25 August 2006

Private Orthoprax - Continued.



Orthopraxy continued from here .

I carried on day to day without any change, like a robot.

I didn't fully trust my thought processes. Adherence to Halacha was a form of Pascal's Wager. I like to call it Pascal's insurance. The odds of a modern day building burning is slim, but you get insurance, just in case. OJ was a lie, but just in case, why rock the boat.


You would have thought that I would have spent lots of energy on trying to prove/disprove Judaism. I didn't do that. I was certain that would lead me off the derech. I had no desire to be any more convinced than I already was.

I just bided my time and waited to see how things turn out.


I threw myself into career, simchas, family, tsures, etc and was content to put up with the inconvenience of OJ practice. Which is really another reason I stayed OP. I did not find most of it terribly burdensome. A lifelong set of practices and habits remained doable.

I even started learning again, it is a social and intellectual activity that's cool with me.


But as I mentioned, my wife is unaware of my true opinion of OJ.

So no matter what, how much of a Sheigets can I be in my own home? I need to go to shul or else family and friends would notice. Treife food? Certainly not at home. So I stayed completely Orthoprax. I even poured the hot water before the coffee on Shabbos.


Now, heres the kicker. Eventually, after many years, my mistrust of my judgment wore off. Just the fact that I was able to stay completely frum for 6 years while not even believing it, refuted the Chazal's adage of Lo Uvdo Avoda Zara.

Ironically, that realization set me free.

Some things did fall away, like hot water first on shabbos. But nothing that would be considered a real no-no.

To be honest, there was one extenuating halachic event that is beyond the scope of this blog. It was not done for my own sake, you could say L'tsorech Tsibbur. (Maybe one day I'll get into it if I'm in a good mood.)

Then I knew I was truly free. Free to practice or not. And I do practice, without many mis-givings about it. I have a good life so why not.

Will I always stay this way? Who knows. If I learned one thing is that we don't know what tomorrow brings.

(I hate Shabbos shul though, I can't take the hours.)

I have no compelling need to practice. On the other hand, I have no compelling need to violate Halacha just to prove a point.

Am I still stuck in a Pascal's Wager mode? Possibly. I don't think so, but sometimes we deceive ourselves.

So I'm free; thats wonderful, right? Well not exactly, because I traded freedom for a new set of burdens.


PS. I re-read this post several times and I'm just not 100% happy with it. I think it might come across as if I'm trying to beg the believers for permission to doubt and deny. Well I'm not. By definition a believer cannot grant me that.

So what do I want? I want the skeptics approval for why I do not violate Halacha and I want other frum skeptics out there to know "you are not alone". BHB

  • ===> Use Haloscan: |
  • Do NOT enter new comments here 33 comments Do NOT use. links to this post

    33 Comments:

    At August 27, 2006 2:50 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    Atleast your not making the same mistake Acher made.

     
    At August 27, 2006 4:09 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    Meaning what? That he left?

     
    At August 27, 2006 4:22 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    From what I have learned of Acher, he did not leave, rather he thought he was too far gone in his beliefs that he would not be given reward for his actions.

    But he still studied Torah because it appealed to him.

     
    At August 28, 2006 12:11 AM, Blogger Moshe Kappoya said...

    You are correct, no one can make you believe, it has to come from within yourself.
    I am here merely to observe and try to understand.
    So now it seems, you have painted yourself into a corner. You're too smart to follow blindly, but you're too comfortable to act on your beliefs. And yes, your kefira is your believe. Your believe in your own superiority. You know better, you understand more, you're more "open minded" then your father, grandfathers, and the thousands of simple jews who live their lives according to the traditions they received.
    I feel for you, because one day you will not be satisfied with the status-quo, and you will feel driven to act one way or another.
    I say this with great empathay, because dear baal habos, I've been there. I've been to the edge and stared into the abyss, and it is only through Hashem's kindness that I did not fall in.
    I hope and pray that Hashem helps you see the truth.

     
    At August 28, 2006 9:44 AM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    Moshe Kappoya.

    > You are correct, no one can make you believe, it has to come from within yourself.

    Correct, you either believe or not. You either believe the world is round or not. Tsk, Tsk but that goes against Chazal. Chazal say people CHOOSE not to believe. I had similiar discussions with Lakewood Yid.

