Year: 2021

Emunah VERSUS ‘Pharmacology’

Medical Intervention in the Torah Part 2

Chizkiyahu’s illness, like all others mentioned in the Torah, had a direct spiritual cause: he had refrained from marrying and starting a family. The prophet Yeshayahu instructed him to give his final instructions to his household, for he was going to die (see Melachim II 20:1-11). Chizkiyahu replied: “Finish your prophecy and get out! I have a tradition from my forefather [King David], even if the point of the sword is on the neck of a man, he should not hold himself back from mercy.” (Brachos 10A)

Chizkiyahu immediately prayed and cried to Hashem from the depths of his heart. Before Yeshayahu could get far, Hashem spoke and told him to return with a message for Chizkiyahu. He would be granted another fifteen years of life and would witness miraculous salvation from the powerful Assyrian army that had besieged Jerusalem. (This could have been the ultimate redemption and Chizkiyahu could have been Moshiach, but the opportunity was lost [Sanhedrin 94A].)

Yeshayahu then instructed Chizkiyahu to place pressed figs on his inflamed skin, after which it healed. Chazal teach that such a treatment should have been harmful even to healthy skin, but Hashem performed a miracle within a miracle to show that He is in charge of all healing, and nature is really nothing more than a camouflage for His intervention (Melachim II 20:7, Rashi, Radak). This is one of the reasons we must engage in reasonable natural efforts, to maintain “plausible deniability” for those who wish to deny God’s intervention, and thereby preserve free choice (see Ralbag). Without the camouflage of nature, that would be impossible. Nevertheless, the true cause of illness and healing (unless one sabotages his own health) is entirely spiritual.

Deep down we all know this. Even those who trust doctors and scientists far more than they ever deserved nevertheless pray in times of medical distress. We do not pray for the plumber to find the cause of the leak and successfully repair it (though perhaps we should). Ditto with the auto repairman, the electrician, the tailor, and so many others whose services and expertise we rely upon to fix that which needs fixing. We know that there is a step-by-step process to their work, the outcome of which – short of negligence – can be entirely predictable.

Yet when it comes to curing an illness or healing the body, we innately understand that the outcome is never entirely predictable. No doctor has ever cured a patient. The most they can do is facilitate the body’s healing, with God’s permission for it to heal. This is why people are nervous even when they undergo “routine” procedures or take medication, and those with sense pray for it to be successful. The step-by-step process of medical treatment includes a lacuna that no doctor can control: the body’s response to treatment. Unlike repairing a car or a shoe, anything can go wrong.

Despite this, doctors have a vaunted belief in their own abilities (a big reason why “the best doctors go to hell”), and most people place doctors on a pedestal. Faith in science and the abilities of doctors has become a religion unto itself, if not a cult. Even most religious people look to doctors with reverence, the sort of reverence that is given to great rabbis and few others. The stereotypical Jewish mother takes the greatest pride in her son, the doctor.

Chazal teach us that Chizkiyahu did six controversial things, three of which received the approval of the Sages and three of which did not (Pesachim 56A). The three which received approval all countered avoda zara: he dragged the bones of his father, an idolater, on a bed of rope, he pulverized the copper snake that Moshe fashioned (Bamidbar Chapter 21) which the Jews later began to worship, and he hid away the book of cures.

The latter is most intriguing. Rashi explains that people used this book of cures (which the Ramban in his introduction to Bereishis attributes to Shlomo Hamelech) to heal immediately, and they didn’t humble their hearts. Chizkiyahu hid it to compel the people to turn to Hashem.

The Rambam vehemently rejects this explanation (see his Pirush Hamishnayos). He suggests that the book of cures might have contained information about how to prepare various poisons from plants, what illnesses they would cause, and how to cure them. When Chizkiyahu saw that this scientific information was being used to murder people, he hid the book.

However, the Rambam’s preferred explanation appears in Moreh Nevuchim Part 3 Chapter 37. There he writes that the book of cures was based on the idolatrous ideology of the Sabeans, which dated back to the times of Avraham. This ideology was dominant at the time; it combined nature-worship, star-worship, and sexual perversity. Their cultish behaviors were not merely religion, but the accepted science of the time. Consequently, one who veered from their behaviors was considered a heretic, a science-denier, and a threat to society. The Rambam is adamant that the cures in the book were idolatrous and fraudulent.

