The Many Types of K'neged Kulam

“Residing in Eretz Yisrael is equivalent to the rest of the mitzvot combined”
Sifre on Dvarim 12 and Tosefta Av.Z. 5,2 and cited by the Pitchei Tshuva Ev.H. 75,6.

“the peg upon which the entire Torah hangs”
R. Ya’akov Emdin, Siddur Beit Ya’akov p.13.

 a mitzva which “encompasses the entire Torah”.
Or HaChayim, Dvarim 30,20.

Rav Ari Shvat (Chwat), Rosh Midreshet Tal Orot, Michlelet Orot, Elkana, in blog Tomar Devorah

There are other similar statements from Chazal concering tzitzis, niddah, and I believe, Shabbos. R' Wolbe has a whole book about this.

We tend to only hear about Talmud Torah being c'neged culam.

R Miller on Secular Education

"IS IT OK TO HAVE ENCYCLOPEDIAS IN YOUR HOME?


It’s a question of limudei chol (secular education).

In Frankurt-am-Main they taught limudei chol in the school of the frum Jews. A man who went there told me once that he learned more Yiras Shamayim (fear of Heaven) from his science teacher there than he learned from his rebbe, because...
...the science teacher utilized all the lessons to talk about Yiras Shamayim. It’s possible for a teacher to inject now and then certain thoughts in the minds of students that will give them more benefit than what they heard in the mesivta where the rebbe was teaching Gemara and Halacha (Jewish law).

If you’re learned already—you know Mussar, you learn Halacha —and you want an encyclopedia in order to use it to help other people become frum using the information that you might pick up, go ahead and do it. Otherwise forget about it, because you’re not capable of dealing with the Apikorsus (heresy) in these books.

I personally think limudei chol are a good thing if they’re done in a kosher way, because limudei chol leads you to Yiras Hashem if it’s done right. If you’re capable of distinguishing, then it’s alright, but most people shouldn’t bother bringing any other books in their houses, because they’re not capable. Children will read them and they’ll make a wrong impression.

A man once brought me some books. I put them in my bathroom and I keep them there. I get benefit out of them, but he wouldn’t get any benefit from them. (#E-083, Learning to Live Successfully)"

http://www.rabbimillersanswers.com/answers/is-it-ok-to-have-encyclopedias-in-your-home1

FFBs, Shiduchim and BTS

I wish someone would have told me about the FFB attitude towards BTs vis a vis shiduchim. What is that attitude? It is that generally they don't want to marry us. There are exceptions, more than a few. But generally this seems to be the case.

It's not based on much more than stereotypes and ignorance that reminds one of Medieval peasants and their feelings about black cats or walking under ladders. Or, Texans thinking Jews have horns. There is a lot of blind following in the frum world and silly ideas about BTs and bad family backgrounds are one of them.

I won't even bother picking it all apart except to say I know many FFBs with family problems and many BTs from sound families. I also think we talk about family background too much. In this day and age, you don't live with the extended family, so the qualities of the person you marry are much more important than the family they come from. And BTs are often very fine people. You know they are people who seek good things in general, who are willing to change their lives. With FFBs, you don't know that at all.

But they don't want us. It's a stigma. It's a fear. It's just something different. Our accents are different and we speak English too well. It freaks them out.

And I wish I knew this because I wasted so much time on FFB women, wining and dining them. Sometimes  they'd go out with me as much as 6 times. But every date felt like the first. They were just waiting for something to nix it because they never wanted a BT in the first place.

A few times, by the time I got to a BT, I was exhausted and sick of dating. Or I was busy with a FFB and couldn't date the BT.

My suggestion to BTs, focus on BTs. The odds are better of something working out. I'm not saying you can't marry an FFB. I'm just talking about probabilities of success.But be patient with them because they are changing over their lives and might just be a little on edge and a little confused. This doesn't mean they aren't worthy marriage partners. 

I know a guy who won't date any woman who speaks BT-speak, ie sounds like she just came out of  Neve. But  that's not realistic. Because the other thing BTs need to be told is that they just went from having 50 million possible matches to about 50 or 5. You have to work with people and make your own success. It  will not be handed to you.

