Thursday, February 18, 2010

Russian posts

I wish I had patience to write like this, translating all my English posts into the language of Pushkin, and all my Russian posts into the language of Douglas Adams.

I also wish I could write this well or be as smart in general.
OK, the program. I skipped about half of the lectures, preferring to hang out with friends, but I did take in some. Haven’t heard anything new, but did notice a certain (already oft-mentioned) tendency of the kiruv workers to pass their opinions as fact. For example, Esther Segal (a really good speaker, BTW) referred to the existence of a single primal Jewish soul as fact at least four times, whereas AFAIK it’s only a contested kabbalistic opinion, just like transmigration of souls is; and as Saadia Gaon said about that (free translation): “Gilgul? Bloody nonsense!”

Another speaker, one David Karpov, spoke about reconciling science and religion. He described three method of settling conflicts: 1) science must yield; 2) religion must yield; 3) let’s compartmentalize and not think about them. After dressing down these straw men, he offered a fourth alternative (to which I have long subscribed): science and religion speak about different things in different languages, and there can be no real conflict between them. However, while knocking the straw men down he mentioned Goedel’s incompleteness theorem and claimed that this was why science could never figure out the mechanism of emergence of life or put together a unified field theory. I collared him after the lecture and asked: first, Goedel’s theorem is formulated in the abstract, so why are you claiming as fact that it’s precisely those two problems that science can’t solve? Second, does it bother you as a Habadnik that the Rebbe had unequivocally chosen the first method, writing about how unreliable carbon dating is and how God must have created dinosaur bones in situ, etc.?

In response to the first question Mr. Karpov told me a story of a pauper who was making rounds of an apartment building, asking people to help a poor cello player, until one of the dwellers asked him to come in and play the cello he happened to have. “Just my luck to run into a cello!” muttered the poor man. “I, too, have run into a cello,” Mr. Karpov told me, “for I normally don’t count on my audience being familiar with Goedel’s theorem. You’re right, this is my personal opinion.” The answer to the second question was more equivocal: since the late Rebbe propounded the aforementioned opinion in the 70s and 80s, thereafter abandoning the topic, Mr. Karpov made a far-reaching conclusion that he must have changed his mind.

Read on.

This is why Chabad started in Russia. I mean, what Americans speak this way? And don’t talk to me about Rav Soloveitchik. He was educated in Berlin, and it’s not clear how much of what he wrote his followers actually understand (perhaps they understand it and merely use it as an excuse to break Halacha).

Also, all of you know this story:
The knight Godfrey, before leaving to the Holy Land on a crusade, asked Rashi to prophesy about the success of the crusade. Rashi answered that Godfrey would fail on the crusade and return with only three horses. Godfrey answered that even if one detail of this story would be off, he would kill Rashi.

Godfrey’s crusade failed, and he had to return back to Europe. But — with four horses! He was making sure they all four survived with great care. As he was about to enter his city, with bloodthirsty thoughts, a stone from the gates fell down on one of the horse’s heads and killed it. Godfrey, full of remorse, went to see Rashi only to find out that the great sage had died a few days before.
Well, the problem is that Godfrey died in the Holy Land. And Rashi died five years after Godfrey.

16 comments:

Just like a guy said...

re: the end: nu, minor detail. You shouldn't let such minor details destroy your emunas chachamim. If it was good enough for Talks and Tales, it's good enough for me.

Anarchist Chossid said...

Faith in which chochamim should my faith be destroyed because of this story? Anyway, nothing of the sort has happened. My faith in chochamim is only (somewhat) affected, when they cite scientific “facts”.

Just like a guy said...

You say R' Levi Yitzchok's prayer on Saturday night?

Anarchist Chossid said...

I say whatever my trusty siddur tells me to say. Which prayer would that be?

Just like a guy said...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_Abraham

Anarchist Chossid said...

I don’t say any prayers in Yiddish. Maybe because I am neither a girl nor a woman. Plus, the article says it’s erroneously attributed to R’ Leivi Yitzchok.

What does it have to do with anything?

Just like a guy said...

Did you read the prayer?

Anarchist Chossid said...

In both tongues. And now I have a headache from the ice cream.

Just like a guy said...

God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, protect your beloved people Israel from all hurt, in your love. As the beloved holy Sabbath goes away, that the week, and the month, and the year, should come to us with perfect faith, with faith in the sages, with love and attachment to good friends, to attachment to the blessed Creator, with belief in your thirteen principles of faith, and in the ultimate redemption, may it be soon, and the Resurrection of the dead, and in the prophecy of Moses, our teacher, may he rest in peace.

Anarchist Chossid said...

Cherry ice cream with chocolate (one nice thing I got out of a certain period in my life) must have blinded my reason, but I still don’t get it.

Are you quoting this to me to explain what emunas chochamim is? I know that already. I was asking which in which specific chochamim will be emunah suffer, if I have a problem with the conclusion of that story? I.e., which sage is the story supposed to be attributed to in its current form?

Just like a guy said...

Talks and Tales is a good enough source for me.

Anarchist Chossid said...

Was it written by a chochom? Is it a better source for you than the combination of two graves (one of Godfrey, in Yerushalayim and one of, lehavdil, Rashi in France), both stating the times and places of the passing of both souls from this here plane of existence?

Anarchist Chossid said...

Also, you didn’t answer the question: if the Rebbe told you to go on streets and start shooting people, would you do it? And do you think the Rebbe changed his opinion about the dinosaurs in the 90s?

Just like a guy said...

Show me pics of those graves.

You never asked me those questions.

Michael said...

Story told at a Farbrengen:
Teacher: If the Rebbe said to you that it is light outside, an it is really dark outside, what would you believe? That it is light? Or, that it is dark?
Student A: You have to believe the Rebbe, no matter what your eyes tell you.
Student B: No, You have to trust your own senses, the Rebbe could be wrong.
Student A: Heretic!
Student B: Fool!
Teacher: You are both heretics, and you are both fools. Believing that the Rebbe is a Tzadik and a Rebbe means that you know that the Rebbe would not tell you that it is day outside, if it is really night.
- the end.

Anarchist Chossid said...

So, when Tzemach Tzedek says in Derech Mitzvosecho that there is no temporal difference between brain willing for the foot to move and the foot moving, I should: 1) believe that what modern science has discovered is false, or 2) believe that Tzemach Tzedek never said that, or 3) explain it away, saying something like “no temporal difference means no observable difference”, even though it doesn’t make sense in the pshat?