questions about faith and reason.

 I am surprized that Leonard Nelson' New Friesian School is ignored. For me it answers basic questions about faith and reason. And these question have bothered plenty of people way before me, I can not imagine that no one besides me cares. Christians during the Roman Empire were the first to try to find the synthesis between faith and reason. Boethius. Later Muslims began to search for the right approach. They did not conquer Constantinople but requested Greek scholars from there to teach them about Aristotle and Plato. Then Saadia Gaon, Solomon Ibn Gabirol, and Rambam.

What I figure is that some are satisfied with the ancients and mediaeval authors. But I found the answers were somehow not satisfying --not just because of David Hume, but just because the questions seemed different that needed answers. 

Ramchal (Rav Moshe Haim Luzato) author of one of the four classical Musar [ethics] books, the Mesilat Yesharim

 I have been thinking about the Ramchal (Rav Moshe Haim Luzato). He was one of the greats before the time of the Gra, and the Gra said that if he would have been alive during his lifetime, he would have walked all the way to Italy just to see him. As is well known, he wrote one of the four classical Musar [ethics] books, the Mesilat Yesharim, and lots of other books. [Some more along mystic lines, and others philosophical. All this is well known. But one thing I thought to bring out is that he had a disciple who also wrote what amounts to almost a whole encyclopedia [along the lines of the Ramchal]. I only saw it once in Netivot in the Yemani beit midrash. Apparently it was only printed once in a limited edition. I think that along with all the writings of the Ramchal would make an important addition to the learning of Musar nowadays. 

[I admit to not being able to get through the Ramchal's books except two. While at the Mir Yeshiva most of my time was in Gemara, with the basic commentaries of the  Maharsha and Pnei Yehoshua. There was only a very limited time for Musar.]

halacha/[Jewish law].Thus when religious leaders are in charge, the society they create is a nightmare

Even though halacha/[Jewish law] is important, there is the flaw that Rav Nachman [Breslov] point out. That flaw is Torah scholars that are demons. [Le.M I;12 I:28] [He bring this from the Talmud]. Thus when religious leaders are in charge, the society they create is a nightmare. But that is not a flaw in halacha but in people. For there is no system that can not be subverted. The reason is that no matter what the system is, people will find a way to mess it up.

[The English-American form of government  maximizes freedom, but is being destroyed from with-in. ]

The Importance of Land of Israel and the State of Israel

 Being in the Land of Israel is important because of the verse Deuteronomy chapter 11 verse 9 which says to do all the commandments of God in order to come to the land and when you are in the land to stay --;''...so that you shall have length of days in the land...'

And the anti Israel religious world does not have a legal leg to stand on.  Both Reb Moshe (Feinstein) and Rav Aaron Kotler said: "דינא דמלכותא דינא" the law of the land is the law which means that the State of Israel has the legal (halachic) category of a legitimate state. And the Rav of Satmer (his entire book) is based on one midrash. and midrash  has no halachic validity.

And besides that, Rav Joel of Satmer ignored the League of Nations. 

The midrash  is- "If you go up to the Land as a wall, I will allow your blood to be spilled like the deer of the field''

People did not come to Israel against the will of the nations as the Rav of Satmer had claimed, they came with the will of the nations. Herzel negotiated with the sultan as long as he was in power. The Rothchild's legitimately bought land in Israel from the Ottoman Empire at extremely inflated prices. --In today's currency, that was hundreds of million of dollars. When the empire of the Sultan fell, the League of Nations declared the land of Israel to be for the Jews.

That, at the time, meant all the land of Israel and Jordan. Then they cut it in half. They said in the later "White Paper" that only half would go to the Jews. But there was no time at which they decided that none of Israel would be for the Jews. So the thesis  of Rav Joel simply has no halachic validity. 

  

It is important to know this because the importance of Israel is not well known 

 I  see the world sleep walk into WWIII. and i can not see how anyone can win. but no one listens to me. so i think the best I or anyone can do to help save mankind from disaster is to learn Torah in depth.  But sadly, while I see that some people  learn Torah, it is mixed with the cyanide of the sitra achra [dark side] that the Gra saw is Torah of the kelipot [Torah scholars that are demons]and therefore put into herem [excommunication].

Argument between Jacob Fries and Hegel

 The main argument between Jacob Fries and Hegel is about how to get beyond Kant's iron wall between ''what's out there'' and what is ''in here''. To Fries this is by immediate knowledge which does not come through reasoning through any principles nor any senses. [This includes space and time which to Kant are synthetic a priori. ] To Hegel this is by the dialectic process of what is commonly known from Kant's phrase thesis anti thesis synthesis.

