Integral Torah Perspectives

In his efforts to explain how Torah views are absolute truth were as philosopy and science is only in the realm of the possible the כוזרי שני bring four opinions as to how lighting forms. As I was reading the theories I figured I would do a quick look up on wikipedia to see if the issue was resolved yet. I was surprised to find that it had not! As a nice coinsidence, there were also four theories mentioned in the wikipedia article. I thought I would share with you the four from כוזרי שני as well as the 4 mentioned in Wikipedia. Short hand from כוזרי שני: 1)Aristotle:Warm, thick steam rises from the earth very quickly and pushes the cloud from all sides. They try to escape from inside the cloud since the cloud is cold and wet while the steam is hot and dry. Because when it finaly escapes, it flames up, ripping through the cloud. This is when you see the lightning and hear the thunder. 2)Katisiv (descartes):The lightning is made out of steam from nitro(glycerin) and sulfur that is

ב''ה If קדב''ה is משתמש במאנין תבירין (the holy one blessed be he uses broken vessels - for example, a person with a broken heart, a pauper whom you give tzedaka to etc) why does it say that a broken vessel refers to the klipa by the hagada when we pour out the wine "סוד הקליפה הנקראת ארור?" Perhaps, if you look at the big picture, the shviras ha'kelim itself, that created the klipos, are the broken vessels that the holy one blessed be uses. One the one hand it is a source of G-dly "wrath" to pour wine into, while on the other, a dear dear thing to G-d that fulfills the purpose of creation, like giving charity to a pauper.Or, one could say that the unfair difficulties a person finds oneself in are the poured "wrath," while the humble state it causes is to be pitied and/or serve as a positive exemplar. Think, a young orphan whose parents were sentenced to death for murder. The wrath was poured out on the parents while the child remains

ב''ה It came to pass after Alexander the son of Pilipos the Macedonian, who came from the land of Kitim, conquered Daryavesh the king of Persia and Madai and become king in his place, ruling from Greece. He fought many wars and conquered fortified cities and slaughtered the kings of the earth. He reached to the edges of the earth and took the bounty of many nations. The earth was silent before him and became exalted and haughty. He gathered a very mighty army,  he ruled over the lands of nations and princes and they paid tribute to him. After all this, he fell ill and knew that he would die. He called to his distinguished servants that grew up together with him since childhood and he split amongst them his kingdom while he was still alive. Alexander ruled 12 years and then died. His servants each ruled their own realm. They all placed crowns of kingship on their heads after he died and passed on to their sons after them for many years. They multiplied the evil on the earth.

ב''ה Throwing the aravos against the paroches of the aron is more akin to throwing דם פר ושעיר against the paroches of the קודשׁ הקדשׁים than an ענין of אשׁר יגעה דמם על קיר מזבחך The bima of the shul is more akin to the מזבח the we circle, עומסי ערבה להכיף מזבח Accordingly when one throws the aravos it does not make sense  to intentionally throw it on the top since: לא היה מתכון לא למעלה ולא למטה, אלא כמצליף

ב''ה If "Good" refers to the angel of life and "Very Good" refers to the angel of death, is that why we say "Thanks" when your complimented and "Thanks A lot!" when someone insults you?

ב''ה The wisdom of metaphor can be found in the Torah 1,000 years before the Greeks. Aristotle, Plato and "Demostinus" (Democraties?) pride themselves in having invented it, yet in the Torah you can find all five forms. 1. Changing the nature of something. For example: --תִּבְלָעֵמוֹ, אָרֶץ. -שמות טו,יב – "The earth swallowed them." or:  א  הַאֲזִינוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַאֲדַבֵּרָה; – דברים לב – "listen heavens and I will speak." 2. Using the singular part to connote the totality of something. For example:  סוּס וְרֹכְבוֹ רָמָה בַיָּם. - שמות טו,א – "Horse and rider were upheaved in the sea." Or oppositely, using the totality for the single part:    (וַיְנַעֵר ה'  אֶת צְרַיִם, בְּתוֹךְ הַיָּם.  (שמות טו,א - "Hashem shook Egypt into the sea."  3. Exaggerated imagery. For example:  וַתִּבָּקַע הָאָרֶץ, בְּקוֹלָם. –   מלכים א פרק א, מ  "The Earth shook from their din." - referring to the joy of coronating Shlomo. י  