Gems from R Miller

"Should you be ashamed of your sins?
In this world people are afraid to admit that once they were sinners. But in the next world, the truth will be revealed and they’ll be honored for the fact that they overcame their pasts.
They will be honored for the fact that despite their sins, they worked so hard that they really regretted it, and they’re going to be rewarded for the fact that they did a sin. — Asking Hashem "

from Rabbi Avigdor Miller's SimchaMail 
ww.simchashachaim.com

Be Practical

People today are so impractical. I think the school system is a primary cause of that. They take kids out of reality and feed them esoteric subject matter day and night. This works for rich WASPS who go into the family business and who buy them out of trouble. Doesn't work for 99% of us.

The frum world is also guilty of this. So rarely do people get together and talk about the tough issues of their lives. Rather, we give divrei Torah and sing songs. That's fine, but can we talk also about money, children, and marriage?

The components of our decisions are also absurd. Take aliyah. Most of the time people get into long winded diatribes about the Ramban or the 3 oaths or about national destiny or moshiach or faith. How about the basic appeal of the place, for example it's less corporate political system that has mutli-parties unlike the USA which really has one party? How about being with people who don't live to work as they do in the USA. These reasons are easier to connect to than the Ramban talking about mitzvos and the land.

Even faith as a goal we approach with too much talk. Yet another guilt trip about our lack of it. Faith comes from Jewish living more than it does speeches.

Or why we should not work too much because that shows a lack of faith. Rather, working too much destroys faith because you get sucked into the corporate cult and lose focus on God. So rather than resort to riding on clouds, just look at your life and you have your reasons.

The examples and offshoots of this are endless.

We need to be more practical.

A Modest Woman

A Modest Woman

The New Torah Lishmah

The contemporary focus on Limud Torah is so sweeping that it seems to exclude all other facets of Avodas Hashem and even Avodas Hashem itself. The new definition of Torah Lishmah seems to be study for no purpose other than study. Historically it meant study without impure motives but always study with the intent of serving God. The approach today is to study for no purpose at all for if we are not studying to serve God then we are doing nothing. It is not unfair to call it narcissistic. We seem really to study for ourselves. As the gentile world has pushed God out of nearly every facet of life (even funerals), we are finding a way to do the same. The Satan has found his way into the very core of Jewish life.

We must inform you that our Sages were not physicians.

Rav Sherira Gaon
(906-1006; Babylonia):

i. Otzar Hageonim, Gittin 68, #376 :

אוצר הגאונים, תשובות שעו – גיטין סח; ז"ל

ודשאלתון למיכתב לכון הני אסואתא דמי שאחזו קורדיקוס מן רב ושמואל עד פסאקא דמתניתין, האיך קיבלוהו ופירושו בלשון הגדים.  צריכין אנן למימר לכון דרבנן לאו אסותא אינון ומילין בעלמא דחזונין בזמניהון וכחד חד קצירא אמרונין ולאו דברי מצוה אינון הילכך לא תסמכון על אלין אסותא וליכא דעביד מינהון מידעם אלא בתר דמבדיק וידע בודאי מחמת רופאים בקיאים דההיא מילתא לא מעיקא לה וליכא דליתי נפשיה לידי סבנה.  והכין אגמרו יתנא ואמרו לנא אבות וסבי דילנא דלא למעבד מן אילין אסותא אלא מאי דאיתיה כגון קיבלא דקים ליה לההוא דעביד ליה דלית ביה עקתא.  וכולהו מילי לא צריכינא לפרושנון וטעמי ליכא לגלואינון אלא מילי דחזיננא דעמיקן עליכון התם.  עכ"ל

We must inform you that our Sages were not physicians.  They may mention medical matters which they noticed here and there in their time, but these are not meant to be a mitzvah. Therefore you should not rely on these cures and you should not practice them at all unless each item has been carefully investigated by medical experts who are certain that this procedure will do no harm and will cause no danger [to the patient]. This is what our ancestors have taught us, that none of these cures should be practiced, unless it is a known remedy and the one who uses it knows that it can cause no harm.  [translation in "Freedom to Interpret", by Rabbi Aryeh Carmell]

http://torahandscience.blogspot.co.il/2006/04/rav-sherira-gaon.html

Rav Kook on Berachos 35b

(posted with permission)
http://ravkooktorah.org/EKEV_65.htm
 Summarzied by Chanan Morrison


Constant Torah Study?

What is the ideal? Should we strive to dedicate ourselves totally to Torah study? Or should we divide our time between Torah study and an occupation?

The Sages debated this issue on the basis on an apparent contradiction between two verses. On the one hand, we are exhorted to study Torah constantly: "This book of Torah shall not depart from your mouth; you shall meditate in them day and night" (Joshua 1:8).