To a large degree, Kant was taken in by Hume who limited pure reason to detecting contradictions in concepts. He repeats this limitation often enough but strangely just assumes it from his experience from teaching Euclid. but that is not to say that there i no difference in types of reasoning from unpacking definitions to reasonable assumptions. 

בירושלמי בפאה פרק ב' משנה ה. רב שך על הרמב''ם מתנות עניים פרק ב' הלכה י''א Yerushalmi in Peah chap 2 Mishna 5

ideas in shas

ideas in Bava Metzia

 I was at the sea again, and it occurred to me on the way back that there is something hard to figure in the Yerushalmi in Peah chapter 2, Mishna 5. My question is this. Let us say one cuts down the whole field up until the one part of sixty (that he is supposed to leave  as peah ("corner of the field"). Then he cuts one more stalk. Then the Yerushalmi says the obligation of peah goes on the fifty nine of sixty. Why could he not still give peah from the one part of sixty (1/60 part) anyway? The reason  is supposed to be that now it is obligated in truma and maassar. But it was anyway obligated in truma and maasar!?

Could it be then that the Yerushalmi considers the measure of one part in sixty to be from the Torah?

____________________________________________________________________

  There is something hard to figure out in the ירושלמי in פאה פרק ב  משנה ה. My question is this. Let us say one cuts down the whole field up until the one part of sixty (that he is supposed to leave  as פאה). Then he cuts one more stalk. Then the ירושלמי says the obligation of פאה goes on the fifty nine of sixty. Why could he not still give פאה from the one part of sixty  anyway? The reason  is supposed to be that now it is obligated in תרומה and מעשר. But it was anyway obligated in תרומה and  מעשר!? Could it be then that the ירושלמי considers the measure of one part in sixty to be דאורייתא?

בירושלמי בפאה פרק ב' משנה ה.

רב שך על הרמב''ם מתנות עניים פרק ב' הלכה י''א

יש משהו שקשה להבין בירושלמי בפאה פרק ב' משנה ה'. השאלה שלי היא כזו. נגיד אחד כורת את כל השדה עד החלק האחד משישים (שהוא אמור לעזוב כפאה). ואז הוא חותך עוד גבעול אחד. ואז הירושלמי אומר שחובת פאה הולכת על החמישים ותשע מתוך שישים. למה בכל זאת הוא לא יכול לתת פאה מהחלק האחד משישים? הסיבה אמורה להיות שעכשיו זה חייב בתרומה ובמעשר. אבל ממילא היה חייב בתרומה ובמעשר.האם יכול להיות אם כן שהירושלמי מחשיב את המידה של חלק אחד משישים דאורייתא

 One girl said to me at the beach that everything depends on from whom you learn. This was prompted by another girl saying she was majoring in criminology and gender studies where upon I explained about the Frankfurt School and the roots of woke and gender ideology. The students listening had never heard  any of that. They had thought gender stuff  had emerged full grown like Athena from the forehead of Zeus. To locate the flaws in any system, it helps to  identify the underlying and hidden assumptions. [For example one major [unstated] assumption in Marx is the labor theory of value. Take that away and the whole structure falls. You can not extract "excess value" is there is no "excess value", only market value.

I do not recommend learning the left-Hegelians and Marxists but it just happened that I picked up some knowledge of this just by reading Hegel and his defenders and retractors  

  My son Izhak held with the idea of learning in depth, and this message was conveyed to me by the Litvak world over the years, but it was not until recently I have taken this advice seriously [But there were some periods when I did more than ''just saying the words and going on.''] 

However, whether in learning Gemara Tosphot or the Achronim like Rav Chaim of Brisk, Rav Shach or in Math and Physics, I am hoping to in fact concentrate on לימוד בעיון learning in depth.

The way I am considering how to do this is to review each section four times at least, and then to go back to the previous section (if what I am doing is not clear), or to the next section, But even with going forward or back, to remain on one basic section for around 40 days.    

I also hope to print a few copies of my little booklet on Shas that my son helped me to write.

The West thinks they can attack Moscow with no response,

 It is astonishing that the West thinks they can attack Moscow with no response, Is not that exactly what Japan thought in its attack on Peal Harbor. They also were unaware that a response would come. Do not people know that Russia will respond?--The flaw comes from the fact that people do not understand why Russia took parts of Ukraine, and the strategy of not attacking to destroy, but to convince. But if the West attacks Russia, the response will not be to convince, but to really attack.