    > You're too smart to follow blindly

    It has very little to do with IQ.

    > but you're too comfortable to act on your beliefs.

    Very true.

    > And yes, your kefira is your believe.

    Huh?


    > Your believe in your own superiority. You know better, you understand more, you're more "open minded" then your father, grandfathers, and the thousands of simple jews who live their lives according to the traditions they received.


    There is an element of truth to that. I am different than prior generations. But it's not superiority on my part, it's just that our parents and grandparents were never exposed to the truth with such glaring clarity. And the argument you're making just distracts from the real issue, being the accuracy of the transmission of our beliefs. Simple people have simpler beliefs Emuna Peshuta. Nice for them. We are more sophisticated. And our Dogma can't hold it's own when analyzed.


    > I feel for you

    thank you.

    > because one day you will not be satisfied with the status-quo

    Very true, I'm like that already.


    > and you will feel driven to act one way or another.

    One day at a time.

    > I say this with great empathay, because dear baal habos, I've been there. I've been to the edge and stared into the abyss, and it is only through Hashem's kindness that I did not fall in.

    I'm glad you're ok.

    It's not a matter of falling in. I admit that I do have emotional issues as a direct result of my beliefs; and I will discuss this at length. Emotional Issues in my life are extremely rare, so please don't turn this around and state that my emotional state brings on my beliefs. It's the reverse.

    But my (and your) emtional issues don't mean that TMS is true.

    > I hope and pray that Hashem helps you see the truth.

    Your prayers have been answered.

    I do see the truth. And it aint pretty according to our upbringing. So, I have to adjust. It's not easy and it takes work, of which I don't have time right now.

    MK, I appreciate your input.

     
    At August 28, 2006 3:03 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >But it's not superiority on my part, it's just that our parents and grandparents were never exposed to the truth with such glaring clarity.

    Incidently, Aristotle said the same thing.

    >Correct, you either believe or not. You either believe the world is round or not. Tsk, Tsk but that goes against Chazal. Chazal say people CHOOSE not to believe. I had similiar discussions with Lakewood Yid

    Ok firstly, the earth being round or not is NOT an issue of belief. The question of belief is if you Trust the sources that tell you that the earth is round or not. (round or flat? Circles are round too you know!.)

    And in these issues you do choose to believe or not. Infact its really the only choice in life you have. In matters of Emunah you choose. In matters of "believe it or not", its not a choice. Just as I can't choose to decide if the color red is red or not. But Emunah, and Yirat Shemaim, is 100% choice. I know this for myself because I have wavered back and forth on that choice before and seen the difference it makes.

     
    At August 28, 2006 4:12 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    > Incidently, Aristotle said the same thing.

    He was right too.

    > Ok firstly, the earth being round or not is NOT an issue of belief.

    Not any more. Before Magellan(?) proved it it probably was amatter of belief. (Steven Hawkings said greeks knew it from the curvature of the Earth because ships dis-appeared over the horizon and also because of the shape of the moon as it appeared in shadows during an eclipse)

    > But Emunah, and Yirat Shemaim, is 100% choice. I know this for myself because I have wavered back and forth on that choice before and seen the difference it makes.

    For you. because you wavered on the line, you had to choose, so you choose Emuna.

    But if you don't believe, just like you don't believe in Christianity, then you don't believe.

     
    At August 28, 2006 6:46 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >For you. because you wavered on the line, you had to choose, so you choose Emuna.

    But if you don't believe, just like you don't believe in Christianity, then you don't believe.

    I dissagree. I did not have to choose, I chose to choose. I sat there one day, and I said... Would my life be any different if I threw away my orthodox beliefs and became reform. So I played thought experiments and did a myriad of other things, and at certain points I could see "my life changing" I could actively choose to do this, or do that. It would not have impacted my everyday life(since I wasn't observant than anyways, I was just orthodox in theory not practice) but it would have impacted the way I looked at other people, and the relationships I would have with them. I even started getting excited about the idea of "playing the crowd" and "getting people to do what I want" - anyway, to cut the story short, I saw that how I actively percieved the world affected greatly how the world reacted with me, and my choice made all the difference.

    But this is the difference between Emunah (which is based on knowledge) and Belief, which is just a chemical responce in the brain. I either believe your story or a I don't on a gut level, no brain activity required.

