Philosophy

Derech Emunah (2:303): You should know that the majority of philosophy came to us from Aristotle who was a Jew from a Jewish family in Jerusalem from the tribe of Benyamin…He gave us and taught us much more than what he learned from us.

Kuzari (2:66): Shlomo spoke with Divine power and his great intellect and natural talents concerning all types of knowledge. From the ends of the earth, people came to him to hear his knowledge and to transmit it to the world - even as far as India. In truth the root of all wisdom and its principles was copied from the Jews - first by the Chaldeans and afterwards the Persians and Medes. Afterwards this knowledge went to the Greeks and Romans. However, because these events are distant in time and the many intermediaries in the process it has not been mentioned in the books of science and wisdom that it was taken originally from the Jews. These books mention only that they originated in Greek and Roman sources. …

Rabbeinu Bachya (Bamidbar 18:29): It is well known that philosophical understanding is not of fundamental importance for us since it is only from intellectual analysis… The wise of Israel base themselves on the words of our Sages who were the scholars of truth which was learned from the prophets. They are the ones who know everything according to its truth.

Ralbag (Milchemes HaShem 1:14): You should know that we do not adopt theological views that are incompatible with the Torah. In fact, in general the conclusions of philosophical thought are not accepted if they contradict our faith. Whenever we find such contradictions, we should assume that it is the result of our shortcomings. Therefore, one should not alter his religious beliefs because of apparent conflicts with philosophical arguments. That is our practice also when we see that our religious faith requires views that differ from what is determined solely on the basis of reason. This approach is obligatory for all religious people. Because if the door were open to reject those aspects of religion that were in apparent conflict with what is taught by pure reason  -  then religion would be finished and its benefits would disappear from the members of the faith. Then there would be major disputes and confusion amongst the members of the religion because of the lack of faith. This would produce major harm that could not be ignored. It should be understood that this point applies to everything discussed in this book. In other words, if it appears to any member of the faith that reason requires believing something which contradicts any aspect of the accepted religious beliefs, he should abandon the conclusions of reason and continue with his religious beliefs. He should attribute his inability to reconcile religion and reason to human inadequacies.

Rambam (Letter to Ibn Tibbon): Aristotle reached the highest level of intellect that man is capable of without the aid of the Divine influence which leads to prophecy for which there is no higher stage.

Rashba (Commentary to Agada Bava Basra 74b pp. 102-106):  You should know that when one of our pious Torah sages reads the words of the philosophers, it is possible that he might agree with them. Even if he finds contradictions between Biblical verses and the philosophers, he can explain those verses in a manner that conforms to philosophy. In other words he can view the verses as metaphoric and not literal - since he isn’t rejecting anything learned from prophecy and he isn’t discarding any mitzvos by doing so.  However when it comes to matters concerning Biblical verses or our Tradition that are widely accepted by our Sages as literally true – then the sage will insist on understanding them literally according to our Tradition. He will do this even though he knows that the philosophers strongly reject such a literal understanding. For example, the belief that the dead will be literally resurrected is not unequivocally found in Biblical verse. It is seems reasonable that all the relevant verses might be explainable as being allegorical e.g., such as those in Yechezkeil (Chapter 36). Nevertheless such a metaphorical approach is rejected by the sage in favor of the literal one because our Tradition insists that these verses be taken literally. In such cases, the sage acknowledges that the widely accepted traditional understanding takes precedent over the philosophical rationalist view. He readily admits in such conflicts that we do not pay attention to rational analysis which goes against our Tradition because the wisdom of G d is beyond our intellectual grasp. Of necessity in every instance that we have a clear Tradition from our ancestors, we cannot reject this Tradition – unless it is established that the traditional understanding is impossible – G d forbid! Why should we destroy our Tradition since we know that it would not have become wide spread except for the fact that it has been received generation after generation all the way back to Moshe or the Prophets… Consequently while we need to acknowledge that many verses in Bible are allegorical, nonetheless we need to accept the truth that some verses are describing actual miracles and that G-d has the ability to change nature according to His wishes…. Therefore when our Tradition requires a literal understanding why should it be discarded just because it is against a rationalistic philosophical understanding? … 