[I would hope that there would be a bit more understanding  about the situation. few people in  the West have actually lived in Ukraine or have talked with average people on the street. the lack of understanding is shocking. So on one hand they do not know what the average babushka selling vegetables in the market think. but they do not know why Russia is taking back what is their's in their opinion and the opinion of many in Ukraine that are now fearful of expressing this.  nor do they understand that the approach of Russia towards people that consider themselves to be Russian and Russia consider to be Russian will be different if they are attacked and Moscow decide to retaliate with nuclear submarines off the coast of California and New York.    

 in philosophy and politics it  helps to trace the genealogy of ideas [and systems]. "Woke" and "gender"? studies stems directly from the Neo Marxist Frankfurt group [the 1960's One Dimensional Man] which comes from the Left Hegelians and the Labor Theory of Value. Without the background the ideas of woke gender seem new and dazzling.  

midot tovot good character would not be known to be an essential part of Torah except for Rav Israel Salanter. Religious feeling would be directed toward ritual. but the importance of musar goes far beyond  the awareness of the importance of good character but also in defining it. sfor pne thing the rishonim were particularly good at was painstaking rigorous  thinking and that kind of thinking i needed in order to understand what the Torah in fact considers good character and not to decide it baed on whim or personal bias.

Fat

 Fat. At one point, a few years ago, I was over weight, and this was cured by פת שחרית morning bread, raw beets and eggs right away in the morning [right after doing a few sessions of learning]. Then a jog. The beets thing does not seem practical right now, but I am thinking of starting again that פת שחרית morning bread, [morning bread is brought in the gemara as being very helpful for a whole array of problems.]

 There is something that is odd about the religious world, but it is hard to know what. Maybe the problem what Rav Nahman [Breslov]  noted about Torah scholars from the Dark Side [sitra achra]. But I am unsure if that is all. While on one hand, the express belief in Torah is good, But when the actions show that belief is hollow and a façade, --that tends to cause '' hilul hashem'' i.e. questions on Torah that they supposedly represent. [I avoid the religious world mainly because of personal experience. I think that if they already did as much harm to me and my family as they could then why trust them again?   Lie Charlie Brown thinking every time that Lucie  could be trusted not to remove the football at the last second when he wa no longer in a position to back out.                   ]

 Few one but a few fanatics want to fight Russia.  I know this from years of asking Ukrainians [IN UMAN central ukraine] if they preferred Russian rule or rule of Kiev. The answer was almost always that things were better under Russia. But I admit there  were a few exceptions. but in a city of 60,000 people, a couple of exceptions were not significant. But clearly Ukrainians in the USA or other countries are ultra nationalists-- they have nothing to lose.

But besides the few Ukrainian fanatics I can see no point in starting WWIII with Russia which in the already started stages of WWIII will be joined by China, Saudi Arabia, Brazil and to add to that the fact is a vast percent of people in the USA itself hate America and can not wait for a bit of chaos to start rioting, burning, looting and raping --as soon as things get unstable.  

musar books on ethics from the middle ages

 in musar there is given the idea that midot tovot are the prime obligation. good character. this helps to a large degree in understanding the of what the Torah considers to be of primary importance and what is secondary. but the main effect of musar nowadays is only in the area of hashgafa [world view] but not o much in translating that into action. but even that alone --that establishing a firm foundation of what is important in Torah is also of great importance.

Kant is in need of modification.

 

  Kant is in need of modification. That can be like Kelley Ross or Michael Huemer. i.e. the Friesian school [Jacob Fries, Leonard Nelson] or the intuitionists [Prichard]. You  have to start with the realization that Kant was too  much influenced by David Hume. Hume limited the scope of reason way too much. He was a teacher of Euclidian geometry and so though that reason can only see contradictions where they exist.  He repeats this claim many times without a shred of evidence or proof. Kant accepted this. But reason has another function. It perceives universals. They are qualities that things have in common like trees. the universals that i refer to here are the very things that Kelley Ross calls ''forms'' in his distinction between content and form. That makes up his theory of value where some things like pure mathematical logic are pure form with sentences A and B that have no content but can stand for anything.  Then you have math which has more content but less form since it can not be reduced to pure logic are Godel showed us. Then you have music and art which have more content but even less form until you get to God who has no form at all but is pure content. But these areas of perception are what Michael Huemer would bring into the category of area where things are partly known by reason--or being reasonable and empirical perception.