     
    At August 28, 2006 8:36 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC,
    > Would my life be any different if I threw away my orthodox beliefs and became reform. So I played thought experiments and did a myriad of other things, and at certain points I could see "my life changing" I could actively choose to do this, or do that.

    Whoa! Please re-read that.
    You seem to be acknowledging that you slected a life style on the basis of of it how it affected you, not on the basis of the historicity of OJ. Yes, I agree YOU chose to choose. I also am "choosing" to live OJ, but not because I believe it. I don't and I'm not sure now that you even believe in OJ in the historic sense.

     
    At August 28, 2006 8:57 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    I believe in OJ in the historic sense only because I choose to have Yirat Shamaiam in general.

    There is no way for a person to know "What came before, and what will come after" and the mishna in chagigah says that such questions should not even be asked.

    Although that mishneh means to say before creation and after creation, on a deeper level, I think it means before I was born, and after I will die. Because the truth is, you don't know any of those thing, you only trust one source of information over another.

    lets look at political affiliation. When I read the Republican "who we are" list and compare it to the Democrat "who we are list", I can then decide which party I want to go with. And to me, thats the only thing that really matters. No amount of "Scandal" will sway me on that issue. Because in my mind, its almost irrelevant to what I think the "real issues" are.

    Its the same thing here, you can't choose which information you learn about history, and which facts you get a hold of. But you CAN choose which lens to look at those facts with.

     
    At August 28, 2006 9:11 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    > I believe in OJ in the historic sense only because I choose to have Yirat Shamaiam in general.

    Irviner, good for you. But that's the cart before the horse. A Mormon with the same yiras shomaim ends up a christian.

    > lets look at political affiliation. When I read the Republican "who we are" list and compare it to the Democrat "who we are list", I can then decide which party I want to go with. And to me, thats the only thing that really matters. No amount of "Scandal" will sway me on that issue. Because in my mind, its almost irrelevant to what I think the "real issues" are.


    But the real events that my religion claims occurred are of utmost importance to me.

    I should keep Shabbos because I "believe" God split the sea as a miracle and I "believe" God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. Not because my Rabbi keeps shabbos.

     
    At August 29, 2006 1:37 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >I should keep Shabbos because I "believe" God split the sea as a miracle and I "believe" God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. Not because my Rabbi keeps shabbos.

    If you read the Chumash, over and over and over again, the only reason given for keeping G-d's commandments is that He took us out of Egypt.

    Everything else is details that Rishonim the world over argue over. Was the sea split into 12 rows or 1 row or 3 rows? Did the Jews cross the sea, or make a U-Turn? All these details are argued.

    It does not say, "I am the Lord your Gd who created you" it says "I am the lord your gd who took you out of Egypt" Because, only Egypt and its exodus is knowable to the Jewish people as a whole.

    I am not quite sure what you mean by the "historicity of OJ" Normally that means did the Pharsees explain Judaism the way thier grandfathers did, but you seem to be meaning something else.

     
    At August 29, 2006 5:12 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC, the question is simply whether you believe miracles (natural or otherwise) took place during Yetsias Mitrayim. You do. I don't. I wish I'd be in your shoes. Life was much more fulfilling then.

     
    At August 29, 2006 7:06 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >IC, the question is simply whether you believe miracles (natural or otherwise) took place during Yetsias Mitrayim. You do. I don't. I wish I'd be in your shoes. Life was much more fulfilling then.

    I am curious why on that issue you don't.

    Here are just a few webpages I quickly pulled up.

    http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/thera.html

    The last line of this link is quite interesting.
    http://www.konig.org/wc52.htm

    http://www.bibleprobe.com/exodus.htm

    http://judaism.about.com/od/torah/f/moses_proof.htm


    http://lightcatcherprod.com/products_books_riddle.shtml

    http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Archaeology_and_the_Exodus.asp

    http://phoenicia.org/steal.html

    http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/library/evidences/otfact.htm

    There are just a bunch of random links. Pulled out of the air.

    One line of argument which I keep hearing and keep hating, because of its inceserity, is the idea that its ok to no have evidence because the Tanach isn't a "history book" which is fine in SOME ways, however, the premise of all of halacha, is that G-d took us out of egypt, so on that piece of "history" I can't judge.

