That is to make a decision based on the idea that I really do not know which path is right. There can be a path before a person that he thinks is right but it ends in death. So we can't depend on our own reason and logic in this area. Especially when we think we are doing a mitzvah. The areas in which we think we are doing a mitzvah are almost always the exact areas of our biggest sins.
I have areas I think are my sins. Many time I was convinced I was doing the right thing, and it turned out that I had made a disastrous decision. So I conclude that there is something about the decision making process itself that needs to be corrected in order for a me or any person to live an upright life. It can't be following reason, nor what he thinks the Torah commands. The Satan dresses up in mitzvot and seduces people by calling to them saying, "Come and do a mitzvah."
The areas that I think are my own sins have given me an amazing perspective and insight about the world. That is doing a sin and getting punished in a way that seems like a direct result of the sin or not listening to my parents because I was sure I knew better than them and finding out that they were right all along has given me more insight about the world the nature of objective morality more than any amount of book learning (even Torah learning) could ever give.
Being against the State of Israel I discovered in this way is a terrible sin. Since then I have tried to speak for the peace of Jerusalem and Israel. There was the Satmar Rav, Joel [who was a tzadik] who was against the State of Israel. But because of this kind of reasoning I decided he was wrong. [Later I found out his objections to the State of Israel had no basis in Halacha, but were based on obscure midrashim which have no legal validity.]
I also learned how right my parents were when they were so upset that I decided not to go to university and learn a vocation. But that is not to say they were against learning Torah. Just the opposite. They themselves put me into Hebrew school on Shabat and encouraged my learning and keeping Torah. Rather the idea of going to yeshiva instead of learning a vocation they saw as wrong and time proved they were right. That is they saw I was joining the "frum world" and they knew that that has nothing to do with authentic learning and keeping Torah. Rather it has to do with joining a social club where one thinks he will do well. Ane they convince him to join because they see they cant survive without a working class slave group under them
I usually think of sin as being a daily kind of thing, Lashon Hara, gossip, Bitul Torah, etc. But I think these areas of major decisions are the more determining areas in which sin is relevant.
So how does one go about making the right life decision?
I suggest trust in God can be helpful in this area. That is to make a decision based on the idea that I really do not know which path is right. There can be a path before a person that he thinks is right but it ends in death. So we can't depend on our own reason and logic in this area. Especially when we think we are doing a mitzvah. The areas in which we think we are doing a mitzvah are almost always the exact areas of our biggest sins.
I have areas I think are my sins. Many time I was convinced I was doing the right thing, and it turned out that I had made a disastrous decision. So I conclude that there is something about the decision making process itself that needs to be corrected in order for a me or any person to live an upright life. It can't be following reason, nor what he thinks the Torah commands. The Satan dresses up in mitzvot and seduces people by calling to them saying, "Come and do a mitzvah."
The areas that I think are my own sins have given me an amazing perspective and insight about the world. That is doing a sin and getting punished in a way that seems like a direct result of the sin or not listening to my parents because I was sure I knew better than them and finding out that they were right all along has given me more insight about the world the nature of objective morality more than any amount of book learning (even Torah learning) could ever give.
Being against the State of Israel I discovered in this way is a terrible sin. Since then I have tried to speak for the peace of Jerusalem and Israel. There was the Satmar Rav, Joel [who was a tzadik] who was against the State of Israel. But because of this kind of reasoning I decided he was wrong. [Later I found out his objections to the State of Israel had no basis in Halacha, but were based on obscure midrashim which have no legal validity.]
I also learned how right my parents were when they were so upset that I decided not to go to university and learn a vocation. But that is not to say they were against learning Torah. Just the opposite. They themselves put me into Hebrew school on Shabat and encouraged my learning and keeping Torah. Rather the idea of going to yeshiva instead of learning a vocation they saw as wrong and time proved they were right. That is they saw I was joining the "frum world" and they knew that that has nothing to do with authentic learning and keeping Torah. Rather it has to do with joining a social club where one thinks he will do well. Ane they convince him to join because they see they cant survive without a working class slave group under them
23.11.15
R. Yochanan says [Shabat page 69b ] if one remembers Shabat but forgets any of the 39 types of work forbidden on Shabat or their punishment he brings a sin offering for each one. Even if he does all 39 he brings 39 sin offerings. Reish Lakish says he forgetting the punishment is regarded as doing it on purpose.