Robert Hanna has pointed out the poverty of modern philosophy and the way forward to Kant, -but that still leaves the problems inherent in Kant. Thus one needs either the Friesian School or the Intuitionists. 

 I have been thinking about my son Izhak and thought about how the story of Henry II relates to this. For when Henry II realized when he was losing everything that it was the blood of Thomas Becket that was crying out from the grave that was the root cause. So it is with all of us that Izhak was asking help, and no one wanted to help.

But there is also the importance of learning the valuable lessons of his life. For myself  I would like to concentrate on learning in depth that he emphasized. I would also like to set time to go through the two Talmuds with the basic commentaries and midrash, but at this point in time that does not seem to be of immediate possibility.]   [Why is learning Torah important? You can see the reason in the Yerushalmi כל חפצים לא ישוו בה  all the mizvot are  not equal to [even] one word of Torah, [chapter I of Peah]. I put in the extra word ''even'']

[I should also add that Physics and Metaphysics is a part of learning the Oral Law as Ibn Pakuda hints to and the Rambam write openly in the Yad (Mishne Tora) and the Guide.]

The problem with mysticism

 The problem with mysticism is that it attaches itself  to Torah. When you have people that are true tzadikim that may have mystic intuitions that is not Torah, even when these intuition are true, [which mot often they are not]-still that is not Torah.

[I do believe Rav Nahman had great insight and was a great tzadik. But "Torah" does not mean insight. Torah means the Written Law  and the Oral Law as contained in the two Talmuds and Midrash. "Torah" is not open to anyone adding to it at whim. But that is exactly what the religious do.]

 If you look at the chapters in Deuteronomy [5-12] about idolatry you will see why the Gra signed the excommunication.  Idolatry can be Jewish. What makes it to be idolatry is the worship of any being besides God-- the First Cause.--not dead tzadikim, [or live ones either.]

 One thing I understood from my son, Izhak is that one ought not add to the commandments in regard to the chapters vayikra Leviticus 18 and 20 and that adding to these prohibitions means subtracting.

As regards to the actual subject--adultery means sex with a married woman. You can see this in vayikra Leviticus 18 and 20. Chronicles I chapter 2 verse 46

[See responsa of the Radvaz and Maharam of Egypt.--beside the already well known treatment of this in Rambam, Ramban, Raavad and in the Shulchan Aruch.]  

 Rav Nahman did not hold of learning philosophy at all even, -- of the great sages of Israel,  To some degree that make sense. But utter ignorance leaves one to prey of the many glittering ideas out there that with the most cursory examination fall to pieces. You need  sense to know what to learn.

  My suggestion is Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Kant, Leonard Nelson [a Jew that started a new sort of approach to Kant.]

[rav nahman was right about everything else. in particular he said not to learn the guide of the rambam and i can  see his point.

what is more I would like to recommend the two treaties of government by john locke

 

 I realize taking a chapter of a book on math or a page of gemara 400 times is a lot if you do not know the context.  Even 40 times. So what i have been thinking is to take one section and  read it straight through 4 day in a row. if at that time nothing i clear--go to the previous section. [you can not always start at the beginning because it is material you have already learned. ]

new song based on a song of my son izhak ben avraham

 za3

Lashon Hara, [slander, or even saying what is true about others unless 7 conditions are satisfied.]

 There is a lot of stuff going on in the world which i would write about but for the problem of lashon hara [slander]. And this is a delicate issue because of the severity of the issue. I might be required to warn someone about hanging out with the wrong sorts of friends, but if my words are not accepted --,is that lashon hara?

And the whole issue  tend to be forgotten on the larger scale. So I try to mention only the positive things that I and  others ought to concentrate on--learning Torah "beiyun" in depth with lots of review. Going through the Gemara with Tosphot, Maharsha, Hidushei Reb Chaimof Brisk, Mathematics Physics, exercise, coming to Israel etc. 

i mean to say, if you are careful about Lahon Hara, what else is there to do but to learn Torah?

[7 conditions: for benefit, not to cause more harm than what would be in a court, to see it yourself, to not judge it except by the law of the Torah and not to rush to judgment, to rebuke beforehand, no other way to reach that benefit.] 

Haywires in the American Democracy

 There is something going haywire in the American democracy. I think the reason is it needs a firmer foundation in theory. For the basic model was put together in an ad hoc fashion with theory coming only later. It is based largely on the English model of government--the Magna Carta and Provisions of Oxford. Only after James II fled, and William and Mary became the monarchs, did the theory arise that the government is supposed to be for the people, not visa versa.

