Torah and Old Testament

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dauer

1. Are you saying the pshat is the wrong answers?

Not nessesarily. It may be "incomplete" or "out of style" answer that is not useful for US, modern people with modern ways of understanding. Pshat was enough for people of THOSE times, but today I believe that we need a more proper interpretation for US. Look it is hard to understand Shakespearian English without some sort of explanation as to what each word means.

2. Is it possible kabbalah reads answers into Torah that were not initially there?

GOOD QUESTION!!! That is why I am VERY selective as to what Kabbalah I listen to and what I reject. A Kabbalah tought by a very Knowledgeble rabbi, who knows Torah, Talmud, Mishna, Gmara, Etz Chayym (Tree of Life or other books by ARI), Zohar well, is what I use as my source.

I don't listen to "western" experts on Kabbalah such as Crowley, Mathers, Dion Fortune, etc.

Yehuda Ashlag(Baal Sulam), Baruch Ashlag (Rabash) are my main sources. I'd put my money on them or ARI any day over some self proclaimed masters (one of them is in California abusing his knowledge for money).

How do you know?
Dauer

I don't, yet. But I try to choose as big experts as possible, until Hashem opens my eyes....

[dauer]

Originally Posted by human1111

Not nessesarily. It may be "incomplete" or "out of style" answer that is not useful for US, modern people with modern ways of understanding. Pshat was enough for people of THOSE times, but today I believe that we need a more proper interpretation for US. Look it is hard to understand Shakespearian English without some sort of explanation as to what each word means.

So do you think there's a big gap between what we think Shakespeare meant to his audience and what what it actually meant to them? In other words, do you think our reading of Shakespeare, when we're trying to understand what he meant, is close to the pshat? How do you think that compares with Torah?

GOOD QUESTION!!! That is why I am VERY selective as to what Kabbalah I listen to and what I reject. A Kabbalah tought by a very Knowledgeble rabbi, who knows Torah, Talmud, Mishna, Gmara, Etz Chayym (Tree of Life or other books by ARI), Zohar well, is what I use as my source.

Are you also studying Torah and Talmud or are you just going by what's been filtered for you? I'm not sure if you're familiar with this line from pirkei avot:

He [Yehuda ben Tema] used to say: A five-year-old begins Scripture; a ten-year-old begins Mishnah; a thirteen-year-old becomes obliged to observe the commandments; a fifteen-year-old begins to study Gemara; an eighteen-year-old goes to the marriage canopy; a twenty-year-old begin pursuit [of a livelihood]; a thirty-year-old attains full strength; a forty-year-old attains understanding; etc etc.

5:25

So I'm not saying that these ages are necessarily important but this does point to the importance of building a foundation so that a person can see the real beauty in something, even if both are being done at the same time.

So an other question: is it possible those rabbis are reading into Torah things that were not initially there, at the time of the origination of the text?

I don't, yet. But I try to choose as big experts as possible, until Hashem opens my eyes....

So would it be correct to state that you are readying yourself to know?

Dauer

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dauer

So do you think there's a big gap between what we think Shakespeare meant to his audience and what what it actually meant to them?

Unless you are a very literacy minded person, I believe that there are many finer points that a person could miss if he reads Shakespeare without reflecting deeply into the text. I've heard somewhere that there are MANY levels to understanding of even children's stories. Nothing to say about sacred texts. Again the worst thing is thinking that you are understanding something, yet be totally off the mark and do not know it.

In other words, do you think our reading of Shakespeare, when we're trying to understand what he meant, is close to the pshat? How do you think that compares with Torah?

As I've said, I am sure that beneath bare letters of Shakespeare (or any other good writer) there may be underlying message that is supposed to be read-between-the-lines kinda deal. With sacred/philosophical texts it is EVEN HARDER than ordinary Literature. Now I understand that using Shakespeare may not be the best example, but that what I did. I can say one thing, book that merely discribes History may be a history book but not a Holy Book.

Are you also studying Torah and Talmud or are you just going by what's been filtered for you? I'm not sure if you're familiar with this line from pirkei avot:

He [Yehuda ben Tema] used to say: A five-year-old begins Scripture; a ten-year-old begins Mishnah; a thirteen-year-old becomes obliged to observe the commandments; a fifteen-year-old begins to study Gemara; an eighteen-year-old goes to the marriage canopy; a twenty-year-old begin pursuit [of a livelihood]; a thirty-year-old attains full strength; a forty-year-old attains understanding; etc etc.
5:25
So I'm not saying that these ages are necessarily important but this does point to the importance of building a foundation so that a person can see the real beauty in something, even if both are being done at the same time.