[Carrying in a public domain, lighting a fire, cooking, etc]
I mentioned the question on the Rambam that the son of the Rambam answered. This was where the Rambam [Laws of Shegagot 7:3] says forgetting all 39 kinds of work on Shabat with their punishments brings 39 sin offerings. The question was in what way then does he remember Shabat?
[Carrying in a public domain, lighting a fire, cooking, etc]
I mentioned the question on the Rambam that the son of the Rambam answered. This was where the Rambam [Laws of Shegagot 7:3] says forgetting all 39 kinds of work on Shabat with their punishments brings 39 sin offerings. The question was in what way then does he remember Shabat?
Before I get to the answer of Rav Avraham and the alternative answer of Rav Shach I wanted to say the question is more severe than meets the eye. The reason is that the Gemara says why does the mishna say 39? To tell us in the case he remembered Shabat but forgot all the 39 he brings 39 sin offerings. Then the Gemara says this crucial phrase "בשלמא לרבי יוחנן" "That is fine for Rabbi Yochanan, but to Reish Lakish there is a question. If he forgot the 39 then how does he remember Shabat?" I ask why is it fine to R. Yochanan? Because of the difference between him and Reish Lakish. If not for that difference it is clear the Gemara would think we have a question on Rabbi Yochanan also.
Just to be more clear: The Gemara thinks 39 is OK to R Yochanan because he can do all 39 and know they are forbidden, but forget the punishment. That is why it is OK. [He brings 39 sin offerings.] So the Gemara has no problem with R Yochanan because obviously he is remembered Shabat in knowing all 39 are forbidden. But when we turn to the Rambam it looks like doing all 39 and forgetting them and their punishment still brings 39 sin offerings.
Now the son of the Rambam said the only two answers would help if not for the Rambam in laws of Shabat. One. The Rambam in the end of that halacah was not saying it in context of the beginning. Or he remembered the Toldot (branches of work). This last answer of Rav Avraham could help, but not the first because the Rambam in laws of Shabat says forgetting all 39 brings 39 sin offerings. [You can't forget something is forbidden, but know its punishment.] But even the "Toldot" (branches) is not a great answer. The best answer is that of Rav Shach, that 12 mil is forbidden from the Torah.
_______________________________________________________________________________
רבי יוחנן says if one remembers שבת but forgets any of the ל''ט types of work forbidden on שבת or their עונשן he brings a קרבן חטאת for each one. Even if he does all ל''ט he brings ל''ט חטאות sin offerings. ריש לקיש says he forgetting the עונש is regarded as doing it מזיד.
I mentioned the question on the רמב''ם that the son of the רמב''ם answered. This was where the רמב''ם הלכות שגגות ז:ג says forgetting all ל''ט kinds of מלאכה on שבת with their punishments brings ל''ט sin offerings. The question was in what way then does he remember שבת?
רבי יוחנן אומר שאם אחד זוכר שבת אבל שוכח כל ל''ט סוגי העבודה האסורים בשבת או עונשן הוא מביא קרבן חטאת עבור כל אחד. גם אם הוא עושה את הכל שהוא מביא ל''ט חטאות (קורבן חטאת). ריש לקיש אומר שאם הוא שוכח את העונש זה נחשב שעושה את זה במזיד. הזכרתי את השאלה ברמב''ם שהבן של רמב''ם ענה. זה היה המקום שרמב''ם אומר שאם שוכחים כל ה ל''ט מינים של של מלאכה בשבת עם העונשים שלהם מביא ל''ט קורבן חטאת. (הלכות שגגות ז: ג) השאלה הייתה באיזו דרך אז הוא זוכר שבת
לפני שאני דן בתשובה של רב אברהם ותשובה חלופית של רב ש''ך, רציתי לומר השאלה היא חמורה יותר ממה שנראה לעין. הסיבה לכך היא שהגמרא אומרת מדוע המשנה אומרת ל''ט? לספר לנו במקרה שהוא נזכר שבת אבל שכח את כל הל''ט שהוא מביא ל''ט חטאות. אז הגמרא אומרת את המשפט הזה "בשלמא לרבי יוחנן, זה בסדר לרבי יוחנן, אבל לריש לקיש יש שאלה. אם הוא שכח ל''ט אז איך הוא יזכור שבת?" אני שואל למה זה בסדר לרבי יוחנן? בגלל החילוק בינו ובין ריש לקיש. אם לא ההבדל הזה ברור שהגמרא הייתה חושבת שיש לנו שאלה על רבי יוחנן גם. רק כדי להיות ברור יותר: הגמרא חושבת ל''ט הוא בסדר לרבי יוחנן משום שהוא יכול לעשות את כל הל''ט ויודע שהם אסורות, אבל שוכח את העונשים. זו הסיבה שזה בסדר. אז לגמרא אין בעיה עם רבי יוחנן, כי ברור שהוא זוכר שבת בידיעה שכל הל''ט אסורות. אבל כאשר אנו פונים לרמב''ם, זה נראה כמו שהוא עושה כל הל''ט ושוכח אותם ועונשן ועדיין מביא ל''ט קורבן חטאת. עכשיו בנו של רמב''ם אמר שתי התשובות שיכולות לעזור. אֶחָד. רמב''ם בסוף ההלכה לא אומר את זה בהקשר של ההתחלה. או שהוא נזכר בתולדות (הסניפים של עבודה).