The American Constitution is just a slightly modified version of English law.

John Locke lacks the glitter of the gothic dialectic of Hegel and Marx.

And sadly enough the Frankfurt School also brings a corrupted version of Kant to support their ideas.

I could suggest a version of Kant called the Friesian school based on Leonard Nelson, But after things have gone so off the rails, it is hard to imagine that anything could help. [Allan Bloom had suggestions in his Closing of the American Mind, but it seems too late for that. ]

my son's [Izhak (also known as Nahman)] emphasis on learning in depth.

 I was thinking about my son's [Izhak (also known as Nahman)] emphasis on learning in depth. It occurred to me that in the Gemara there is the mention of four hundred times review of every lesson. [That is in the story of one teacher who used to learn every lesson 400 times with his student. One time the student was distracted, so the teacher taught him the same lesson again another 400 times.] [A voice rang out from Heaven, Because of that  merit, he can have either one of two things: (1) all of his generation will merit to the world to come or (2) he will live for 400 years. In the end he got both.] And there is another place where it is mentioned that one person used to learn for himself every lesson 40 times.  And in fact I recall that lots of review helped me in many cases--e.g. when I was learning the book of Rav Chaim of Brisk and in physics [Joos's famous book Theoretical Physics]. [In that physics book, there were for me two sessions--one chapter I did forty days in a row. But most of the book, I did the approach of ''saying the words in order and going on''. ]

[However, there is also value of "bekiut" (fast learning) as done in Litvak Yeshivot in the afternoon and evening. You can see this in one of the great Musar books Ways of the Righteous. אורחות צדיקים

I might mention that Izhak was making preparations to come to Israel, but died before his plans were realized. To me it seems that coming and settling in Israel is important, as you can see in parshat hayira [chap on fear of God in Deuteronomy. Plus  the State of Israel is important. Rav Moshe Feinstein and Reb Aaron Kotler said about Israel דינא דמלכותא דינא the law of the state is the law.[Bava Batra 35] 

Kant and Leonard Nelson

 I was at the beach and talking to people there about the importance of Kant and Leonard Nelson. I mean it is not as if these students are not learning hard things. One girl had read Hegel's Phenomenology. --[If anything at all of Hegel, I think that should be the last.]

[Nelson built on Jacob Fries. This approach has a third source of knowledge besides reason or sence perception; that is ''immediate non intuitive knowledge.'' But it is not infallible it jut gives the categories of Kant as starting axioms that can be modified by evidence --like space and time.]

  But the interesting thing is that one girl was complaining that Leonard Nelson's works are not in Hebrew,-- and that is a valid complaint. After all even when they {Springer Verlag}got around to publishing his stuff, it is all in German. Can you imagine that even in English,  they only published minor works.

  But just for now with my barely functional keyboard, let me give the basic outline.--but forgive me for leaving out the details. The basic point is philosophy in the last 100 years got to be a mess. Marcuse is juvenile. --''Just tear down everything, and utopia will magically appear,'' is his alchemy thesis--really, [And that is the "woke" (i.e. asleep), just Marcuse repackaged. ]] Analytic philosophy was harder to see the flaws until Jeremy Katz. then recently Robert Hanna dealt it the final blow in his book The Fate of Analysis: Analytic Philosophy From Frege To The Ash-Heap of History, and Toward A Radical Kantian Philosophy of The Future, by Robert Hanna, [https://againstprofphil.org/category/not-an-edgy-essay/page/15/].[I think now you need to buy the book. I had read it when it was still on line.] Existentialism was refuted by a child in the audience of one of the great names who was saying, ''What my words mean to me is not what they mean to you.'' So the child asked the natural question, ''So why are you talking? i.e. he is talking because presumably  he want to say something, not nothing. 

So like Robert Hanna says, ''Forward to Kant''. But then you get into the original problem in Kant, and so the modification of Leonard Nelson is needed.

[I also went into the development of  philosophy of the Middle Ages which for us Jews was neo-Plato until the Rambam who turned towards Aristotle. That Aristotelian  turn came from the Islamic world which had one school that was totally into Aristotle. Then soon after the Rambam, Thomas Aquinas also went to Aristotle. But this move towards Aristotle did not hold up under the scrutiny of Bishop Berkley [about the question how perception works,] that led to the conflict between the rationalists and empiricists until Kant found a solution to that dilemma.

