The basic approach of the Gra and the Litvak yeshivot is learning Torah  and trust in God. These two reinforce each other. So when one is spending all day and night in the yeshiva learning Torah one is not thinking about parnasa [making a living]. One tries to walk in this path for his yeshiva years and then  gets married and goes with that same idea that as long as one learns Torah and serves God, God will take care of the needs of his family. So in essence, trust in God is at the very centre of the Learning Torah idea.

On a large scale this is not in practice. but on the individual scale it is. one can still trust and God and God does take care of one.

 For really hard core Litvaks, there is almost no value in learning unless it is learning in depth. This I saw in Shar Yashuv in particular, But at the Mir and many other Litvak yeshivot, the afternoon is devoted to learning bekiut [fast learning].  So as a compromise, I learned every paragraph twice and went on. After all, I had not the intellectual tools to go in depth.  But eventually, I found myself learning with David Bronson in Uman, and his natural ability to see into the depths of Tosphot and the Gemara opened up for me the whole concept of learning in depth. But my learning with him came to an end. 

 For many people like me, I think the best thing is the combination of having some session in depth [review ten times of every thing, and learning the rishonim/early authorities and achronim/later authorities on the sugia (subject)] and another for fast learning. 

Also I would like to add here an idea that the real learning comes by listening to an expert. Rav Nahman brings this idea based on a Midrash that says this: Klal Israel [the House of Israel] at Sinai when offered the commandments said, "We will listen and do." But later they made the Golden Calf. Then God now says to us :"You have lost the we will do. So now at least hold onto we will listen."  Now Rav Nahman explain that saying the words yourself is "doing." But  we have lost that. That means learning yourself is not very effective.  Effective learning happens only by listening.

 Z92

The Rambam writes [Laws of Shkalim 1:2] הרמב''ם כותב [הלכות 'שקלים א הלכה ב]

הרמב''ם כותב [הלכות שקלים א' הלכה ב'] שלש מאות ועשרים שעורה משקל תבואה [לא נפח] שווה שקל אחד. זה היה לפני שהוסיפו לשקל כדי שיהיה שווה לסלע. בבכורות רב אשי שלח שש עשרה זוז של פדיון הבן. אז חמש כפול שלש מאות עשרים שווה שש עשרה זוז. אז זוז אחד הוא מאה שעורה גרגר. אבל החכמים של בית שני הוסיפו לשקל לעשות אותו שלש מאות שמונים וארבע. אז שלש מאות שמונים וארבע כפול חמש שווה עשרים זוז. אז רב אחא שלח הודעה לרב אשי להוסיף שלושה זוז לעשות זאת עשרים זוז. אז זוז זה תשעים ושש שעורה גרגר. איך זה מתאם לרמב''ם מסכת דמאי ב' משנה ה שהזוז הוא שש עשרה גרגרי שעורה

 The  Rambam writes [Laws of Shkalim 1:2] 320 barley grain weight [not volume] i one shekel. before they added to the shekel to make it equal to the sela. Rav Ashi sent 16 zuz to pay the 5 shekels of pidion haben. so 5 times 320=16 zuz. So one zuz is 100 barley grain. but the sages of the second temple added to the shekel to make it 384 grain. so 384 times 5 = 20 zuz. So Rav Acha sent word to Rav Ashi to add three zuz to make it 20 zuz. So a zuz is 96 grain. How does that correlate  with Rambam Tractate Demai chapter 2 mishna 5 that the zuz is 16 barley grain? 

 The רמב''ם writes [Laws of  'שקלים א הלכה ב] שלש מאות ועשרים שעורה grain weight [not volume] שווה one שקל. That was before they added to the שקל to make it equal to the סלע. In בכורות רב אשי sent שש עשרה זוז to pay the מש שקל  of פדיון הבן. So חמש multiplied by שלש מאות  עשרים שווה שש עשרה זוז. So one זוז is מאה barley grain. But the חכמים of the בית שני added to the שקל to make it שלש מאות שמונים וארבה grain. So שלש מאות שמונים וארבה multiplied by חמש שווה עשרים זוז. So רב אחא sent word to רב אשי to add three זוז to make it עשרים זוז. So a זוז is תשעים ושש grain. How does that correlate  with  רמב''ם מסכת דמאי ב' משנה ה that the זוז is שש עשרה barley grain? 

 i am still confused about the ketuba. in the Mishna in Demai chapter 2 mishna 5 the commentary of the rambam says a dinar is 6 zuz. and the dinar during the time of the mishna was the roman danarius. which was about $8,75 so a zuz is about $1.50. so that is about $300. [each zuz was in weight 16 grain of barley. so this works out ok. ] but what to do with the Rambam in Laws of Shekalim where  one shekel is 284grains of barley weight in silver? [and 20 zuz is five shekels in the gemara in bekorot. Rav Ahi sen17 zuz for pidion haben and Rav Acha told him to raise it to 20]

There is a "zona" in Hebrew which is a prostitute. However the legal definition of the word when it comes to the prohibition of a priest to marry a zona is that she is a woman who had sexual relations with someone who was forbidden to her. To R. Meir the first maaser [tithe] is forbidden to someone who is not a Levi. To Tosphot [yevamot page 91 side one] that does not include a zona. To the Rambam [in laws of maaser chapter one law 2] that includes a zona. 

The question comes from the fact that  a non cohen can not eat truma and that prohibition includes a zona and a halala. Rav Shach suggested that the reason of the rambam i that there is a parallel between truma and maaser. It is not just that a zona is excluded from laws relevant to  cohenim, but something about the holiness of the truma itself. But there is a difference. a zona can not be married to  cohen while she can be married to a levi

___________________________________________________________________________

There is a "זונה" in Hebrew which is a prostitute. However the legal definition of the word when it comes to the prohibition of a כהן to marry a זונה is that she is a woman who had sexual relations with someone who was forbidden to her. To ר' מאיר, the first מעשר  is forbidden to someone who is not a לוי. To תוספות [יבמות page צ''א ע''א] that does not include a זונה. To the רמב''ם in הלכות מעשר פרק א' הלכה ב  that includes a זונה. The question comes from the fact that  a non כהן can not eat תרומה and that prohibition includes a זונה and a חללה. AND רב שך suggested that the reason of the רמב''ם iS that there is a parallel between תרומה and מעשר. It is not just that a זונה is excluded from laws relevant to  כהנים, but something about the holiness of the תרומה  itself. But there is a difference. a זונה can not be married to כהן while she can be married to a לוי

יש "זונה" בעברית שהיא זונה. אולם ההגדרה המשפטית של המילה בכל הנוגע לאיסור של כהן להתחתן עם זונה היא שהיא אישה שקיימה יחסי מין עם מי שהיה אסור לה. לר' מאיר, המעשר הראשון אסור למי שאינו לוי. לתוספות [יבמות דף צ''א ע''א] שאינה כוללת זונה. לרמב''ם בהלכות מעשר פרק א' הלכה ב הכולל זונה. השאלה נובעת מכך שמי שאינו כהן אינו יכול לאכול תרומה והאיסור כולל זונה וחללה. ורב שך הציע שטעם הרמב''ם הוא שיש הקבלה בין תרומה למעשר. לא סתם זונה מוחרגת מהחוקים הרלוונטיים לכוהנים, אלא משהו בקדושת התרומה עצמה. אבל יש הבדל. זונה לא יכולה להיות נשואה לכהן בעוד שהיא יכולה להיות נשואה ללוי

written around 2002 [music for orchestra]

[b100 midi] b100 mp3