If such progression of events work for you, then it is great. That sort of progression worked before. But today people change, people's psychology change, and we are getting worse and worse. Thus we need stronger and stronger methods. Again it is not the message that is changing, but the way to deliver it, and not just deliver but to make it comprehendable for us. If you could explain complex relationships using Parables, Judiciary Rules, Tales and metaphors, today a logical-mathematical system is much more efficient and understandble.

So an other question: is it possible those rabbis are reading into Torah things that were not initially there, at the time of the origination of the text?

Could be, but I am trying to listen to biggest (and most modern) experts. Why Most modern? Because they are closer to our time, and understand our current/modern circumstances better and are able to better frame sacred texts into our modern logical/mathematical minds.

"Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag is known as “Baal HaSulam” for his rendition of the Sulam of The Zohar. Born in 1885 in Lodz, Poland, he absorbed a deep knowledge of the written and oral law in his youth, and later became a judge and teacher in Warsaw. In 1921, he immigrated to Israel with his family and became the rabbi of Givat Shaul in Jerusalem. He was already immersed in writing his own doctrine when he began to pen the commentary of The Zohar in 1943. Baal HaSulam finished writing his commentary of The Zohar in 1953.

Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag, the Baal HaSulam, is the recognized spiritual leader for our generation. He is the only one in this generation who has written a fully comprehensive and updated commentary of The Zohar and the writings of the Ari."
http://www.kabbalah.info/engkab/book...k1eng_ch04.htm


You are free to disagree of course.

[dauer]

Well, they are the most modern traditional perhaps, but they're still restricted by their allegiance to tradition. Questions two:

1. Do you ever bother to read the Jewish scholars using a Western approach to understanding Kabbalah?

2. Why do you quote from Ashlag's site to support that he's the greatest kabbalist of our time? Why not quote something more objective?

dauer

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dauer

Well, they are the most modern traditional perhaps, but they're still restricted by their allegiance to tradition. Questions two:

1. Do you ever bother to read the Jewish scholars using a Western approach to understanding Kabbalah?

Could you please elaborate by what you mean "Western Approach" ?
For some reason I cannot read Dion Fortune's Mystical Qabbalah, Crowley's, Mathers, and others take on Kabbalah. I prefer what you might term "rabbinical" or "classical" Kabbalah.

2. Why do you quote from Ashlag's site to support that he's the greatest kabbalist of our time? Why not quote something more objective?
dauer

I didn't have the time to sift through other sites.
Here are more:

The Teachings of the Ten Sefirot is one of many parts of the profound spiritual legacy of Rabbi Yehudah Ashlag, the Rabbi of Jerusalem; and, the greatest Kabbalist in our generation. In his monumental work, the inner workings and dynamic relationships of the Sefirot are clearly set forth and explained.

Ashlag reveals, what has been concealed.

'this is the fulness of time and this teaching is for all of us, now, .... today'. Y. Ashlag

The serious student of Kabbalah needs no explanation regarding the importance of this work. Its title and author speak to its vitality and importance.

The Teachings of the Ten Sefirot is a must have book

http://www.jewishfinds.com/10.htm

---------------------------------------------
Yehuda Ashlag. In the years that followed he would be known as Rav Ashlag, recognized as one of Kabbalah's greatest scholars.

http://www.lightworks.com/MonthlyAsp...nversation.htm

Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag (1885-1954), who wrote the commentary on the Book of Zohar, was the last greatest Kabbalist of our time. He left behind a special method of study for the souls of this generation that people of all faiths, backgrounds and cultures can benefit from simply by reading the texts that were provided in modern-day language.
http://www.urlwire.com/news/062403.html


There are more of course. I just don't have the time.

[InLove]

Thank you all so much--I didn't even have to ask anything yet, and now I understand so much more while at the same time still being confused.

But, then, I come to be educated.

InPeace,
InLove

[dauer]

Originally Posted by human1111

Could you please elaborate by what you mean "Western Approach" ?
For some reason I cannot read Dion Fortune's Mystical Qabbalah, Crowley's, Mathers, and others take on Kabbalah. I prefer what you might term "rabbinical" or "classical" Kabbalah.

No no no. I'm not talking about any of that stuff. I'm talking about a Western scholarly approach, looking at it like any other type of literature. Personally, I don't think the Western approach alone is a good way to go but it does seem to be a good temper.

I didn't have the time to sift through other sites.
Here are more:

The main thing that struck me I guess is the way it was stated, it's kinda like a boxer fighting in their hometown and the announcer booms, "In the red trunks,5 foot 11, 210 pounds of pure muscle, the Jewish Jabbowski, the Bronx Buster, the Shtetl of Rock Hard Metal, intercontinental super duper champion of the wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorld Mendel "The Jew" Chan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But there really was no good reason for me to say what I did.