  My son. Isaac ben Avraham. was extraordinary in terms of desire to help others and the trait of forgiveness. But I forget the exact circumstances when I saw this, so I did not write about it. I think one event was was we were living together (in the neighborhood of Zichron Moshe) in Yerushalaim when there was some hurtful act of someone that I was angry about, but  Isaac said that there was no point in bearing a grudge. Also, at some point, I was learning the Avi Ezri on Shas of Rav Shach in Uman and lost it, so he sent to me another four vol. set. But later I lost that again --and he sent to me another set. And so on and so forth many times. I would lose the books I had to learn [because of all kind of difficult circumstances I fell into] and every time he would send another copy to me.

my son izhak ben avraham held with in depth learning.

 The thing of the Litvaks is learning in depth. I had a friend who became the acting rosh yeshiva of Chaim Berlin Yeshiva in N,Y. that told me once he saw no point in ''bekiut'' [fast learning-saying the words and going on.] This point was brought home to me over the years --first by Motti Freifeld in Shar Yashuv and later then in Uman when my own learning partner David Bronson refused to "go on" until he got the subject perfectly.

I believe this started with the Gra because it is the most obvious and characteristic thing about the Litvak world that goes with the Gra. I am beginning to think that this sort of learning in depth is the only possible way to get to the light of Torah.

But at the Mir in NY there was the afternoon ''bekiut learning'' which also makes sense to me--but only if done along with some sessions that are done in depth.

I might mention that my son izhak ben avraham held with in depth learning.  

Other lessons I learned from him: (1) exercise, (2) the importance of following the path of the Gra in every detail--including the signature of the Gra on that letter of excommunication. (4) Not to be hard hearted. like it says in Torah about the brothers of Joseph that he pleaded with them but they were hard hearted and sold him. Also with Naval HaCarmeli who was hard hearted when the men of King David asked for help. In fact, this last  lesson seem to me to be the most important one that must learn from the life of my son. (5) Shmrirat Habrit - to keep the laws of the Torah concerning sexual issues like it says in Leviticus  chapters 18 and 20. [ And not to add them what is mentioned there.] (6) Coming and staying in Israel. [This is also mentioned in Torah in the verse in Deuteronomy ""Keep the commandment so that you may come to the Land of Canaan and that you may have length of days in the Land. [Parshat HaYira at the end.] (7) He also had inventions which he never published. so, like my dad, he had an interest in mechanical engineering. 

 Closing of the American Mind  by Allan Bloom suggested throwing out the Humanities and social studies department of universities [unless they get straight]. It is an amazing book tracing the crisis to an essential contradiction in the Enlightenment. But it misses the infiltration of the whole system the universities by the Neo Marxists that is at least one major cause of the problems that he noted.     

Allan Bloom also did not note the movement in the time of Kant to simply make universities into tech schools. Before that time they were theological institutions. So many wanted to change them into what we have today with Humanities and social studies departments. The first idea would have been better. 

Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri

 I would like to recommend review of every lesson in Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach 400 times before going on. This is based on the idea of the Gemara of 400 times review plus the idea of the Gra [the Gaon of  Villna] that one needs knowledge of the seven wisdoms before one can know anything in Torah. He said, ''When one lacks knowledge in any of the seven wisdoms, that lack will cause a lack in understanding of Torah a hundred times more.'' [This I recommend for the sake of my son,  IZHAK BEN AVRAHAM.  And, in fact, Izhak held with lots of review. When I suggested,  ''Just say the words and go on'', he did not agree.] The Physics and Mathematics is brought more openly in the Rambam in the Guide for the Perplexed in the Introduction and later in the parable of a king in his country. \

[The Gemara says, ''Anyone who does not review his learning is as if he buries his sons and daughters.'']

My plan is that after 40 days in a row of learning one page or section that then one goes to the previous page if that first one was not clear, or to the next of it was clear. but that whole should be reviewed 400 times.

ALSO to listen to lectures in Math Physics and the Avi Ezri and Rav Chaim of Brisk from experts.

Also I suggest  some fast sessions to get through the Avi Ezri in total and through the basic core subjects in Mathematics and Physics, and 1/2 page of Gemara, Rashi, Tophot, Maharsha daily to go for the merit of my son, Izhak.

wake up from ''woke''. Intellect can often lead people astray just as much as being dumb--even more so.

 relevant to the new year when people should wake up from ''woke'' neo-Marxism. But I do not know for other how to do so except to close the university humanities and social studies departments.