Yet, the Torah also says, "You shall gather your grains, your wine and your oil" (Deut. 11:14) — implying that we should occupy ourselves with working the land and a livelihood. Which is correct?

Rabbi Ishmael explained that the verse exhorting constant Torah study cannot be taken literally. The second verse teaches us that one should combine the study of Torah with a worldly occupation. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, however, disagreed:

"Can it be that a person will plow and plant and harvest and mill and winnow, each labor in its season? What will become of Torah? Rather, when Israel fulfills God's will, their work will be performed by others ... And when Israel does not fulfill God's will, they must perform their own labor." (Berachot 35b)
The Nature of the Human Soul

According to Rashi, both scholars agreed that the ideal is full-time Torah study. Rabbi Ishmael, however, took a pragmatic stand that it is better to have a livelihood and not be dependent on charity.

But Rav Kook explained that the disagreement is not a matter of practicality versus an ideal state. Rather, they disagreed about the nature of the human soul and its spiritual capabilities.

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai held that the human soul is meant to be continually occupied with intellectual and spiritual pursuits. If necessary, we may be forced to deal with mundane matters, but such activity is, in fact, beneath our true potential. The human soul is so elevated that it can only be satisfied with total dedication to study and contemplation.

Thus, the command that "This book of Torah shall not depart from your mouth" should be understood literally. It applies to the complete human being who has not become soiled by sin. Some people may feel a weakness in spirit due to excessive study, but this frailty is only due to flaws in character. As the Jewish people perfect themselves, their work will be performed by others, and their sole desire will be to dedicate themselves to knowing God and His ways.

Rabbi Ishmael, on the other hand, felt that human nature is a composite of both theoretical and practical inclinations. According to his view, to occupy oneself with worldly matters in the proper measure is not just a concession to the current state of the world; rather, it meets an innate need of our inner makeup. Rabbi Ishmael came to this conclusion through his observation that most people are not satisfied to spend their days only in study and spiritual pursuits.

Who Was Right?

The Talmud records that many followed the advice of Rabbi Ishmael, and it worked well for them. Those who followed Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, on the other hand, were not successful.

There may be a select few who feel they are destined for greatness and are happy to delve constantly in wisdom and Torah. However, the Torah was not given to angels; its teachings must be suitable for the majority of people.

While it is difficult to determine the true capacity of the human soul, we can ascertain from empirical evidence that what works for most people is indicative of humanity's true inner nature. Many followed Rabbi Ishmael's counsel and found satisfaction in both their Torah study and their material accomplishments, while those following Rabbi Shimon's opinion felt less successful, due to an internal resistance to constant Torah study. This indicates that Rabbi Ishmael's assessment of human nature is accurate for the vast majority of people. Rabbi Shimon's outlook is only valid for the select few who are blessed with rare spiritual gifts.

The Right Balance

Having ascertained that for most people it is preferable to combine Torah study with an occupation, we still need to determine the proper balance between Torah and work. How should we divide our time and effort between them?

The Talmud (Berachot 35b) made the following observation:

"See what a difference there is between the earlier and the later generations. Earlier generations made the study of Torah their main concern and their livelihood secondary to it, and both prospered in their hands. Later generations made their livelihood their main concern and their Torah study secondary, and neither prospered in their hands."
Even in worldly matters, one's sense of contentment and happiness is influenced by his spiritual state. A person who has acquired virtuous character traits, a strong faith and an awe of heaven is protected against many of the aspects of life that can lead one astray and that make life's burdens so difficult. Such a person is content with his portion in life. For this reason, the earlier generations who made Torah study and ethical pursuits their principle concern, were successful in both their spiritual and material endeavors.

However, one who has not properly developed his ethical nature, since he concentrated all of his energy on his livelihood, will never be content with what he has acquired. His flawed character traits will lead him to chase after ill-advised cravings. Even if he succeeds in amassing great wealth, he will not be satisfied and will never feel true peace of mind.

Quality, not Quantity

Rav Kook concluded with a very significant comment. The amount of time devoted to a particular activity is not the sole factor in determining that this is our main pursuit in life. What truly matters is our mindset. That which we consider to be the central focus of our life, even if we are unable to devote most of our time to it, constitutes our principle activity.

(Gold from the Land of Israel, pp. 310-313. Adapted from Ein Eyah vol. II pp. 173-175.)