Rav Elchonon Wasserman (Kovetz Shiurim 2 46:9): It is true that you find that some of the classic sources permit the study of philosophy. In fact, the Chovas HaLevavos apparently views the study of philosophy as a mitzva. He bases himself on the verse You should know the G d of your father (that faith should be based on knowledge. Those who disagree assert that the mitzva of faith is belief based on the tradition we have from our ancestors rather than from philosophical analyses. However, on the practical level today the dispute is irrelevant since it is obvious that even according to those who permit philosophical analyses it is only when harmful consequences are not common. That is relevant only for those people who are high level Torah scholars and whose religious views guide their intellectual activities and who are so solidly committed that all the winds in the world won’t alter their views. It is only for such people that it is said that there is a mitzva to clarify their faith through philosophical analyses. However, not for lesser people such as ourselves who are in great danger to be influenced and led to error. One should never deliberately place himself in a dangerous place. Furthermore, you should recall that the mitzva of faith starts at the age of 13 for a boy and 12 for a girl. Can you conceive that the Torah would obligate everyone from child to adult, youngster and women to be philosophers like Aristotle? G d doesn’t cause impossible dilemmas for people. It is clear that those who permit or obligate philosophy are only referring to unique individuals who are not found at all in our time.

Rema (#7): I am more concerned with avoiding independent study of Kabbala than with studying philosophy. That is because there is a greater danger in erring in Kabbala than philosophy as we see from the warning of the Ramban in his introduction to his commentary to the Torah.

Rema (Toras HaOlah 3:4): And R’ Moshe Butreal wrote in his commentary to Sefer Yetzira that the wisdom of Kabbala is the wisdom of philosophy but expressed in a different language… The way of Kabbala is itself the way of true and reliable philosophy.

New UTJ candidate: Situation of Haredim in Israel today is ‘close to what was in the Holocaust’

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/new-utj-candidate-situation-of-haredim-in-israel-today-is-close-to-what-was-in-the-holocaust/

A new candidate for the United Torah Judaism party is quoted by Hebrew media as likening the current situation of the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel to Jews during the Holocaust, drawing condemnation.

“I have taken upon myself not to talk about the Holocaust in the first years, but… I have no other definition. Our situation is close to what was in the Holocaust… It reminds me of stories from our grandparents,” he says.

“The shocking remark by soon-to-be MK Eliakim Stark is a disgrace to any Israeli and any Jew,” Winter says. “It doesn’t come in a vacuum, but against the backdrop of the silence of the prime minister and senior government officials in the face of shocking calls against the IDF in the Jerusalem Faction protests.”

Everything is a Miracle

 Ramban (Introduction to Iyov) We believe in absolute Divine Providence—as expressed in the concept that "the eyes of the Lord range throughout the whole earth"—as well as in miraculous providence; that is to say, the phenomena described in the Torah involving miracles. For, upon reflection, there is no distinction between the statement that a certain righteous person will live out his days or that one who eats *terumah* will die, and the splitting of the Red Sea or the manna falling for forty years. Verses such as "I will remove sickness from your midst" and "I will send a plague among you" stand on the same footing as the Plague of the Firstborn, the plague, the drowning of the Egyptians in the sea, and all other miracles; for if we were to say... Consider the plague that struck your midst—akin to the Plague of the Firstborn—alongside the drowning of the Egyptians in the sea and all the other miracles. For if we attribute all sustenance to the natural order, neither man nor beast would die based on merit or transgression; yet, once we believe that God cut a life short before its natural time, we acknowledge that the hand of God performed a miracle and altered nature—just as He parted the sea before His congregation and drowned our enemies within it. The only difference between the two cases is that one is hidden while the other is manifest. Even if one stubbornly insists that the person who ate *Terumah*—in the instance you cited regarding a supernatural death—did not die through a suspension of natural law, but rather that God simply orchestrated events so he would consume foods that induce illness, or perish in battle in the usual course of events or altered his mazel, the fact remains: his destiny was altered due to his sin or improved because of merit and it wasn’t due to the natural course of Nature. If God alters the nature of a person's food—causing him to consume harmful items he would not have eaten had he not sinned—then it is certainly plausible for the nature of wholesome food to be transformed into something harmful to him. Phenomena such as "I will give you your rains in their season" and "The Lord will open for you His good treasury"—as well as the reverse, "the heavens over your head shall be bronze"—are all instances of miraculous changes to the natural order and the celestial influences governing the heavens and the earth.