    What I do -know- is that there is not enough evidence to know for certain one way or another about the exodus, and I know for a FACT that the Islamic world is not looking to help Jews find out the truth. Infact, there are numerous stories of Arab and Islamic countries puprosefully destroying artifacts that relate to Jews, for nationalisitic and political reasons. (They even do it to buddhists, such as the destruction of Buddhist temples in Afhganistan)

     
    At August 29, 2006 11:11 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC, Other people say it so more more elegantly, so I'll look it up and post it here. But briefly, it gets to a point where the whole JO system is problemamtic. Sure theres a Doichek answer for everything, but the sum of all the questions is greater than each individual difficulty. Like a Rubic's cube, where you're constantly juggling answers but can never get the whole solution at the same time. And suddenly you bump into a model where everything just fits much better. And it just suddenly clicked. This is without reading any skeptical material, blogs or anything. Just the 5 books of Ball from my prior post. (there my have been a few more that I did not mention, like dead sea scrolls, etc) anyhow, others state it much better. I'll find them for you sometime tomorrow.

     
    At August 30, 2006 11:22 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC, check this out, it's much better stated than what I said.


    http://daasdiybur.blogspot.com/2006/01/pegs.html

    > I am curious why on that issue you don't (believe).

    Once you start to doubt, the question becomes not why don't you believe in miracles but rather why *do* you believe in miracles.

     
    At August 31, 2006 1:23 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    I find the exact opposite to be true.

    Once I assume that Judaism is some invention from the people too many questions arise in my mind.

    1. Why the lie about the origins of the book? (No other religion lies about its origins)

    2. Why the acceptance of the system? The system as written, does not give authority to one group of people over another. There is no concept of a person superceding the rules. (such as a pope)

    3. Why is it so poorly written? No other religious book is so dry and uninspiring, not even from similar time periods. Infact, most of the apocrypha is more exicting than whats actually in Tanach.

    As for the reason why I beleive in miracles... Its because I see them almost every day, in my life. As those more athiestic scientists like to say, "we have the most amazing power to see patterns in statstical noise"... To them, this is evidence of our ability to see things which arn't real. To me, its just further evidence of our connection to the ultimate singularity.

     
    At August 31, 2006 1:48 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC, It looks like XGH just addressed some of that new post on Dov Bear. Your questions are good ones, and I'll try to formulate my own answers sometime tonight.

     
    At August 31, 2006 2:34 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    I didn't see XGH adressing anything to be honest. He enjoys the realm of the absurd so much there isn't anything to actually talk about. No point of reality.

     
    At September 01, 2006 3:29 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC,

    > Why the lie about the origins of the book? (No other religion lies about its origins)

    This is a mis-characterization. It's not a lie, Now it is explainable by DH, Ezra, Joshia.
    But what you're really asking is the same thing as the Kuzari. If it's not true, how did it start.

    There are ready refutations to the Kuzari, one of which really makes a lot of sense. It is in a link on TFSG and I'd rather not post it. It basically shows that there are several examples of peoples that do not know their own origins and have attributed it public miracles (not in the religious sense, but a whole people originating from the ground, I think it was old Ireland or something like that).

    But there's no religious bent to it.



    2. Why the acceptance of the system? The system as written, does not give authority to one group of people over another.

    Sure it does according to DH. It establishes the soveriegnty of Judeah over Israel. Read Finkelstein. Even without that, the Kohanim (Tsedukim?) are favored.

    >There is no concept of a person superceding the rules. (such as a pope)

    Not relevant, read Finkelstein. Also there is the king who is somewhat priveliged?

    3. Why is it so poorly written? No other religious book is so dry and uninspiring, not even from similar time periods.

    I can't speak to this, I'm not familiar with other books. I find it quite inspiring and poetic, especially Breishis, Shmos and Devarim.

    >Infact, most of the apocrypha is more exicting than whats actually in Tanach.

    So what?

    > As for the reason why I beleive in miracles... Its because I see them almost every day, in my life.

    You call it miracles. It's not a Nes. Nes in Hebrew means "sign" or "flag" as to indicate something unusual happened here. Clearly the Bible, when using miracles, does not mean the kind we ALL see in everyday life, such as a tree growing, sunset, etc.

