I’m waiting for the keynote, which promises to be the most boring thing in existence, so here’s a Jewish joke to cheer everybody up:
There is an election for a rabbi in a synagogue. Everyone says Rabinovich would be a great choice. Chaim stands up and says,
— I am against Rabinovich because his daughter is a prostitute.
- Chaim, what are you saying! Rabinovich does not have a daughter at all. He has four sons - that's all!
- Well, I said my piece, and you decide.
Clarissa's Blog 
Related. Hunter S Thompson tells a a story about LBJ.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Torah as contrasted by Goyim Philosophers
The concept of פשט does not make a literal reading of texts. Making a literal reading of Torah qualifies as טיפש פשט. An example of טיפש פשט: “Rather, פשט refers to the straightforward, contextual interpretation of sacred texts, especially within the context of the Torah and other Jewish scriptures.” The entire Book of בראשית teaches טהור זמן גרמא מצוות. Do you know what this type of Av mitzva means, contrasted by toldot positive and negative Torah commandments?
NO Torah commandment: to believe in God. Why? Because all avoda zarah belief systems begin with the self-centered EGO I. But my EGO I did not Create God. Yet Christian and Muslim theologies and Creeds … their EGO I in fact creates Gods! The Xtian EGO I creates the Trinity. The Muslim EGO I creates strict monotheism! Bunk.
Tefillah NOT prayer. A person swears a Torah oath through שם ומלכות in תפילה. Prayer has nothing to do with swearing a Torah oath. Hence the two as different as oil and water. The פשט of the opening Creation story in ספר בראשית, the introduction of the concept that doing tohor time oriented commandments can Create the Universe from nothing. For example: the mitzva as told when Yaacov wrestled with the Angel of Esau and became crippled. This mitzva of the gid ha’nasheh, the tearing of the sciatic nerve teaches the mussar of Esau greeting Yaacov with a kiss rather than plunging a sword within Yaacov’s gut!
Tefillah and Shabbat and Acts of kindness and charity, like for example burying the dead or visiting the sick etc all these cases, they qualify as tohor time oriented commandments and NOT positive commandments. Why? Because positive commandments do not require prophetic mussar k’vanna when a person does any positive Torah “toldot” commandment. Whereas Av tohor time oriented commandments, require prophetic mussar as the foundational k’vanna פשט – otherwise known as מלכות.
The idea of טיפש פשט or bird brain stupidity ironically also translates as מלכות or kingship. Whereas Av tohor time oriented commandments understands מלכות as the prophetic mussar פשט which defines the parameters of the k’vanna of Torah spirits אל רחום חנון וכו; also known as the revelation of the 13 tohor spirits – Oral Torah middot system of logic.
Prophetic Mussar and K’vanna: The concept of prophetic mussar (ethical guidance) as foundational k’vanna (intention) for Av tohor time-oriented commandments an intriguing Torah vision. It emphasizes that fulfilling these mitzvot goes beyond mere rote Shulkan Aruch robotic ritual actions; it requires inner alignment with Divine tohor middot spirits. The term מלכות (kingship) takes on deeper significance when understood in this context. As opposed to the טיפש פשט literal translation of “KING”.
The concept of prophetic mussar as the foundational k’vanna for Av tohor time-oriented commandments – indeed profound. It highlights the importance of not just performing mitzvot (commandments) mechanically, but doing so with a deep, intentional alignment with Divine tohor spirits revealed to Moshe Rabbeinu 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf on Yom Kippur. This inner alignment of tohor middot spirits, transforms the mitzva act into a meaningful spiritual revelation.
The term מלכות (kingship) in this context, underscores the idea of Divine sovereignty within our Yatzir Tov, contrasted by our Evil I Self-worship infatuation, emotionally immature inclination. By integrating prophetic ethical guidance (mussar) into our intentions (k’vanna), individuals can elevate their observance of mitzvot, making each act a reflection of Divine kingship Av tohor middot spirits achieved through tohor time oriented commandments.
This approach encourages a holistic view of religious practice, where the external actions qualify as but the bark of a tree, deeply connected to internal spiritual k’vanna; ethical living constitutes as the fruit of this same tree. A beautiful way to infuse everyday actions with profound spiritual significance.
Hegel, the German philosopher, had a distinctive approach to truth. He believed that truth emerges through a dynamic process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Essentially, opposing ideas clash, leading to a higher synthesis—a richer understanding that transcends the initial contradictions. Torah, by contrast, emphasizes a journey—a path of prophetic ethical living and spiritual growth. Each person’s unique path (destiny walk) contributes to a larger truth, and no single party can dictate it to another.