No Tyrants Please

One of the clearest signs of a tyrant is greed. This takes many forms. Tyrants want it all, power, money, pleasure. They don't want you to have any. The worst tyrants are bothered by any other living being having autonomy or resources of their own. They'll try to convince you that simple use of your own mind is brazen, having your own dreams is somehow wrong, even as they have their own. Abusive people are tyrants. They too want it all and basically want you to not exist except for their purposes. Keep this in mind when you deal with authority figures. If they are tyrannical, toss 'em.


Copyright 2013. You may link or copy in part or entirely.

More on Daas Torah: Lawrence Kaplan

Linked Post

More on Daas Torah: Lawrence Kaplan

"The idea of Daas Torah, as a charismatic notion of rabbinic authority, is something different. It doesn’t come out of nowhere, so it’s not yeish me-ayin. But, as I and others see it, it is an expanded view of traditional conceptions of rabbinic authority, precisely because of greater challenges in the modern period to rabbinic authority. And the classical sources which have been cited as support for it don’t seem to prove the larger claims made on its behalf. One such source is the notion of Emunas Chachamim.  But it must be said that the phrase is very general; what it means is not so clear. The meaning attributed to it by the exponents of  Daas Torah seems to be a late nineteenth century development, imported from the Hasidic view of the Rebbe. The source cited most often in support of the notion of Daas Torah,  and which I focused on most in my article, is Lo Sasur. As I pointed out, according to most authorities it applies only to the Beis Din Hagadol. I further pointed out that the view of Afilu omrin lekha al yemin shehu semol is that of the Sifre. The Yerushalmi is the other way, that only if they say yemin is yemin  and semol is semol do you have to listen to them. In my article, particularly the Hebrew version, I went through all the different ways how different scholars try to reconcile the two sources. The authority who seems to be the key figure for the exponents of Daas Torah is the Sefer HaChinuch -- he’s the one who  applies the Sifre generally to Chachmei HaDor. But the Sefer HaChinuch’s view is more of a practical view; you have to submit to the authority of Chachmei HaDor not because they necessarily have such great understanding, but just because otherwise you’re going to have chaos and anarchy. So it’s a more practical view. So what I suggested is that the modern view of Daas Torah – again, I’m not saying it was made out of whole cloth – is arrived at by taking the idea of the Sefer HaChinuch applying Lo Sasur to all Chachmei HaDor and combining that with the view of the Ramban who talks about the Beis Din Hagadol’s great understanding and how God will protect them from error, etc [7]."

continue at Sefarim blog

True Lithanian Judaism is gone

Linked comment, Micha Berger on Orthodoxy today:

"I do not identify with mod-O. In fact, there is not a movement around today I would feel comfortable identifying with.

Sociologically, my neighborhood has little mod-O presence. Actually, around 1/3 of the rabbis are from YU, but it's a sea of black hats, black suits, and white shirts even in their neck of the woods. My own LOR is a Lakewood product (and my father's chavrusah). In terms of my attire, I don't dress yeshivish or mod-O outside the workplace; I dress East European (long jacket, etc...)

But even in my YU days, I was in R' Dovid Lifshitz'a shiur. The Suvalker Rav didn't know Lithuania? I had a rebbe who learned in Grodno under a former Telzher Rosh Yeshiva, so my connection to that world is more direct than you're simply writing off with the words "YU".

For that matter, going further back, my elementary school hired rabbeim from Williamsburg, and the taitch for "Bereishis" was given as "In unfang".

So kindly refrain from reducing people to stereotypes, and then attacking their ability to comment based on your own assumptions.

You also seem to think that today's "chareidi type yeshivos" more authentically reproduce Telz or Volozhin than does RIETS. That's a fantasy. Not that Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan does either. (BTW, under the Alter, Kelm had a yeshiva qetana with limudei chol WITHOUT gov't coersion!) And while Volozhin, Kelm and Slabodka didn't have classes in limudei chol beyond what the Czar forced into Volozhin, it was expected of the talmidim in their spare time. See R' EE Dessler's recollection of his father giving him Uncle Tom's Cabin to read. But I'm not going to pretend they were YU -- just that they aren't today's Lakewood, either.

True Lithanian Judaism is gone, r"l. If it weren't I would probably have a spiritual home.

