Public law is very important, still it is very different from Torah.

Even though Torah involves laws that are for the public domain , it is mainly oriented towards personal morality. [And it is well known in Moral Philosophy that there is a very large difference between personal morality and public. I can not think of an example this minute since my thoughts are going in a different direction. (note 1)] So while public law is very important, still it is very different from Torah. (note 3) A good example in Henry II. His job after becoming king was to bring stability and peace to England after decades of chaos and anarchy. So he unified the laws. No more was each county going to have a different set. There was to be one set for all England.  And circuit judges just as is done today in the USA. And trial by jury, not by physical combat.[כל דאלים גבר]. But on the other side of things, Torah is personal. even though many of the laws are in the public domain , but the center of gravity is the relationship between the individual and God.

So in Torah it matters not what goes on in the public domain. I might be living in a city that is an עיר הנדחית [a city that has gone astray after idolatry]. That does not absolve me of responsivity to Torah. Just think about Eliyahu the prophet and Elisha his disciple that lived in the Shomron area. [The center of Israel, not the Jerusalem area.] Though the state was officially serving idols, they certainly refused. 

[The Northern kingdom of the ten tribes was officially serving the idols that had been set up by Yeravam ben Navat. So you can have Jewish idols. The fact that everyone is serving them does not make it okay. So I suggest that the signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication is still valid, even if everyone refuses to pay any attention. (note 2) And this is easy to see as you can find a simple and understandable definition of idolatry in the commentary of the Rambam on Sanhedrin perek Helek. Worship of anything in heaven and earth except for God is idolatry. Not just physical statues.]

      

note 1. Here is a text from the Ethics textbook  of Stephen O Sullivan and Philip A. Pecorino  2002. [published by CUNY]  Here are some examples of actions that are illegal but are thought to be moral (for many)! 

Drinking under age.

Driving over the speed limit on a desert highway with no cars or people anywhere around.

Smoking marijuana.

================================================= 

People do not think of themselves or of others as being immoral for breaking these laws.

=================================================

Here are some examples of actions that are immoral (for many) but are not illegal. 

Breaking a promise to a friend.

 People can not be arrested or punished with imprisonment or fines for doing these things.

(note 2) The validity of a "herem" [excommunication] is from the laws of nedarim [vows]. [This I noticed in a commentary on the Rambam on the bottom of the page.]  What is a vow? It is when one says, "This loaf of bread is forbidden to you like a sacrifice." If he owns that loaf, then that loaf becomes forbidden to the person he is talking to. Similarly a herem is valid, as long as the person making it is qualified.] Why does he say like a sacrifice. It is commonly accepted that this is a argument between the Rambam and Tosphot. However Rav Shach points out that just saying "this loaf is forbidden to me" instead of being a way of making avow by its simple meaning would simply be an untruth! 

\

(note 3) Peace of the state is one reason for many commandments, but that is not the central source of authority of Torah

the religious talk a good talk. All lovey dovey--especially when they think or know you are a naïve American with rich parents.

 People that parade their religiosity are not religious. This you know from the verse מה השם אלוהיך שואל ממך כי אם והצנע לכת עם אלוהיך What does the Lord your God ask from you but to do kindness and judgment and to walk modestly with the Lord your God. No matter how you want to interpret this verse, advertising how religious you are to get peoples donations and trust does not come under the heading of "walking modestly with God."

But even more compelling to me is that the religious talk a good talk. All lovey dovey--especially when they think or know you are a naïve American with rich parents. But when it comes to actual actions of sincere kindness, the religious have to take a back seat. They will do almost anything to get out of helping anyone in need except themselves. And to me this seems like a serious flaw in their character. And that is especially noticeable when you learn in Torah that the primary action that is needed is good character. Not religious rituals or identification with the religious. [See any of the Rishonim for verification on this point which should not need emphasis. No where in in the Torah or Gemara or Rishonim do you find any value attributed to identification, rather with objective right and wrong. So the wearing of the kipa as the first obligation is clearly a show of values quite opposed to Torah. The religious excel in bragging how kind they are. My experience shows the opposite to be the case. And woe to the person that thinks he can depend on them in time of need. [While to show off how wonderful they are is their main goal. And who falls for this? people of the same character. So there really is littlee reason to have sympathy. Those that are fooled are the same people that have a similar sort of wish to show off how wonderful they are.