The Talmud Yerushalmi’s version of the teaching refers to it as a tablet of cures (Pesachim 64A). The Pnei Moshe and Korban Ha’eida commentaries both explain that remedies based on astrology were engraved on the tablet, and it was a great sin for people to follow it. This is similar to the Rambam’s explanation.

When Chizkiyahu was deathly ill, he prayed for Hashem to remember that he had done what was good in God’s eyes. Both Rashi in Pesachim and Radak in Melachim say that this refers to hiding the book of cures. It’s interesting that they single out this action. Perhaps Chizkiyahu’s effort to turn the Jews to Hashem as the source of healing merited his own recovery.

Even more interesting, Chizkiyahu knew that hiding the book would indirectly cause some people to die. He reasoned that the book of instant cures was causing more spiritual harm than it was worth. Although this was most controversial, the Sages agreed with his decision. Did his miraculous salvation after turning to God – when the book of cures was no longer available – validate his decision?

According to Rashi, Ramban, and Radak, it was meritorious to suppress authentic medicinal cures because the people had put their faith in medicine over God. In our day, the cultish faith in modern science and medicine is on steroids (pun intended). This mindset is equated in the Gemara with actual idolatry, and warranted a swing to the opposite extreme – banishing the book of cures – to set people straight.

According to the Rambam, the book of cures was fraudulent, and therefore its banishment was no loss to the sick. If anything, removing this “misinformation” could only benefit them! It seems strange that Chizkiyahu’s decision to hide a book of false, idolatrous, presumably harmful medicines would be controversial. Perhaps the Sages needed to approve this obviously righteous act because Chizkiyahu might have ended the people’s dependence on the fake science without burying an important historical record.

Either way, the Jews of Jerusalem, with a Beis Hamikdash and true prophets in their midst, were so attached to fake science and cultish behavior that it took the brave action of a Moshiach-worthy king to put an end to it.

Stop and reflect on this as you compare to present times. Read the previous paragraph again, and just reflect on it.

Even if the science was authentic – even if it contained the wisdom of King Solomon – it was still appropriate for the book to be hidden, because the people relied on the science too much. When people give power and faith to science over God, it is idolatrous, and it is better for the science to be suppressed.

Compare to present times and reflect on that as well.

A reader recently emailed me the following remarkable comment: “I noticed a special fact today while reading the Torah. In the Greek translation (Septuaginta) I read that Pharaoh called his magicians to perform miracles. The word for magician in Greek is “Pharmacon” as you surely know [I didn’t]. These are the Pharmacists of today. They could only make some plagues worse but not take them away. How topical…So this biblical story from Egypt now gets a whole new perspective.”

If modern pharmacology does not have its actual roots in idolatry, the slavish worship of white coats, degrees, and establishment “experts” is clearly idolatrous. There is overwhelming evidence that the system is rife with corruption and that much of what is taken for granted as “scientific fact” is more akin to faith in cult leaders. Those who scorn religious faith have created a substitute that demands complete faith and ritual obedience.

Natural interventions are intended to be a camouflage for God’s intervention, not a substitute. This is even when the science behind them is indisputable, all the more so when it is shrouded in deceit, greed, politics, and conflicts of interest. Those who gamble their wellbeing and their lives on such science are certainly turning away from God and committing a great sin.

We pray three times a day in the Shemoneh Esrei for God to heal us, referring to Him as the רופא נאמן, the faithful healer. There are many doctors, but only God is the true healer, only God can be relied upon. If we must turn to doctors at times, we must do so with the understanding that they are nothing more than a camouflage for God’s healing. Their place in society deserves no special reverence, no more than anyone else who does a job and relies on God for the outcome to be successful. Doctors and medicine exist to provide a cover for God’s intervention, not to replace it.

We are blessed to live in a time when the idolatry of medical worship is being destroyed before our eyes and its priests exposed as frauds. Let us live according to the Torah, turn to God, banish the fear, and enjoy life.

__________________________

https://chananyaweissman.com/

Don’t Plan on Retiring!

Your Portfolio Is a Sack of Lies

By 

August 25, 2011

Years ago, I bought a domain name: www.NeverSayRetire.com.

I did this because I have long been aware of a crisis that will face tens of millions of Americans. They will not be able to afford to retire.