Just to be more clear: The Gemara thinks 39 is OK to R Yochanan because he can do all 39 and know they are forbidden, but forget the punishment. That is why it is OK. [He brings 39 sin offerings.] So the Gemara has no problem with R Yochanan because obviously he is remembered Shabat in knowing all 39 are forbidden. But when we turn to the Rambam it looks like doing all 39 and forgetting them and their punishment still brings 39 sin offerings.
Now the son of the Rambam said the only two answers would help if not for the Rambam in laws of Shabat. One. The Rambam in the end of that halacah was not saying it in context of the beginning. Or he remembered the Toldot (branches of work). This last answer of Rav Avraham could help, but not the first because the Rambam in laws of Shabat says forgetting all 39 brings 39 sin offerings. [You can't forget something is forbidden, but know its punishment.] But even the "Toldot" (branches) is not a great answer. The best answer is that of Rav Shach, that 12 mil is forbidden from the Torah.
_______________________________________________________________________________
רבי יוחנן says if one remembers שבת but forgets any of the ל''ט types of work forbidden on שבת or their עונשן he brings a קרבן חטאת for each one. Even if he does all ל''ט he brings ל''ט חטאות sin offerings. ריש לקיש says he forgetting the עונש is regarded as doing it מזיד.
I mentioned the question on the רמב''ם that the son of the רמב''ם answered. This was where the רמב''ם הלכות שגגות ז:ג says forgetting all ל''ט kinds of מלאכה on שבת with their punishments brings ל''ט sin offerings. The question was in what way then does he remember שבת?
Before I get to the answer of רב אברהם and the alternative answer of רב ש''ך I wanted to say the question is more severe than meets the eye. The reason is that the גמרא says why does the משנה say ל''ט? To tell us in the case he remembered שבת but forgot all the ל''ט he brings ל''ט sin offerings. Then the גמרא says this crucial phrase "בשלמא לרבי יוחנן" "That is fine for רבי יוחנן , but to ריש לקיש there is a question. If he forgot the ל''ט then how does he remember שבת?" I ask why is it fine to רבי יוחנן? Because of the חילוק between him and ריש לקיש. If not for that difference it is clear the Gemara would think we have a question on רבי יוחנן also.
Just to be more clear: The גמרא thinks ל''ט is OK to רבי יוחנן because he can do all do all ל''ט and know they are forbidden but forget the עונש. That is why it is OK. So the גמרא has no problem with רבי יוחנן because obviously he is remembering שבת in knowing all ל''ט are forbidden. But when we turn to the רמב''ם, it looks like doing all ל''ט and forgetting them and their עונשן still brings ל''ט sin offerings.
Now the son of the רמב''ם said the only two answers here I can think would help. One. The רמב''ם in the end of that הלכה was not saying it in context of the beginning. Or he remembered the תולדות branches of work.
Just to be more clear: The גמרא thinks ל''ט is OK to רבי יוחנן because he can do all do all ל''ט and know they are forbidden but forget the עונש. That is why it is OK. So the גמרא has no problem with רבי יוחנן because obviously he is remembering שבת in knowing all ל''ט are forbidden. But when we turn to the רמב''ם, it looks like doing all ל''ט and forgetting them and their עונשן still brings ל''ט sin offerings.
Now the son of the רמב''ם said the only two answers here I can think would help. One. The רמב''ם in the end of that הלכה was not saying it in context of the beginning. Or he remembered the תולדות branches of work.