 Hennry I had a daughter Matilda who he named as the next ruler of England. But the crown was seized by Stephen her cousin. She fought to keep the crown. One day her son Henry II came of age and continued the fight. He came to relive the forces of Matilda at a castle. When the forces of Stephen and Henny II met they decided not to fight. [That is to say their commanders decided not to have this civil war any longer.] So Stephen and Henry had to meet and talk it over. The decision: Stephen would remain king and after him Henry would be the rightful king of England.

 I have wondered for months what would have happened if in the American Civil War both sides had simply decided not to kill each other? [Maybe there are wars that must be fought. But doubtful wars -like the Civil War seem to me to have been better not to have been fought.]

[good character]

 People that are religious seem to think that they are morally superior to secular Jews. Though I do not know people inner thoughts or motivations, still this seems apparent in their speech and actions. [And experience generally show the opposite.] If you need a kindness, the last person  that will help is religious. Thus to me, it seems the  message of Torah of the prime importance midot tovot [good character] is lost. For me it reached  the point that  what ever damage the religious could do to me, they would do. [These same people asked me to get money for them from John Factor my neighbor because these people were supposedly learning Torah not for money--while asking me to get money from my neighbor John Factor for millions of dollars. Clearly they [and all the religious world ] want money, and especially for the fact of their learning Torah not for money. The hypocrisy shouts out to the heavens.]

Rav Israel Salanter tried to correct this fault, but I have not seen that people that learn Musar are all that more decent than anyone else.

But this is not possible to see or know by learning.  In the religious world all the words are right. But the actual acts of kindness are lacking. [Except to themselves]. It is only the shock of reality, of how people actually act that shoes the religious illusions of  moral superiority to be lacking in all substance.

What the lesson is this. There is something about the religious world that is off kilter. [Seethe LeM of Rav Nahman vol II chapter 8  That even the kindness of the religious  is really cruelty. It is the same kindness of the fisherman that gives a worm on his hook free of  charge to the fish. It is not really from the motivation of kindness that teh fisherman gibes a worm to the fish  but rather to catch it in his hook.  The kindness if of the religious is really cruelty as Rav Nahman puts it in the LeM vol II chapter 8.

outside wisdoms"

 The translation of Euclid [a small part of the actual massive volumes of Euclid] by a disciple of the Gra brings in the introduction that the Gra said "One will lack in understanding and knowledge  of Torah a hundred times in proportion to one lack of knowledge in the seven widoms."

And this is the common opinion among the rishonim that built on Saadia Gaon.  [like the Chovot Levavot.] However there are other rishonim and even geonim that disagree with this.

I take the first approach to be best, but I also recognize the validity and value of the second approach.

Right after writing the above I went over to the Breslov place  and listened to someone reading the books of Rav Nathan [a disciple of Rav Nahman] on  the subject of "outside wisdoms" he disparages those that learn or teach them. But that while going with Rav Hai Gaon and some rishonim like the Ramban that goes with that approach, I still prefer the Saadia Gaon, Chovot Levavot, Rambam approach, which is exactly opposite. 

To my way of thinking it all depends on what one is learning. If we are talking about the social studies departments of universities, well Rav Nathan was 100% correct.  [As Allan Bloom goes into great depth in his Closing of the American Mind]. But if we we would be talking about STEM fields then clearly Saadia gaon and the Hovot Levavot are correct.

 People in the USSR at the end did not want to USSR to continue. However what they got after that was generally not to their liking either. When I would ask people [often the women selling their products at the local bazar how were things during the time of the USSR, they would always answer the same thing: "Better than now." And sometimes they would elaborate: "Everyone was working." Or sometimes even more extensive elaborations. What I generally take that to mean is that you have to take things in perspective. To try and make the USA into a socialist state is to try and take it down. But to compare the USSR to the kinds of chaos that things sank to after the fall of the USSR --well obviously the USSR was better.

To accept things the way they are is a important trait.

 i was thinking about the advantages of having one's own space. But also thinking that the best idea is to accept things the way they are.as long as these things at least least to tolerable and lovable in some degree. To accept things the way they are is a important trait. There can be a point where one must act but it is best not to hurry that point along.