Every Western government has lied to its citizens, All have promised to provide an old age safety net. These promises will soon be broken.

Americans have long accepted these promises at face value. They have not applied a discount for the high risk of a government default on its IOUs. They have also not applied a discount for price inflation to compensate them for a politically inevitable policy.

Yet they are becoming vaguely aware that the government will in some way wiggle out of its obligations. Anyway, they say they think this. But they take no practical steps to hedge their portfolio of lies.

This is why I conclude that there is enormous self-deception in all adult age groups in the United States regarding the prospects of retirement. This self-deception is so comprehensive and so widespread that I have doubts about people’s ability to make assessments and then make decisions that are consistent with their assessments.

The financial media are beginning to publish articles about how millions of Americans will not be able to afford to retire. Americans have not saved enough money, we are told. This is accurate.

These articles are coming about 45 years too late. It was clear to anyone with an understanding of basic economics back in 1965 that Medicare would bankrupt the United States government at some point. A few critics said so at the time, but they were not taken seriously. The program’s expenses have grown relentlessly. They are going to undermine the solvency of the government. This means that there will be a default at some point. This default will also undermine Social Security.

The writers also report that more Americans than ever before are saying that they will not be able to retire. But the actual rate of retirement indicates that they do not really believe this.

ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS

The people being interviewed are telling the reporters one story, but their actions tell a different story. They say that they will not be able to afford to retire, yet the overwhelming majority of people who are eligible to start collecting full Social Security payments at age 66 do retire. This percentage has been increasing over the last decade, but not fast enough. A Congressional Research Service report dated September 2009 summarizes the development. Only a third of men eligible for full Social Security benefits around age 66 are still in the labor force.

In March 2009, 52% of men aged 62 to 64 were employed, compared with 42% in 1990 and 47% in 2000. Of men aged 65 to 69, 33% were employed in March 2009, compared with 26% in 1990 and 30% in 2000. Among women 62 to 64 years old, 41% were working in March 2009, compared with 28% in 1990 and 35% in 2000. Among women 65 to 69 years old, 25% were working in March 2009, compared with 17% in 1990 and 20% in 2000.

What the data reveal is that two-thirds of American men who reach the age of full Social Security payments quit working. Three-quarters of women make this decision.

If Americans were really concerned about their inability to pay for their retirement years, they would not retire. They would stay on the job. By law, they cannot be fired merely for being older. Companies are afraid to fire anyone who reaches retirement age who asks to stay on the job.

My conclusion: there is a deep-seated schizophrenia in America’s older population.

This schizophrenia extends to the younger members of society. For over a decade, pollsters have asked voters if they believe that Social Security will be still be operational when they reach retirement. Over half of all people surveyed say they do not think it will be. Younger workers are even more emphatic that it will not be there.

Yet there are no signs that this age group is saving enough money to provide retirement. They say that the government will not be there with a safety-net program, but they refuse to build a safety net of their own.

Something is fundamentally wrong with the public’s ability to assess economic cause and effect. If we believe their actions, they discount the bad statistical news and take at face value the government’s lies.

BROKEN RETIREMENT DREAMS

The Wall Street Journal published an article on August 21 that dealt with retirement prospects.

The article began with the story of a woman who got trapped by events. Her mother became ill in the 1990s. She needed long-term medical care. This is not cheap. So, the daughter stopped making contributions to her retirement account. Then the “ups and downs” of the stock market dealt her retirement account another blow, the author writes. She calls them ups and downs. This is misleading. The stock market is lower today than in March 2000, and consumer prices are 30% higher.

Today, the 67-year-old woman went back to work part-time as a data-entry clerk. She hopes to retire by age 70.

It’s a sad story. But something is left out: numbers. Exactly how much money did the woman have to pay each month for her mother’s care? For how long? How much had she been contributing to her retirement account before her mother got sick? In other words, is there evidence that she, in fact, would have been able to afford to retire, had her mother not gotten sick? We are not told. We only know that this is her explanation of what happened.

As for the stock market, the financial media did not warn people in the spring of 2000 that a decade-long decline was coming. They did not tell readers to sell stocks. Since then, they have repeatedly said that the best way to achieve a secure retirement is to save more money. They have also said that the best place for this money is the U.S. stock market. They have been wrong for over 11 years.