[i might suggest to learn the philosophical roots of woke in Hegel, Marx, and Marcuse. But that can not work since people can be very smart and still not see mistakes. [''Hegel’s problem is that it is possible to level the charge of insufficiency that he directs at Pyrrhonian skepticism against his own account of the appearance of knowledge.'']  

Intellect can often lead people astray just as much as being dumb--even more so. See Rav Nahman's comments on this in his book the Le.M vol. II

See also this insightful essay: https://newcriterion.com/issues/2000/9/the-difficulty-with-hegel

laws of mourning

   In laws of mourning the second day of festivals count for one day of mourning according to the Rambam. The Ramban asks on this from the law that a bridegroom who prepared the meal and then his father died  first does the seven days of joy and then seven of mourning.. That is even though during the days of joy he must observe private laws of mourning. [That makes a difference since in a case one becomes a mourner one hour before a festival and does even one act of mourning, then the festival nullifies the rest of the days of mourning.

This last point is what Rav Shach brings to reinforce the question of the Ramban.

But I think that three things combine to make the law of the Rambam true. One is that a festival is stronger than the days of joy and thus has power to nullify the mourning completely. See Moed Katan that says a positive command of the multitude nullifies a positive command of an individual. Second.;-the thing that the bridegroom does is private. At no time does he do the open laws of mourning like turning over his bed. Third--nullifying the days of mourning for the bridegroom would mean not having any days of mourning at all 

______________________________________________________________

   In הלכות אבל the second day of יום טוב count for one day of mourning according to the רמב''ם. The רמב''ן asks on this from the law that a חתן who prepared the meal and then his father died  first does the seven days of joy and then seven of mourning.. That is even though during the days of joy he must observe private laws of mourning. [That makes a difference since in a case one becomes a mourner one hour before a festival and does even one act of mourning, then the festival nullifies the rest of the days of mourning. This last point is what רב שך brings to reinforce the question of the רמב''ן. But I think that three things combine to make the law of the רבב''ם true. One is that a festival is stronger than the days of joy and thus has power to nullify the mourning completely. See מועד קטן  that says a positive command of the multitude nullifies a positive command of an individual. Second.;-the thing that the bridegroom does is private. At no time does he do the open laws of mourning like turning over his bed. Third--nullifying the days of mourning for the bridegroom would mean not having any days of mourning at all 

______________________________________________________________________

בהלכות אבל היום השני של יום טוב של גלות עולה למניין ימי אבל יום אחד לפי הרמב''ם. הרמב''ן שואל על זה מההלכה שחתן שהכין את הסעודה ואחר כך מת אביו עושה תחילה שבעת ימי שמחה ואחר כך שבעה של אבלות. זאת למרות שבימות השמחה עליו לקיים ביחידות דיני אבלות. [זה משנה כיוון שבמקרה נעשים אבלים שעה לפני מועד ועושים אפילו מעשה אבל אחד, אזי החג מבטל את שאר ימי אבלות.] נקודה אחרונה זו היא מה שמביא רב שך לחזק את שאלת הרמב''ן. אבל אני חושב ששלושה דברים מתחברים כדי לבאר שאת דין הרמב''ם אמת. האחת היא שחג חזק מימי השמחה ובכך יש בכוחו לבטל את האבל של יום אחד לחלוטין. ראה מועד קטן שאומר מצווה חיובית של הרבים מבטלת פקודה חיובית של יחיד. שנית.;-הדבר שהחתן עושה הוא פרטי. בשום זמן הוא לא עושה את הלכות אבלות הפתוחות כמו להפוך את מיטתו. שלישית--ביטול ימי אבלות לחתן פירושו שלא יהיו ימי אבלות כלל

i am in mourning for my son Itzchak. Thus i post here two links to my books that he had a large contribution to help me write.

 Ideas in Bava Metzia ch.s 8 and 9 

Ideas in Shas

It is a terrible thought to note that he was begging people for help for years and no one wanted to help him. So he just laid down and died. [He was asking his family to come live with him and no one wanted to--even me. At best I wrote to him he should come to me in Israel, but he obviously needed help even to do so. ] I hope that since he had no place in this world, that at least God will find a place for him in the next.  Where no one else found a place in their heart for him that God will find a place for him in His and in Gan Eden.