Bertrand Russell, a British philosopher and logician, made significant contributions to formal logic and mathematical analysis. His work influenced fields like philosophy of language, epistemology (philosophy that examines the nature, origin, and limits of knowledge), and the foundations of mathematics. Russell’s rigorous approach to reasoning sought to establish precise rules for making a valid logical inference (a דיוק in rabbinic logic), using mathematical tools to analyze language and thought. Essentially, he aimed to create a logical framework that applied across various domains.
Oral Torah logic focuses only upon the realm of Torah common law precedent comparisons. A precedent in Hebrew: בנין אב.
Hegel’s truth involves deriving a synthesis which emerges from opposing concepts. Torah’s truth a path toward ethical behavioral refinement, how a person behaves/conducts business with both family and people.
Russell’s work focused on formal logic and mathematical rigor. Aristotelian logic, the foundational system of deductive reasoning which has dominated Western Civilizations starting with the Renaissance which emerged following the Muslim invasion of Spain and the rediscovery of the concealed ancient Greek ideas that so threatened the early Church that it preferred Dark Ages beliefs in God, Devil and witches over rational reason.
The heart of Aristotelian logic, his syllogisms. Major Premise: A general statement or principle. Minor Premise: A specific statement related to the major premise. Conclusion: An inference drawn from the major and minor premises. Classic rabbinic logic learns from כלל פרט או פרט כלל. Modern literature requires that a thesis statement has qualifying particulars which support the premise of the thesis statement.
Hegel’s dialectical approach indeed invites us to see truth as a dynamic process. The clash of opposing ideas—thesis and antithesis—leads to synthesis, which transcends initial contradictions. It’s like the unfolding of a philosophical dance, where each step contributes to a richer understanding.
In the context of Torah, this resonates with the idea that truth dynamic and not static; it evolves as we engage with ethical living and spiritual growth. Each person’s unique path (destiny walk) adds to this collective truth, and no single party, whether past or present generations can monopolize it. In Hebrew this collective error that places earlier generations upon a pedestal known through the טיפש פשט of ירידות הדורות. The correct interpretation for ירידות הדורות: domino effect based upon the fact that throwing a rock into a pond produces a ripple impact.
When we apply Russellian clarity to religious concepts, we dissect their logical structure. For example, analyzing the premises behind ethical commandments can reveal deeper insights into their implications. In rabbinic logic, the principle of כלל פרט או פרט כלל (general to specific or specific to general) allows for nuanced interpretation. It recognizes that truth simply not always straightforward; context matters, and particulars absolutely required to refine our understanding of the general idea.
Modern literature, too, appreciates the importance of qualifying particulars. A well-crafted thesis statement gains strength when supported by specific evidence or examples. The anti-thesis of this idea: the Church ‘Blood Libel’ made virtually every Easter, followed by violent pogroms. An accusation does not qualify as proof. Hence a general thesis statement requires multiple specifics which validate the general thesis “accusation”.
Spanish Jewish philosophers utterly assimilated and embraced the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophies of both Plato, Aristotle and others. The Kuzari, poet Judah Halevi conducts a religious debate with the king of the Khazars.
The Khazar king, curious about the tenets of Judaism, seeks instruction from the rabbi, comparing it with Christianity and Islam.
This issue whether the Kuzari claim concerning the conversion of the king of Khazar to Judaism utterly not important. The Kuzari attempt to differentiate the Jewish people during the height of the Xtian crusades totally collapses. Why? Judah Halevi’s logic based upon ancient Greek logic rather than rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah פרדס logic discipline of Common law based upon precedents!
The Kuzari’s Av tumah avoda zarah impact on subsequent Jewish thought – profound. It shaped debates within the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment) movement. Its ideas and style played a role in shaping intellectual discourse during the Haskalah. It also influenced the rise of anti-rationalist Kabbalah.
The Kuzari, originally written in Arabic. Judah ben Saul ibn Tibbon’s 12th-century Hebrew translation particularly well-known.
The Kuzari Principle an “empirical generalization” concerning certain national traditions such as the Pesach story expressed through the Haggadah. The Kuzari’s emphasis upon history rather than mussar planted the foundation for Historical Judaism. Otherwise known as Conservative Judaism.