ב''ה כ וַאֲנִי, שְׁלֹשֶׁת הַחִצִּים צִדָּה אוֹרֶה, לְשַׁלַּח-לִי, לְמַטָּרָה. –שמואל א,כ "...I will shoot these three arrows towards the side of the target." -Yehonatan was hinting to "lashon Ha'ra" that "kills three," with the three arrows. Implying, that he would see how much his father Shaul had become prejudiced against David by talebearers. – םלבי''ם

ב''ה O.K. This is just too good! Check this out! א מַשָּׂא, נִינְוֵה--סֵפֶר חֲזוֹן נַחוּם, הָאֶלְקֹשִׁי. Ninve ring any Yom Kippur bells (Yonah maybe...)? ג יְהוָה, אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וגדול- (וּגְדָל-) כֹּחַ, וְנַקֵּה, לֹא יְנַקֶּה; יְהוָה, בְּסוּפָה וּבִשְׂעָרָה דַּרְכּוֹ, וְעָנָן, אֲבַק רַגְלָיו. Straight from 13 attributes of mercy to hurricanes and tornados; in the same Pasuk! Or how about: וְעִנִּתִךְ--לֹא אֲעַנֵּךְ, עוֹד. Sounds like a promise that for what we suffer on Yom Kippur, we will not suffer any further.

ב''ה Just a small note on Hawkings latest statement about G-d's involvement in creation (or lack thereof.) It would seem that his opinion is similar to Aristotle in קדמות העולם (primordal existance of matter/the world.) He simply replaces the קדמות הבורא  (primordal existance of the creator) with the laws of gravity. The concentrated form of matter that existed, in whatever form it did, before expression of time and space etc that was caused by the 'big bang' is simply another way of expressing קדמות העולם. There is no way of separating it's 'cause' as a תנועה (movement.) If it is causal it must have a  תנועה itself. If it has a תנועה itself, it must have a primal first 'cause', קדמות הבורא. Something must have caused the laws of physics/gravity themselves to be in there present form. What forces us to say that the laws are absolute? The laws of gravity can not replace the  קדמות הבורא that must be there according to Aristotle (even.) It is s

ב''ה Ruven, Shimon, Levi and Yehuda correspond to the 4 legs of the Merkava just as Avraham, Yitzchok, Yakov and David do. David, of course corresponds with Yehuda. This is why it says after Yehuda was born, (על כן קראה שמו יהודה ותעמוד מלדת. (בראשית כט:לה – That Leah "stood" from birthing. Once all the legs of the Merkava were there, it was able to stand. -From Eishel Avraham

ב''ה Just a shameless plug for some Chassidic thought. Buy it and rejoice in the goodness of the creator!

ב''ה Concerning the Gemara in Sanhedrin 98A that is floating around in reference to the BP oil spill. Yichezkel 32:14 O.K., first of all lets translate the Gemara properly: “The descendant of king David will not come until they will search for a fish for the sick and they won’t find…” “…as it is stated in the scriptures: Then I will sink their waters and will make their rivers flow like oil.” Rashi: That they will all be congealed, and since they are congealed the fish will not be found on the hook. This is a drasha in the Gemara and is not the pshat of the pasuk. Perhaps an obvious symptom of this is quoting a later pasuk (in p. 32) before an earlier pasuk (p. 29  - which also talks about mitzrayim) and saying that the earlier one applies later. In addition the perek is referring to Mitzrayim while the drasha is referring to a general state of being “without fish for the sick” without stating who this is happening to (presumably everyone.) I wonder, why would a sick man