Secular Studies Harmful

 Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayashor Shaar 6): Damage from learning non-Torah wisdom:  Tenth Midah -  Wisdom which is no good. There is wisdom which destroys faith for example external wisdom, heretical wisdom and philosophy. There is no need for one who serves G d to be involved in them rather he should distance himself from them with all his strength. Because before he receives any benefit from them he will have lost his faith. It is like one who loses his possessions in the attempt to acquire other possessions and ends up having nothing. There are many who think they are wise who think this is an exalted wisdom and they think they will acquire profound and esoteric secrets – but they don’t realize they are going away from their faith. It is like a healthy person who accustoms himself to eating unhealthy foods because they taste good but he ends up destroying his health and complexion without realizing the changes. He considers himself healthy when in fact he is close to death. When a person associates with a heretic, he destroys his faith little by little without being aware. Similarly a person who studies philosophy becomes alienated from his faith little by little without being aware. While the intent and concern of philosophy is to understand the unity of G d - but when you learn it you suffer a loss. Philosophy has words and axioms which from the very beginning weaken faith. No one can be certain that when he engages in its study that he won’t lose his faith – except if he has an expert and pious teacher that will guide him and protect from the places which weaken his faith. In such a case then he will be able to avoid the pitfalls of philosophy and accomplish the goals he desires. But if he reads books of philosophy on his own or has a teacher who is not completely pious – then there is no doubt that his faith will be destroyed and he will lose more than he gains. This is the general situation that stands before all those who fear G d and therefore he has to be very careful. 

Rabbi Nachman (Sichos HaRan 103) It is better to be the fool who believes in everything’ (Mishlei 15:15). In other words, it is better to believe and have faith - even if you end up believing in stupidity and lies - if you at least also believe in the truth. This is far superior to the other extreme of being a cynical skeptic who successfully rejects stupidity and lies but at the same time also rejects the truth because of his reflexive skepticism and ridicule of all beliefs. This is what Chazal (Eduyos 5:6) say, ‘It is better that I be called a fool all my life and not be wicked for a moment before G d’.

Maharal (Menachos 64b): Greek Wisdom is what we call the natural sciences. All the natural sciences are included in Greek Wisdom which is outside of the Torah. Even though it is a mitzva to calculate the seasons and astronomical movements…(Shabbos 75a) – it is prohibited to learn these except from the Torah. This is the desire of G d  that everything be from the Torah and this is the way it should be done. However to learn them for their own sake without using the Torah – it is prohibited.

Inside Trump, Netanyahu's dilemma: Strike Iran before elections or wait

 https://www.axios.com/2026/10/13/netanyahu-trump-iran-war-elections

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump last week discussed the possibility of launching a major new operation against Iran before the Israeli and U.S. elections, according to two U.S. officials, one Israeli official and a fourth source with knowledge of the matter.

Netanyahu said during the call that he was concerned about Israeli intelligence indicating Iran was taking troubling steps to reconstitute its nuclear program, according to the Israeli official.

 The White House is aware of Netanyahu's domestic political considerations. "Bibi's got an election before the midterms. He believes his strength is being a wartime prime minister," one of the U.S. officials said.

Rabbi David Stav: 'We abandoned Judaism'

 https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/434560

Rabbi David Stav, chairman of the Tzohar Rabbinical Organization, has criticized what he described as the Religious Zionist movement’s priorities over the years, arguing that its focus on settlement in Judea and Samaria came at the expense of influence over issues concerning Israel’s Jewish identity and religious institutions.