רבי יוחנן אומר שאם אחד זוכר שבת אבל שוכח כל ל''ט סוגי העבודה האסורים בשבת או עונשן הוא מביא קרבן חטאת עבור כל אחד. גם אם הוא עושה את הכל שהוא מביא ל''ט חטאות (קורבן חטאת). ריש לקיש אומר שאם הוא שוכח את העונש זה נחשב שעושה את זה במזיד. הזכרתי את השאלה ברמב''ם שהבן של רמב''ם ענה. זה היה המקום שרמב''ם אומר שאם שוכחים כל ה ל''ט מינים של של מלאכה בשבת עם העונשים שלהם מביא ל''ט קורבן חטאת. (הלכות שגגות ז: ג) השאלה הייתה באיזו דרך אז הוא זוכר שבת
לפני שאני דן בתשובה של רב אברהם ותשובה חלופית של רב ש''ך, רציתי לומר השאלה היא חמורה יותר ממה שנראה לעין. הסיבה לכך היא שהגמרא אומרת מדוע המשנה אומרת ל''ט? לספר לנו במקרה שהוא נזכר שבת אבל שכח את כל הל''ט שהוא מביא ל''ט חטאות. אז הגמרא אומרת את המשפט הזה "בשלמא לרבי יוחנן, זה בסדר לרבי יוחנן, אבל לריש לקיש יש שאלה. אם הוא שכח ל''ט אז איך הוא יזכור שבת?" אני שואל למה זה בסדר לרבי יוחנן? בגלל החילוק בינו ובין ריש לקיש. אם לא ההבדל הזה ברור שהגמרא הייתה חושבת שיש לנו שאלה על רבי יוחנן גם. רק כדי להיות ברור יותר: הגמרא חושבת ל''ט הוא בסדר לרבי יוחנן משום שהוא יכול לעשות את כל הל''ט ויודע שהם אסורות, אבל שוכח את העונשים. זו הסיבה שזה בסדר. אז לגמרא אין בעיה עם רבי יוחנן, כי ברור שהוא זוכר שבת בידיעה שכל הל''ט אסורות. אבל כאשר אנו פונים לרמב''ם, זה נראה כמו שהוא עושה כל הל''ט ושוכח אותם ועונשן ועדיין מביא ל''ט קורבן חטאת. עכשיו בנו של רמב''ם אמר שתי התשובות שיכולות לעזור. אֶחָד. רמב''ם בסוף ההלכה לא אומר את זה בהקשר של ההתחלה. או שהוא נזכר בתולדות (הסניפים של עבודה).
Anaxagoras and Kant. Instead of things having to conform to the human mind I think it would be a better idea to have things conform to the Mind that Anaxagoras was suggesting. This would correspond roughly to Plotinus's three step system. First the One--the First Cause emanates the Mind. The Mind then contemplates the One and produces the world soul.
[I am here leaning on my yeshiva education with Maimonides and Saadia Gaon's Neo Platonic approach. I admit this. But in any case, I think to make this kind of modification in Kant makes sense. But it does introduce a kind of Schopenhauer element into Kant. Dr. Kelley Ross would almost surely not go for this since he wants to stick with Kant's "dinge an sich" plural. Not Schopenhauer's "Ding An Sich" singular.
21.11.15
Lithuanian yeshivas.
My basic idea of serving God is the kind of thing that you would have in a regular Lithuanian yeshiva. That would be learning the Babylonian Talmud along with Musar. I know the are questions about even the best of Lithuanian yeshivas.
Torah is its most simple form the actual Oral and Written Law. {By "Oral Law" I mean the actual tradition that were written down in the time of the Talmud. Not things that were written a thousand years later and some one person claimed it was written thousand years before that and had been hidden somewhere in Spain. Let's say I had a book that I claimed had been written by Rashi a 900 years ago and only I had ever seen it. And I would not let anyone see the original but made copies of each page and charged a hand and a leg for each page. Would you believe Rashi had written it?
The lack in Musar is that of the philosophy behind it. Even people that learn Musar often have zero knowledge of the Philosophical systems of Saadia Gaon or the Rambam. השקפה the world view of people that learn and teach Musar is usually directly opposed to the actual worldviews of the Rishonim. Musar has become just another form of religious fanaticism and is very far from the vision of the Rambam or Israel Salanter.
Most of what goes on in the "frum world" I consider far from Torah. Even groups that supposedly learn secular subjects I think are into pseudo sciences, not real sciences. The more mysticly oriented groups are led by delusional. schizophrenics. That is why I will only mention authentic Litvak yeshivas as presenting authentic Torah teachings.
Torah is its most simple form the actual Oral and Written Law. {By "Oral Law" I mean the actual tradition that were written down in the time of the Talmud. Not things that were written a thousand years later and some one person claimed it was written thousand years before that and had been hidden somewhere in Spain. Let's say I had a book that I claimed had been written by Rashi a 900 years ago and only I had ever seen it. And I would not let anyone see the original but made copies of each page and charged a hand and a leg for each page. Would you believe Rashi had written it?