Bikhlal the line between chassidus and Litvishkeit largely fell since we left Eastern Europe. In R' Aharon Kotler's day only the rabbeim wore black, only the rabbeim were allowed to have beards, and talmidim were encouraged to argue back during a shiur -- even R' Aharon's. Today's yeshivish student is expected to wear a uniform (as per chassidus) and view his Rosh Yeshiva as a chassid does his rebbe. The masses don't even know enough hashkafah to know the machloqes between the Besh"t and the Gra about tzimtzum -- transcendence vs immanence, or about sheleimus vs deveiqus.

Yes, the typical O Jew today spends so little time thinking about the fundamentals he doesn't realize he holds conflicting beliefs about whether G-d is in Shamayim or everywhere, and about man's mission in life. Not the conflict -- it's resolvable. But not to even know there is a problem to resolve? So of course he ends up judging based on lifestyle. Chassidim, particularly after the uniforming and daas Torah, have a more similar lifestyle to the yeshivish than MO does. So, they think it's more similar in philosophy as well."

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2013/05/rabbi-micha-berger-why-yeshiva-world.html

Gratitude

Feeling gratitude should be one of the essential activities of life. As Rabbi Miller points out, people will not feel gratitude if they are unhappy. A life of asceticism and denial for denial sake is a terrible mistake because it leaves people struggling with the middah of gratitude. They will not feel grateful if they are miserable. Yes, self-denial is a part of life, but only one part. If you turn that into the whole thing, you create a mess.

When we allow ourselves to enjoy the many kosher activities of life, we should then feel gratitude to our Creator. When we do not, we miss out on one of the great opportunities of life. William Shakespeare offered some powerful words on the mistake of ingratitude.

Blow, blow, thou Winter Wind by William Shakespeare
 
BLOW, blow, thou winter wind,
Thou art not so unkind
  As man's ingratitude;
Thy tooth is not so keen,
Because thou art not seen,         5
  Although thy breath be rude.
Heigh ho! sing, heigh ho! unto the green holly:
Most friendship is feigning, most loving mere folly:
        Then heigh ho, the holly!
        This life is most jolly.  10

      Freeze, freeze, thou bitter sky,
      That dost not bite so nigh
        As benefits forgot:
      Though thou the waters warp,
      Thy sting is not so sharp  15
        As friend remember'd not.
Heigh ho! sing, heigh ho! unto the green holly:
Most friendship is feigning, most loving mere folly:
        Then heigh ho, the holly!
        This life is most jolly.  20

age of Marriage

"In the Chazon Ish on Y'D hilchos Talmud Torah and in Igros
Chazon Ish Volume 2 # 135 he Writes that 'From the Mishna and Gemora the age of Marriage is
18 yrs old. That is the way people were 'Noheg' for many Generations' and he continues ' Some delay marriage for Learning Torah...but that is the Way ONLY for a few individuals'!"

Wise counsel from the Chazon Ish

"1-Do not borrow money from
People

2-do not do strange things even
If it involves Ruchnayus

3-try to stay away from eating
Until satisfying desire.

4-Quote "I love to make peoples
Hearts happy, it is my obligation
To be cautious not to cause discomfort for another jew even
For ONE SECOND!"

Igros 1-letter 33

5-"it is human nature to get tired. There should be NO feelings of guilt or sin only recognition of G'D nature.
One should Ignore Hashem's
Nature which is the ultimate
Experience of Hashem's will".

"Therefore , I decree upon you
To interrupt your learning completely for 2 weeks and
You should increase eating healthy food and increase your sleep and take relaxing trips and
Other kinds of 'Batala'"

Igros volume 1-35

Going back to college

After becoming frum, I went into the standard college is shtus mode. I tried to maintain this for many years, but it never really took hold. And I don't think that the difficulty of change is the primary reason for that. The reason is that college is not schtus. Certainly much of it is. I knew that even then. But much is quite positive. It's madah, it's chochmah, it's even Torah in a way. Overall, college lead me to yiddishkite as I learned about religious devotion via the poets, learned to think in new perspectives, learned about moral conservatism, learned about Bible from Christians on campus. I never hooked up with the religious Jews because I found them too odd.  The Christians knew how to be pleasant. But I didn't become Christian. Rather, they introduced me to my tradition. College has its problems - the promiscuity is terrible. The snobbery is terrible. But parts are quite positive. Moreover, I worked my whole life to get there, so to try to extirpate it from the mind is unhealthy - you wind up cutting off much of your brain along with that kind of gesture. So now I embrace my college and I don't hide it even from the Lakewood crowd.