“Unfortunately, the cheapest thing for prime ministers on both the right and the left was to sell off the country’s Judaism and hand it over - or, more accurately, abandon it - to the haredi parties," he said.

“Unfortunately, we in the Religious Zionist community also abandoned these areas. In return, we successfully secured settlement in Judea and Samaria, which is an impressive and tremendous achievement," he said.

More young Haredim leaving the fold than previously thought, study finds

 https://www.timesofisrael.com/more-young-haredim-leaving-the-fold-than-previously-thought-study-finds/

Young ultra-Orthodox people are leaving Haredi society at a faster rate than expected, according to data published by the research and strategy division of the nonprofit Yotzim L’shinui.

An estimated 15.3 percent of young Haredi men and 11.9% of young Haredi women leave ultra-Orthodox society by the age of 30, the figures, based on data from Israel’s latest population census, showed.

Studies, including those published by Yotzim L’Shinui, have found that leaving the ultra-Orthodox world is a complicated process, and that many former Haredim preserve some aspects of their former lives, including relationships with family members. About 66% of those leaving the community still identify as being on the spectrum of Haredi society, the organization said.

A Mandatory Listen - Nechumi Yaffe: An insider's dire prognosis for the Haredi world - and its cure

Trump donor says he’ll sue Guilfoyle, attorneys

 https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/6144835-donald-trump-donor-eric-deters-kimberly-guilfoyle-scandal/

The MAGA donor who accused U.S. Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle of pressuring him to wire her $100,000 to pay off her American Express bill said he will be taking legal action against her.

“I’m going to be suing those lawyers, that law firm, and Kimberly Guilfoyle,” Eric Deters said in an interview with CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360” on Monday. “It’s going to be fun.”

Deters accused Guilfoyle’s legal team of making false claims about him following The Wall Street Journal’s explosive report exposing her pricey request. Guilfoyle allegedly offered to help him reach senior Trump administration officials in exchange.

“They first said that the text messages were fake — defamation,” he said. “Then they said I was a known blackmailer. I’ve never blackmailed anybody in my life.”

Kimberly Guilfoyle is a Greek Tragedy of MAGA Hubris

 https://www.newsweek.com/kimberly-guilfoyle-greece-scandal-maga-hypocrisy-trump-12562265

President Donald Trump came to power promising to overthrow a decadent political establishment: a self-serving ruling class that had grown rich and arrogant, apparently insulated from the ordinary Americans it purported to represent but didn't actually understand.

Now, the controversy surrounding Kimberly Guilfoyle, his ambassador to Greece, shines a negative light on that promise, raising a question: has MAGA simply replaced the old establishment with a new one that has acquired many of the same habits? In simpler words: are Republicans just like Democrats when it comes to their relationship with power?

Guilfoyle, the former Fox News personality and onetime fiancee of Donald Trump Jr., has been asked to resign following allegations of financial impropriety and questionable diplomatic conduct. Although she denies wrongdoing, the details emerging from her tenure in Athens paint a portrait of an elite enjoying the privileges of power, the same type of character that Trump has been warning against.

Florida Neurologist Recalls Examining the Rebbe

 https://collive.com/florida-neurologist-recalls-examining-the-rebbe/

“When I was an intern at Cornell, I had the opportunity of looking after many people and I met many of the Hasidic community,” he said. Among them was Rabbi Shmaryahu Gurary (the Rashag) and his family.

“But the Rebbe was a special case,” he continued. “He was very ill at New York Hospital. I had the opportunity of examining him with his students.”

After conducting a CAT scan on the Rebbe, Dr. Suite said, “I concluded as a scientist, that it’s impossible for him to speak or communicate or understand.” But what happened next left a deep impression on him.

Differing from Chazal

 Ohr HaChaim (Bereishis 1:1): You should know that we have permission to explain the implication of the verses after careful study - even though our conclusions differ from the explanation of our Sages. That is because there are 70 faces to Torah (Bamidbar Rabbah 13:16). There is no prohibition against differing from the words of our Sages except if it changes the Halacha. Similarly, we find that even though the Amoraim did not have the right to disagree with Tannaim in halachic matters - but we find that they offered alternative explanations to verses. 