The lack in Musar is that of the philosophy behind it. Even people that learn Musar often have zero knowledge of the Philosophical systems of Saadia Gaon or the Rambam. השקפה the world view of people that learn and teach Musar is usually directly opposed to the actual worldviews of the Rishonim. Musar has become just another form of religious fanaticism and is very far from the vision of the Rambam or Israel Salanter.
Most of what goes on in the "frum world" I consider far from Torah. Even groups that supposedly learn secular subjects I think are into pseudo sciences, not real sciences. The more mysticly oriented groups are led by delusional. schizophrenics. That is why I will only mention authentic Litvak yeshivas as presenting authentic Torah teachings.
The fellow that died in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 2015
The wife of the fellow that died in Uman on Rosh Hashanah came there sometime after Sukkot. She supplied some detail to the actual story. [The incident was on Rosh Hashanah itself. She came afterwards I imagine to find some sense of closure.]
The fellow had epilepsy. There were a few episodes and then he had a dream of Reb Nachman coming to him telling him if he would come for Rosh Hashanah it would all be OK. He was also saying the entire book of Psalms for 40 days in a row. The event happened on the fortieth day. Apparently it was not as some had thought that he went to the river to dip in "tovel." Rather he went out to do Hitbodadut [Talk with God alone as Reb Nachman emphasized.] He fell in the river while doing Hitbodadut and drowned. No one could find him for a week or two.
This is like the normal question of theodicy. But it is worthwhile knowing that there is a negative side of things when it comes to Breslov. I don't want to minimize it.
But for me Reb Nachman seems basically very good. I can't answer why this does not seem to apply to everyone across the board, even people that are obviously sincere.
One problem I think is that of "Ribui Or" ריבוי אור ("excess light"). But I should mention that questions on Ren Nachman are perennial . And there are new ones all the time. But to me these question just seem like obstacles that are meant to keep me from the good ideas and advice of a tzadik who I feel I in fact get benefit from.
Spiritual things have an aspect of the subject and another of the object. The subject--i.e. the observer supplies the way he sees the reality. So even objective reality will depend on who is the observer. The same reality can turn from good to bad depending on the receiver. סם חיים למימינים וסם מוות למשמאילים בה. That does not mean that that is what happened to that fellow. I imagine he was truly following the advice and path of Reb Nachman to the best of his ability, All I am saying is there are plenty of people that don't and for them it does have a bad effect.
But the bad aspect should not be ignored either. There are pitfalls that need to be avoided. The baali teshuva give great power to their leaders although they are scammers and frauds. There is a tendency to leave one's vocation and or yeshiva and both of these are wrong.
The fellow had epilepsy. There were a few episodes and then he had a dream of Reb Nachman coming to him telling him if he would come for Rosh Hashanah it would all be OK. He was also saying the entire book of Psalms for 40 days in a row. The event happened on the fortieth day. Apparently it was not as some had thought that he went to the river to dip in "tovel." Rather he went out to do Hitbodadut [Talk with God alone as Reb Nachman emphasized.] He fell in the river while doing Hitbodadut and drowned. No one could find him for a week or two.
This is like the normal question of theodicy. But it is worthwhile knowing that there is a negative side of things when it comes to Breslov. I don't want to minimize it.
But for me Reb Nachman seems basically very good. I can't answer why this does not seem to apply to everyone across the board, even people that are obviously sincere.
One problem I think is that of "Ribui Or" ריבוי אור ("excess light"). But I should mention that questions on Ren Nachman are perennial . And there are new ones all the time. But to me these question just seem like obstacles that are meant to keep me from the good ideas and advice of a tzadik who I feel I in fact get benefit from.
Spiritual things have an aspect of the subject and another of the object. The subject--i.e. the observer supplies the way he sees the reality. So even objective reality will depend on who is the observer. The same reality can turn from good to bad depending on the receiver. סם חיים למימינים וסם מוות למשמאילים בה. That does not mean that that is what happened to that fellow. I imagine he was truly following the advice and path of Reb Nachman to the best of his ability, All I am saying is there are plenty of people that don't and for them it does have a bad effect.
But the bad aspect should not be ignored either. There are pitfalls that need to be avoided. The baali teshuva give great power to their leaders although they are scammers and frauds. There is a tendency to leave one's vocation and or yeshiva and both of these are wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)