    > As those more athiestic scientists like to say, "we have the most amazing power to see patterns in statstical noise"... To them, this is evidence of our ability to see things which arn't real. To me, its just further evidence of our connection to the ultimate singularity.

    That's nice and poetic but what does that mean. I don't deny God as a singularity, but what does that have to do with OJ.


    To recap, I agree, there are some questions as to the origin of the Bible if it's not divine. But there are many many more questions and absurdities if you insist it's the word of God (especially as LY sees it). The best explanation is the rational and scientific. Is the Bible true? In my opinion highly unlikely, almost impossible and if it is, then maybe Jesus is the saviour or the Koran ?
    Is Science and DH true? More likely than the Bible.

    Does Occams razor apply here? I don't know. OR is much more complex than it sounds.

    So, I admit, the Bible might be true, But no way is that what I "believe" to be true.

    Once again, I say I'm not very good at debating and I can't always express myself well, but that's the gist of it.

    Shabbat Shalom

     
    At September 01, 2006 4:06 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    Like I am good at debating???

    Ok, first of all. the DH is complete bunk. Using the same methods of the DH people have shown "dante's inferno" to also be written by 3 authors. There is also a theory that Shakespear is actually 5 authors. (none of these theories are accepted in any academic setting save the DH.. even though they all use the same process and tools. I wonder why, its because we know about shakepear and dante's inferno, its recent enough)

    So if you are going off of DH, then you have just exchanged one non-falisfiable idea for another.

    Can you give me the links to the "kuzari" argument. Because, you see, unlike in Judaism, that story about ireland is 100% different. The bible also says that man came from dirt (in one way of reading it) however, that is not hte question about where the physical bodies came from. The question is where did the Philosophy come from.

    I have heard lots of "what if" stories, and everyone I have heard is flawed in quite a few ways to the story of Judaism.

    Accepted that maybe redacted the Torah, ignores the story in Melachim about the same thing. It also ignores that many books written way before Ezra mention the torah or make refrences to the torah in it.

    In fact there is a 2700 year old "priestly blessing" amulet that was found.

     
    At September 01, 2006 4:54 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    > Like I am good at debating???

    If you'd leave out the Kabbala, you;d be much better. (IMHO)

    >
    So if you are going off of DH, then you have just exchanged one non-falisfiable idea for another.


    True.

    > Can you give me the links to the "kuzari" argument.

    Whats your Email I don't want to post it. I'll send it after shabbos or sunday.


    > I have heard lots of "what if" stories, and everyone I have heard is flawed in quite a few ways to the story of Judaism.

    sure, it looks flawed, because people give new interpretations and apologetics for the Bible.

    >

    > In fact there is a 2700 year old "priestly blessing" amulet that was found.

    So what does that prove? That Yivorecha is old? So what it gets incorporated into the Bible when it's redacted.

     
    At September 01, 2006 6:39 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >sure, it looks flawed, because people give new interpretations and apologetics for the Bible.


    email is daganevATgmail.com

    Ok, normally, apologetics means that you are twisting the words of the torah and Chazal to answer a question that was never given before, and you now have a new answer.

    However, the answers to these new questions that I am finding, are from hudreds to thousands of years ago. Thats not appologetics.

    What Aish Hatorah does, is appologetics. They twist the facts of history and ignore other facts, and move some words of the sages around to come up with neat stories. But that is not what I am talking about. (I am not suggesting that what Aish does is bad, only that it is not complete- its like fast food: Fast food is really good when you are broke, but too much and you can get sick)

    >So what does that prove? That Yivorecha is old? So what it gets incorporated into the Bible when it's redacted.

    Apparently you don't know much about amulets. You don't create an "magical amulet" and then place it into a holy book. You create amulets from places you think are something of value. Its not like this amulet was a poem on a stone, it was wrapped up, not ment to be read, but ment to be used for "magical" purposes.


    But anyway, why should I leave out the Kabbalah? Because some idiot decided to make money off of it? I guess you think so, because you think that if some fringe group takes your traditions and changes them, then that means you have to get rid of your traditions???

    Honestly, I don't know how someone can understand Judaism without understanding Kabbalah. What do you daven of on Shabbat? What are the zemirot you sing at your shabbos table?