Ohr HaChaim (Bereishis 46:8): Don’t be bothered by the fact that our explanation is the opposite of what our Sages stated. We have already asserted that concerning the understanding of the non halachic verses of the Torah permission is given to the diligent student to innovate.

Ohr HaChaim (Devarim 32:1): Even though I am explaining this differently than our Sages but we know that there are 70 faces to Torah (Bamidbar Rabbah 13:16). Concerning Agada it is permitted to offer explanations even if they contradict those of our Sages as long as they don’t contradict the Halacha….

Ohr HaChaim (Vayikra 26:3): Vayikra Rabbah (22:1) states that Scripture, Mishna, Halacha, Talmud, Tosefta, Agada and even what a faithful student would say in the future - were all taught to Moshe on Sinai. It is clear from this medrash that permission has been granted for Torah scholars to explain and interpret in various ways and for the diligent students to provide new insights in expounding verses - to the degree that it can be justified with the verse. 

Michtav M’Eliyahu (4:355): It is puzzling why many Rishonim strive to follow a different understanding than the true explanation given by our Sages? We find such tendencies in the commentary of the Rashbam, Ibn Ezra and other Rishonim. What is the purpose of offering explanations which differ from the definitive true ones? I think that they offer these alternative explanations for the sake of confused people. In other words, these Rishonim want to show that there are many different aspects even in the simple understanding of the verses and that it is permissible for a person to create new interpretations according to what makes sense to him. (Of course, any alternative explanations which contradict foundation principles of faith are prohibited.) This is consistent with our understanding of R’ Shmuel HaNagid. This advice is very critical in order to save the souls of the confused people. Such an approach is similar to that of the Rambam who wrote so much for the confused. We see this from the fact that many difficulties that exist in what he wrote could have been explained in a much clearer fashion. However, since he was addressing confused people he provided alternative explanations which they could accept - as long as it didn’t contradict the Halacha. Using this approach, I have been able to understand the difficult comments of the Radak who was a very holy person and one of the great members of the period of the Rishonim. In particular, it justifies his comments concerning the disparity of the text of the Torah and how it is to be read in a number of places ….

Science vs Chazal

 Rav Dovid Karliner (Sde Chemed Kuntres Metziza 3:4): …It remains for us to explain how to decide in a matter that doctors based on their knowledge and experiments decide against the Tradition of Chazal. I have already explained in Sheilas Dovid when there is a tradition of Chazal which is undisputed and it is from Sinai in a halachic matter such a treifos. However regarding the condition of an animal which our tradition doesn’t deem a treifah, it can certainly be curable and it doesn’t concern us if the doctors decide based upon their studies that it is incurable. We rely on the Talmudic Sages and their Tradition and we don’t agree with the view of the doctors that nature has changed since this is a matter which is relevant to halacha concerning such things as treifos… we don’t say that nature has changed. Because if it were so then we would have been informed that a time would come that nature changed and these animals would be prohibited by means of this illness or this physical deficit. But from the fact that our Talmudic Sages did not agree in certain cases that indicates that they did not have a clear tradition or they are disagreeing what the majority case is but nevertheless they agree with each other that at least a minority exists. Therefore since there is not a clear tradition and there isn’t a direct halachic consequence but it only has consequences regarding certain fact than we can say that it is possible that nature has changed over time. In contrast where there is a clear tradition and the Sages are in agreement with each other than nature will never change and we don’t listen to the contrary view of the doctors. All this is only relevant regarding halachic issues. However regarding conditions that Chazal consider dangerous to health – the correctness of these statement can change over time…It is also possible that in their times there was no cure for a particular condition but now a cure has been found for something which Chazal don’t claim is a Tradition from Sinai but rather they knew from the medicine of their day. In fact it is possible that they learned many things from the doctors of their time such as scurvy (Yoma 84a) which R’ Yochanon learned how to cure from a non-Jewish woman. Nevertheless he poskened that it was allowed to profane Shabbos for the sake of this cure even though it apparently involved transgressing a Torah prohibition. There were also many cures that Chazal described as being learned from “a certain Arab” and other secular sources. Thus so while it is true that many cures were known to Chazal from Divine Inspiration (Sod HaShem) but it is not possible to say that all of their cures were such. Therefore when Chazal said about certain medical treatments that Shabbos can be violated for them in their times and places it was because they didn’t know any alternatives and they considered the medical conditions to be dangerous and thus it was permitted to profane Shabbos for them. But once it has been determined through medical science that these conditions are not dangerous we cannot profane Shabbos for them…. As long as all doctors are in total agreement then the condition is not considered dangerous anymore. However if there is not universal agreement then it is possible to say there is a possibility of error and the assumption of danger remains…. In my opinion concerning all the dangers and cures that require transgressing Shabbos mentioned in the Talmud, if there is not universal agreement of the doctors then we follow the view in the Talmud even to transgress Shabbos. But when there is universal agreement that in modern times there is no longer danger then we say that nature has changed in this matter…