The woman says she will have a hard time retiring if she cannot sell her home. This indicates that she had regarded her home as her capital for retirement. She is not alone. She knows this. “Like most older people, my money is in my home. … I’m caught between a rock and a hard place.”

But why is she caught? Because she believed the U.S. government and the mainstream media. We now live in the aftermath of Alan Greenspan’s anti-recession policies, beginning days after he took over as chairman in October 1987. The stock market fell 22% in one day. The Federal Reserve responded within 24 hours by flooding the markets with fiat money.

Greenspan always inflated his way out of short-term downturns. This created the housing bubble that he denied even existed. He got away with this because the mainstream media applauded.

The financial media did not warn readers in 2005 and 2006 that residential real estate was a bubble, and that home owners should not put any hope in their homes’ equity as a retirement savings plan. I warned my readers.

So did a lot of other Austrian School analysts.

But we were ignored. Among the few financial media talking heads who did not ignore us, we were dismissed as naysayers, doomsters, and people without vision. Those who ignored us are now living in less expensive homes. Millions of them owe more on their mortgages that their homes are worth.

The bubble-blowers of course mention none of this. They insist that no one could have foreseen the popping of the housing bubble. Their victims are in despair, for good reason.

Another of the lady’s complaints is on target. “Everything is more expensive. I cannot retire, I wish I could.” But this price inflation began in the mid-1960s, when she was a young woman. It did not slow until about two years ago. How is it that she did not see this coming? For the same reason that the financial media did not see it coming. They did not understand Austrian School economics.

Ludwig von Mises warned about secular price inflation from 1912 until his death in 1973. His disciples followed his lead. He took a stand against the entire academic community and the entire financial journalism guild. He was right. They were wrong.

A generation ago, he was asked if he had an inflation hedge. “Yes,” he said. “Age.”

The lady in the article did not see this coming. Neither did the mainstream media, the world of academic economists, and politicians. It is a sad tale, but it was predictable. We Austrians predicted it . . . and were told that we did not understand economics.

The article continues: “Many older people are finding themselves in a position they never expected to be in at retirement age: still working or in need of a job.” This is true. But whose fault is it? The voters. Their parents voted for politicians who voted for the welfare state. They imitated their parents. Now the bills are coming due, as they do in every ponzi scheme. Yet the victims seem surprised. This is a self-inflicted wound.

The article covers recent developments: the fall in stock market prices over the last 30 days, the decline of interest rates since 2008, and falling housing prices. All of this is true, and it is going to get much worse.

Then she cites a statistic. Three-fifths of workers surveyed by a nonprofit organization devoted to retirement studies said that they plan on working past age 65. Of these people, 47% said this is because they have no financial option. They will need health care benefits and income.

If people really took seriously this threat to their futures, they would be saving at 10% per annum, minimum. The older ones would be saving at 20%. They aren’t saving at 6%. They show no sign of panic regarding old age. They may sing songs of woe to reporters. They may tell pollsters that they see what is coming. There is not much evidence that they are taking statistically relevant steps to avoid the grim future which they say they envision.

SAVE MORE AND WORK LONGER

Whenever we read these stories on the plight of the retirees, the author adds the obligatory warning about failing to act now and save more. This article is no exception.

But in this tight labor market, working into your golden years isn’t easy. And you’ll have to make your age and years on the job come across as assets, not liabilities. In addition, with the current market upheaval, you’ll need a financial plan that puts your savings on the fast track and takes into account how Social Security and Medicare benefits could be affected.

But the author does go beyond this ritual response about saving more money. She admits the truth: the best plan is to plan not to retire.

For many older workers, the easiest option may be to continue with their current employer. But that will entail making themselves essential.

Workers should take on new projects when possible. And it’s crucial to stay on top of the latest technology being used; you don’t want to be perceived as the old guy who doesn’t know what’s going on.

This is very good advice. The fact is this: there is no way that most Americans will be able to save enough money to accumulate enough capital to sustain them in their old age, from age 66 to 80 for men and 84 for women. They will not have sufficient capital. This assumes that there will be no mass inflation. That is a low-probability assumption.

Older employees also can put their experience to use — and on display — by volunteering to mentor younger workers either formally or informally.

This is also very good advice. The older worker who can get younger workers up to speed rapidly is a real asset to any company.