    I was suggest that I use a different word than Kabbalah. But I don't know a good word to use. Should I use the term Sod? Perhaps Pardes?

     
    At September 02, 2006 11:34 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC,

    > Thats not appologetics.

    They were appologettics 2000 years ago. Aish Hatora is new appol. Those were new back then.


    >So what does that prove? That Yivorecha is old? So what it gets incorporated into the Bible when it's redacted.

    >Apparently you don't know much about amulets.

    Probably right.

    > You don't create an "magical amulet" and then place it into a holy book.

    why not? Especially if it's a blessing. There must ne hundreds of K'mayos written new not from other seforim.
    I'll tryu to do some reasearch.

    > But anyway, why should I leave out the Kabbalah?

    You can keep it for yourself. But that certainly wont win points with rational seeking skeptics.



    > Honestly, I don't know how someone can understand Judaism without understanding Kabbalah. What do you daven of on Shabbat?


    What did Chazal daven on Shabbos?

    > What are the zemirot you sing at your shabbos table?

    I sing all the usual (I love Zemiros) . What did Chazal sing on Shabbos table?


    > I was suggest that I use a different word than Kabbalah. But I don't know a good word to use. Should I use the term Sod? Perhaps Pardes?


    You don't need to drop Kaballah from your thoughts, just your arguments. Just my 2 cents. NOt that debating helps much anyway. do you think one person ever changed his mind because of a debate?

     
    At September 02, 2006 11:58 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >What did Chazal daven on Shabbos?

    > What are the zemirot you sing at your shabbos table?

    I sing all the usual (I love Zemiros) . What did Chazal sing on Shabbos table?

    Read the second chapter of Chagigah, Chazal clearly knew Kabbalah.

     
    At September 03, 2006 12:00 AM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >You can keep it for yourself. But that certainly wont win points with rational seeking skeptics.

    Why? Kabbalah, as our sources understand it , is much more rational (on a fundamental level, not in its individual statements) than anything else we have. Relying on medievial philosophy to get rational understandings is not going to get you anywhere.

     
    At September 03, 2006 1:57 AM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >You don't need to drop Kaballah from your thoughts, just your arguments. Just my 2 cents. NOt that debating helps much anyway. do you think one person ever changed his mind because of a debate?

    I have changed my mind because of a debate. It wasn't untill many months and sometimes years after I had, or heard the debate, but the debate has changed my mind before.

    Also realize, to say that I can have the kabbalah in my heart, but not use it as an argument, means that I will end up just not giving anyone the answer to the question they desire regarding the origins of things. Because the only place that Judaism deals with origins, is in works that involve Kabbalah.

     
    At September 03, 2006 10:08 AM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    > I have changed my mind because of a debate. It wasn't untill many months and sometimes years after I had, or heard the debate, but the debate has changed my mind before.


    I find that I'm more influenced by reading. And then debating with myself.

    > Also realize, to say that I can have the kabbalah in my heart, but not use it as an argument, means that I will end up just not giving anyone the answer to the question they desire regarding the origins of things.


    > Because the only place that Judaism deals with origins, is in works that involve Kabbalah.

    B'reshis bara Elohim (Genesis).
    Basarah Mamoros nivra Holam.
    Shlosha Devarim you're not allowed to ask, etc,

     
    At September 03, 2006 10:09 AM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    IC, you mentioned in another comment that you were engaged. Mazel Tov! When's the wedding?

     
    At September 03, 2006 1:59 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    342 days from now.

     
    At September 03, 2006 5:19 PM, Blogger Irviner Chasid said...

    >B'reshis bara Elohim (Genesis).
    Basarah Mamoros nivra Holam.
    Shlosha Devarim you're not allowed to ask, etc,

    Those things don't really tell you much of anything without the kabbalah.

    Just read the commentaries on Chagigah Perek Bet.

     
    At September 10, 2006 12:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    dear Baal Habos,
    i have just discovered your blog and some other bloggers who are in the same boat. i too am a heretic who lives as a frum woman, and whose family and husband do not suspect my divergance. i wonder if there is an email address i can send you a message to and ask you some questions that you might be able and willing to address.

     
    At September 10, 2006 7:00 PM, Blogger Baal Habos said...

    Certainly. BAALHABOS@GMAIL.COM

     

    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home