Dauer

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dauer

No no no. I'm not talking about any of that stuff. I'm talking about a Western scholarly approach, looking at it like any other type of literature. Personally, I don't think the Western approach alone is a good way to go but it does seem to be a good temper.

I like to study to change myself and accomplish something, I am not a historian. Of course I keep a critical eye on everything, but today in rapidly deteriorating society we need help and as we see it has to come from Above to help us.

The main thing that struck me I guess is the way it was stated, it's kinda like a boxer fighting in their hometown and the announcer booms, "In the red trunks,5 foot 11, 210 pounds of pure muscle, the Jewish Jabbowski, the Bronx Buster, the Shtetl of Rock Hard Metal, intercontinental super duper champion of the wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorld Mendel "The Jew" Chan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But there really was no good reason for me to say what I did.
Dauer

In today's dog-eat-dog world, you HAVE to have a confidence and I guess a little bit of "arrogance" in order to spread your teaching. Otherwise nobody would choose it. Look at Christianity and the way it has spread. We can learn a thing or two from THEIR method, which was painful but effective. Xtianity is #1 on popularity (I belive), not because it was passive and submissive. It is sad, but C'est le vie.

[dayaa]

hello/shalom
sorry, butting in on this conversation....i was reading this thread to try to find answers to some of my questions....i thought abraham was from an area which would be in present day iraq and the languages of the area are related for example aramaic and arabic. spoken arabic has some similarites with hebrew but at some point i was looking at some zoroastrian texts shown in the original language and the script looks very much like arabic. there are also some similarities between arabic script and hebrew script.
i have two questions i would like to ask please:
firstly what is the oldest hebrew scripture still existing to the present day (i mean actual written book) and when does it date back to? i am asking this question in terms of being able to compare texts with "originals" for validity and lack of corrupted text.
secondly, for a non hebrew speaker who has to rely on translations what would be the best way to compare jewish scriptures with christian versions? without trying to read all of it twice, side by side which would be very time consuming.......for example would it be an acceptable method of study to read the christian version but where it is given a christian interpretation, to cross reference it with a jewish version?
really it's very difficult to know where to start. everyone claims that their religion is the right one and everyone accuses everyone else of corrupting texts etc etc. i just want to read and make up my own mind, but even that becomes difficult if you don't know which version of which book to read
thankyou for your help

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dayaa

hello/shalom
firstly what is the oldest hebrew scripture still existing to the present day (i mean actual written book) and when does it date back to? i am asking this question in terms of being able to compare texts with "originals" for validity and lack of corrupted text.

If you follow the orthodox Kabbalistic dates then Sefer Yetzirah at around ~1811-1600 BC was written in Hebrew by Abraham.
(In what language was Malah Raziel written, the book attributed to Adam. Was it in Hebrew? If so, than it was ~ 3760 BC)

secondly, for a non hebrew speaker who has to rely on translations what would be the best way to compare jewish scriptures with christian versions? without trying to read all of it twice, side by side which would be very time consuming.......for example would it be an acceptable method of study to read the christian version but where it is given a christian interpretation, to cross reference it with a jewish version?
really it's very difficult to know where to start. everyone claims that their religion is the right one and everyone accuses everyone else of corrupting texts etc etc. i just want to read and make up my own mind, but even that becomes difficult if you don't know which version of which book to read
thankyou for your help

Probably Impossible. Hebrew language is structured differently than other languages. There are connection between words that are impossible to translate. "Old" (There is ONE testament) is totally different from Old Testament in hebrew.

Hebrew words can mean multiple things, be read in multiple ways, with multiple translations so much that 1st reading can be totally different from the 2nd.


My humble 2 cents.

[dayaa]

hello/shalom
sorry nagging about the same point again but i'm not sure if i didn't understand the answer or maybe my question wasn't clear.
i was not asking about the dates of the origins of the books....i was asking about physical books still in existence. i mean if you took your copy of the torah or tanakh (original hebrew) to jerusalem for example to compare it with "original" texts would it be exactly the same....no mistakes, no alterations and how old (physically) are those original texts.
thankyou

[human1111]

Originally Posted by dayaa

hello/shalom
sorry nagging about the same point again but i'm not sure if i didn't understand the answer or maybe my question wasn't clear.
i was not asking about the dates of the origins of the books....i was asking about physical books still in existence. i mean if you took your copy of the torah or tanakh (original hebrew) to jerusalem for example to compare it with "original" texts would it be exactly the same....no mistakes, no alterations and how old (physically) are those original texts.
thankyou

From what I've heard, Tanakh was very carefully copied throught the ages to make sure that every letter was the same.