If you are working on commission, you are in good shape if you can keep selling. The article interviewed a shoe salesman who is still on the job at age 70. He stated emphatically: “I have to produce or the company wouldn’t let me work out here.” He’s wrong. The company would let him work, but he would eventually starve. The company would not risk a lawsuit over age discrimination. It would let the pressure of falling commission income push him into retirement.

THE ILLUSION OF A SAFETY NET

The governments of all Western nations have promised workers that they will be taken care of by the state in their old age. That promise cannot be fulfilled. Statistically, it is impossible to fulfill. This is why families should be making plans to resume the responsibility of caring for the aged members, as societies have done throughout history.

For as long as you are still in the labor force, you have a chance of being able to afford to care for aged parents. If you are trying to avoid becoming the aged parent who needs care, think through your present employment situation.

If you are in a job where you think the physical requirements will be too much for you, try to get transferred now. Don’t wait for your boss to come to you to suggest this. You had better gain skills in the new position. This takes years.

Some firms offer phased-retirement programs: reduced hours worked. I recommend this strategy, with this proviso: you have a side business to retire into. You plan ahead. You devote more hours to it each week as you get older. You get it profitable, and then you phase out of your present salaried position.

Employers like this option. It allows them to get rid of dying wood without facing a lawsuit. They don’t want oldsters on the payroll. They want younger people who have more years of service ahead of them. Another major incentive for hiring youngsters is this: they will be less likely to negotiate from expectations of high income. They have been battered by Bernanke’s economy. They are happy just to get a job.

CONCLUSION

You are sitting on a portfolio of government lies. I don’t know if you really understand that there is going to be a great default by the government. By “really understand,” I mean this: you are taking steps not to retire.

If you are still planning to retire, you had better have a lot of money, and this money had better not be invested in markets that are going to collapse when the government’s promises are finally exposed as lies.

August 25, 2011

From LRC, here.

The American Regime: Not EXACTLY What They Taught You In Civics Class…

Read “Extreme Prejudice” to find out what happens when whistleblowers try going through “proper channels”.

From the author’s Amazon bio:

Washington DC

As a U.S. Intelligence Asset, Susan Lindauer covered anti-terrorism at the Iraqi Embassy in New York from 1996 up to the invasion. Independent sources have confirmed that she gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack. She also started talks for the Lockerbie Trial with Libyan diplomats.

Shortly after requesting to testify before Congress about successful elements of Pre-War Intelligence, Lindauer became one of the first non-Arab Americans arrested on the Patriot Act as an “Iraqi Agent.” She was accused of warning her second cousin, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Secretary of State Colin Powell that War with Iraq would have catastrophic consequences. Gratis of the Patriot Act, her indictment was loaded with “secret charges” and “secret evidence.” She was subjected to one year in prison on Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas without a trial or hearing, and threatened with indefinite detention and forcible drugging to shut her up.

After five years of indictment without a conviction or guilty plea, the Justice Department dismissed all charges five days before President Obama’s inauguration.

כיצד צמח הרב יקותיאל יהודה הלברשטאם זצ”ל, האדמו”ר מצאנז-קלויזנברג לאוהב א”י

ופעם כששאלו אותו מה גרם לו כל כך לחבב את הארץ, הוציא ממגירת השלחן ספר של רבי עקיבא יוסף שלזינגר בשם “כולל העברים – מחזיר עטרה ליושנה”, ואמר שהספר הזה ומחברו השפיעו עליו השפעה עצומה וקישרו אותו נפשית לארץ ישראל [רע”י שליזנגר, בעל “לב העברי”, קרא להקים בארץ שלטון יהודי על פי תורה], והעיקר – “הלואי והיו שומעים לקולו בשנים הקודמות, כשפירסם את ספרו, כי אז היתה כל תמונת העולם היהודי שונה לחלוטין”, ו”אלמלי היו אחינו בני ישראל עושים בשעתו כפי שהציע רבי עקיבא יוסף זצ”ל, יתכן מאד אשר מאות אלפי יהודים מחו”ל – ואולי מליונים ממש – היו שורדים מיוון המצולה ונשארים בחיים, ולארצנו הקדושה היו פנים אחרות לגמרי… ברם, למגינת הלב, הצליחו השטן וגונדא דיליה להפריע אותו מהגשמת תכניותיו”.

(מתוך לפיד אש עמ’ תסז, וסביבותיו)