But to say this to family members is hard to decide. Those that know, already know. So why make them feel worse? Those that do not know will just find someone else to blame.[Just like I am doing. Instead of asking ,''Why did I not help?,'' I ask, ''Why others did not help?"]

The problem is that humans -given the right set of circumstances-- can be incredibly kind or incredibly cruel. All I can do now is to dedicate any good deed I will ever do for his sake to have a place in the Garden of Eden. Perhaps also to do review 400  times every lesson in Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach.   

The point of concentrating on positive things that I can do, is that if I think overly much about what I did wrong, I am likely to go insane.

 I was at the beach and explained to some people there about from where the woke agenda comes from. I traced the lineage to the left Hegelians, Marx, the Frankfurt school and cultural Marxism. But while doing so I was asked about my own philosophical development.  I have mentioned this before, but just for now let me repeat.   Before and during high school I learned a lot of Spinoza. but I did not want to go into philosophy because I thought modern philosophy was not  good. So instead I went to two great Litvak yeshivot--Shar Yashuv and the Mir in N.Y.. But I still continued my philosophical education. In Shar Yashuv I learned Sartre's  Being And Nothingness. Eventually I arrived at Kant and the modification on KANT of Fries and Nelson.

I had explained the difference between the rationalists [Spinoza and Leibniz] and the empiricists [Locke and Hume], Reason recognizes truth as opposed to the senses recognize truth. this is different from pot modernism which hold there in truth, 

 In short I was asked what my philosophy is. I said reason recognizes truth. But I added ''What kind of truth? Universals.'' Then I went into that subject. then to Fries about a third source of knowledge  

Learning Torah is a commandment for everyone and therefore by definition is not skilled labor. The religious [frum] try to convince everyone else that they are morally and mentally superior and therefore must be put in charge of everyone else.

 I hold with learning Torah, but not as a paid profession. On one hand the stipend is low, but it is not a "skilled labor". "Skilled labor" gets paid more. Learning Torah is a commandment for everyone and therefore by definition is not skilled labor. It is something like English Literature majors. Or Psychology majors. These are the stupid people in college that think they are on par with Mathematics majors and are vastly overproduced. They then can not get jobs, but think they ought to be the people in charge of everyone else because of their imagined superiority. Ditto with religious institutions. They produce too many overly educated idiots that think they are geniuses.

The problem is that too many people try to convince others that the stupid disciplines equal the smart ones. i.e. the politics of resentment. The religious [frum] try to convince everyone else that they are morally and mentally superior and therefore must be put in charge of everyone else.

THE FRUM [RELIGIOUS] PRODUCE NOTHING BUT INTEREST IN THEIR OWN BRAND. -not even morality. They commonly poach and try to steal  the  wife of the baal teshuva [newly religious] and rape his children,

Hegel, Wokeness, and the Dialectical Faith of Leftism

 If one has merited to be in the Litvak World of Torah, it is a terrible thing to abandon that. Even though I see Rav Nachman of Breslov was a great tzadik, it is a mistake to leave the world of straight Torah. One might learn from the great advice of Rav Nachman, but Breslov is different.   

My own path into the Litvak world was philosophical interest. But modern philosophy repelled me [as it should]. So it made sense to the path that combined authentic Torah [Gra, Rav Shach, and musar. ]with reason. Reason and faith is the approach of the Rishonim and it continues in the Litvak world.

I might mention that this post is a result of many years of contemplating and seeing what happens to people that leave the Litvak Path. It never ends well.  

Reason for the Middle Ages [Saadia Gaon, Rambam, Ramban, etc..] means Plato, Aristotle. Plotinus, But this proved to have problems as noted by the early Enlightenment people like Berkeley. So arose the Rationists as opposed to the Empiricists. Each of these in turn proved problematic, so arose. Kant and a modification of Kant by Fries, Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross.  This progression is what is hold with. --as opposed to the other modern philosophy.  

other approaches do not make sense, Robert Hanna noted the bankruptcy of Analytic Philosophy. Woke is the Frankfurt neo Marx school. Marx is wrong since the labor theory of value is wrong [even though he did not explicitly say that he was building on that theory  still it is the basis of all his work--otherwise there is no ''surplus value'' to extract. .]

 

 Ukraine is a confusing place. That is unless you accept the proposition that half the people are saints and the other half are the opposite. [Well,.. the not so great part is less than half.] Because of this, I think it is best to make a deal with Russia. It makes no sense to say that Russia has no case. Anyone who has done business in Ukraine knows what I mean. So for everyone's benefit a peace agreement must be made and kept.