The encounter with Greek philosophy—especially through the works of Plato and Aristotle—shaped medieval Jewish intellectual life. The tension between embracing Hellenistic ideas – avoda zarah, and maintaining Jewish cultural identity, as expressed through the dedication of lighting the Hannuka lights – the central Jewish Civil War during this period. Some scholars, like assimilated Maimonides, sought to harmonize Greek philosophy with Jewish common law logic.
The Crusades, a time of extreme Jewish upheaval. The Kuzari’s arguments reflect the urgency of asserting Jewish identity crisis concerning our cultural identity in the face of external pressures to assimilate. Interestingly, the Kuzari’s anti-philosophical stance also contributed to the rise of Zohar and Ari Kabbalah—the divergent mystical traditions that incorporated ancient Greek philosophy through and through. The Ari Kabbalah failed to grasp the Creation story as teaching Av tohor time oriented commandments as the critical theme of the Book of בראשית.
Judah ben Saul ibn Tibbon’s Hebrew translation of the Kuzari ensured its accessibility to subsequent generations. Ibn Tibbon’s work as a translator simply crucial in transmitting philosophical and scientific knowledge from Arabic into Hebrew. This fundamental error of thought, that Torah common law a simple translation could duplicate has plagued all generations of Torah scholarship thereafter. Torah common law learns by means of precedents. Learning through comparative precedents defines both Aggadic research and Halachic research. The Rambam’s Yad HaZakah translated and organized halacha into Greek and Roman statute law classifications of subject matter!
This Av tumah avoda zarah assimilation represents a disaster on par with king Shlomo’s building a wood and stone assimilated Catholic like Cathedral rather than establishment of lateral common law Sanhedrin courtroom across his kingdom – the real Beit Ha’Mikdash which king David and the prophet Natan commanded. Both this and that undermined Torah faith as the pursuit of justice in the land of Israel.
Maimonides, in particular, grappled with assimilated avoda zarah Av tumah tension. His works, such as the Guide for the Perplexed, sought to harmonize Aristotelian thought with “Jewish theology”?!. His rationalist approach aimed to bridge these worlds of Greek Philosophy with Jewish common law converted unto Greek/Roman statute law!
Torah’s legal system doesn’t merely rely on translation; it evolves through case law, precedent, and employing Gemarah halachot to re-interpret the original k’vanna of the language of its Home Mishna. The true “house of God” lies not at all in wood & stone, but rather in the ethical and legal fabric of a just society. A just legal system, kindness, and ethical behavior create sacred spaces. The true “house of God”, built not through wood & stone like the idols mocked by the prophets, but rather in the hearts and actions of those who seek justice and compassion.
LikeLike
Chaim mixes meat and milk in synagogue politics. The leviathan a unique sea creature, some sort of sea serpent. Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 27:1’s description of it as a snake (nachash). An answer to this question suggests that it’s a fish (and doesn’t address Yeshayahu). We know from the midrash that at the end of days the righteous will feed on it, whatever it is. A kosher snake!
Originally, God produced both a male and a female leviathan. But fearing they’d multiply and wreak havoc, God slew the female, reserving her flesh for a righteous banquet during the Messianic era. So, Chaim’s meat-and-milk escapade meets the leviathan’s aquatic mystery. Who knew synagogue politics could be so… piscine? Hamlet’s “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark”.
Marcellus, one of the guards at Elsinore Castle, says this as they discuss the appearance of the ghost of King Hamlet, who has been haunting the castle. The ghost beckons to Hamlet, setting off a chain of events that will uncover political corruption, betrayal, and tragedy. The reference: “rotten” suggests decay, corruption, and moral decline. Just as Marcellus not just talking about the ghost; but hints to a broader political corruption festering within Denmark. So too Chaim deeply suspects Rabinovich’s – “fear of heaven”.
Claudius, the new king (and Hamlet’s uncle), has ascended the throne through foul means—by murdering his brother, King Hamlet. Claudius’s actions cast a shadow over the entire kingdom. His guilt goes unpunished, and the state suffers as a result. By comparing the Midrashic story with Shakespeare’s Hamlet comes the interpretation that the end of days as told in the Midrash refers to achieving the clarity of a sterling reputation and good name; in the 17th Century following the Cossack 1648 pogroms arose a Jewish leader/rabbi known as “Baal Shem Tov”. A reference to the interpretation of “fear of heaven” as meaning: a person to strives to build and protect his Good Name reputation.
LikeLike