Integral Torah Perspectives

From: some shmo Hi shlemiel, The question is: The Rebbe explains that according to the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, the nature of Teshuva is  that the person must repent to the extent that he (not only deicde not to do *that particular sin* that he violated; but) decide that he will not vilate any one of the Mitzvot that Hashem commanded. The question was: According to this opinion what IF the person did not reach that far, and he only decided that he will not commit that particular sin, is it considered as if he did NO teshuva whatsoever, or we say that although he did not reach *Complete* teshuva he nonletheless is no longer a RASHA ( as ALter Rebbe states: that if a person committed a sin he is a rasha until he does teshuva). This is the question in the abstract form.  (There may be various practial "nafkah minahs" practical ramifications that result from this question. Rabbi Piekarsky offered one, which i feel has no practical bearing). Kol tuv, Some other shmo ~~~~ Fro

ב''ה Is it surprising that, for a place where we have a Jewish tradition of a flame regularly coming down from heaven to rest on the alter, we would see one? There are three Torah opinions as to where the Mikdash was on the temple mount. 1)The dome of the rock is the holy of holies. 2)The dome of the rock is where the main alter used to be. 3)The holy of holies was directly behind the western wall, and the temple was not connected to the dome of the rock.