Rav Sherira Gaon (Otzair HaGaonim - Gittin 68b page 152): Our Sages were not doctors and what they said is merely a reflection of what was known by the medical experts of their times and therefore there is no mitzva to accept their statements concerning medicine…. 

Rav S. R. Hirsch (Educational Value of Judaism Collected Writings #7): Judaism is not frightened even by the hundreds of thousands and millions of years which the geological theory of the earth's deve¬lopment bandies about so freely. Judaism would have nothing to fear from that theory even if it were based on something more than mere hypothesis, on the still unproven presumption that the forces we see at work in our world today are the same as those that were in existence, with the same degree of potency, when the world was first created. Our Rabbis, the Sages of Judaism, discuss (Midrash Rabbah 9; Chagiga 16a) the possibility that earlier worlds were brought into existence and subsequently destroyed by the Creator before He made our own earth in its present form and order. However, the Rabbis have never made the acceptance or rejection of this and similar pos¬sibilities an article of faith binding on all Jews. They were willing to live with any theory that did not reject the basic truth that "every beginning is from God." In fact, they were generally averse to specula¬tions about what was in the past and what will be in the future, because, in their view, such questions transgressed the limits of that which is knowable to man, or, at best, they did not enhance man's understanding of his moral function. In the view of our Rabbis, the Book of Books was intended to be mankind's guide for life on earth as it is at present, to teach man to recognize God, in the here and now, as the everlasting Creator and Master of the universe, and to worship Him by faithfully obeying the laws by which He governs mankind. 

Moreh Nevuchim (03:14):  Don’t expect from me to show that everything that our Sages said regarding astronomy in fact agrees with observation. That is because mathematics was not fully developed in those days and their knowledge was not based on information received from the Prophets. Rather it was based on their own personal knowledge as experts or it was taken from the astronomers of those times. However I am not going to say that what they say that in fact agrees with observation is incorrect or was accidentally true. Rather whenever it is possible to explain a person’s words as being in accord with observation, it is the duty of every educated and just man to so.  

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras HaGuf v’HaNefesh): Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach was asked why the view of Rav Sherira Gaon and the Rambam’s son - that the medical and scientific knowledge of our Sages was that of their times - should be listed as a minority view? He replied: “At the present I don’t remember whether there was anyone who actually disagreed with their views or even whether anyone has the authority to disagree with them. However, rabbinic authorities typically explain disparities in medical and scientific understanding [between the views of our Sages and contemporary science] as the result of change in nature. They do not utilize at all the reason that medical knowledge has advanced from the time of our Sages. That is why I commented that this view should be classed as a minority view. Especially since concerning the laws of Shabbos, there are rabbinic authorities that permit violating the Shabbos in certain circumstances that our Sages say are medically dangerous despite the fact that contemporary doctors assert there is no danger at all.

The Vaccine That Caused 40,000 Cases of Polio In The 1950’s | The Cutter Incident