http://youtube.com/post/Ugkx6sa_N81eV_OVoO_jQO4ug8PxByK21oIX?si=TazCTrMU0EMpYWzG
✨ Z Marzeń i Snów ✨ Blog narracji mistyczno-historycznych — o historii, duchowości i filozofii. Miejsce, gdzie dawne opowieści splatają się z marzeniami, mitami i refleksją nad światem…. ✨ „Jeśli słyszysz szepty zza zasłony czasu — to znak, że Echo Cię wzywa. Wejdź.”✨…..✨ Z Marzeń i Snów ✨ Ein Blog für mystisch-historische Erzählungen über Geschichte, Spiritualität und Philosophie — wo alte Geschichten mit Träumen, Mythen und Reflexionen über die Welt verwoben werden…..✨ „Wenn du Flüstern hinter dem Schleier der Zeit hörst — ist es ein Zeichen, dass das Echo dich ruft. Tritt ein.” ✨„To literacki ogród opowieści inspirowanych historią, mitami i duchowością. Nie opisujemy świata dosłownie — wsłuchujemy się w jego echa, tam gdzie zaczyna mówić dusza.”
Z marzeń i snów 
Cześć mosckerr 🙂
Dziękuję za ten głęboki komentarz – widać w nim dużą wiedzę i pasję do żydowskiej egzegezy Tory. Doceniam wyjaśnienie różnicy między egzegezą (wiernym odczytem z Oral Torah i minhagim) a eisengezą, zwłaszcza w kontekście Pawła i NT.
Jako chrześcijanka nie jestem ekspertką od PaRDeS czy rabinicznych interpretacji, ale fascynuje mnie, jak te metody pomagają unikać narzucania własnych założeń na teksty T’NaCH. Twoje słowa skłaniają do refleksji nad wspólnymi korzeniami judaizmu i chrześcijaństwa .Dziękuję za podzielenie się tą perspektywą.
Pozdrawiam 🙂
Magiczna Lu
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
Cześć Darco😊
Dzięki za komentarz
Zobacz jak traktują Naszych
Kibiców . Szok
PolubieniePolubione przez 2 ludzi
משנה תורה – קידושין Common Law
Shalom and Howdy from Israel. As a Jew I am an atheist praise the Gods. Theology and Creed based belief systems an abomination to me. Torah faith defined as the pursuit of judicial justice which strives to make fair restitution of damages inflicted. Torah law – a judicial common law system. The idea that the State pays the salaries of judges and prosecuting attorneys – bribery. Revolutionary America despised the vertical Star Courts whose bought and paid for judges justified and validated British impressment of American sailors, stolen off of American ships on international waters…The behavior of the American courts toward Trump before and after he won the election – day and night difference! What a total disgrace, proof that the American judicial system totally corrupt together with Nancy Pelosi and her ilk who made 100s of millions from insider trading! Forced to resign in disgrace from Congress, but that hardly qualifies as justice.
Torah defines “love” as ownership. A man cannot love that which he does not own. The Talmud interprets love through theft of his property. It teaches the mussar that a person attaches a portion of his soul to his owned property. “Life liberty and property” to keep this in an American context. Torah common law learns “love” through the mitzva of קידושין. Marriage – a man acquires his wife! But a woman simply not a slave or a whore – which can be bought and sold! So what does a man “acquire” through Cash, Contract, or Sex?
Torah a common law legal system. Common law stands upon the central premise that it requires similar Case/Rule precedential judicial rulings. American literature 101 calls this “Compare and Contrast”. The opposite of marriage – divorce. קידושין כנגד גט. A evil man who divorces his wife but treacherously refuses to give her her “Get”/גט makes this woman a “jailed”/agunah woman. This woman if she has a child from another man without her “get” births bastard children. How does this legal condition qualify as being – at all fair and just?
A superficial reactionary reading of the language of the Torah/Talmud – known as פשט – has no explanation. Hence rabbinic Judaism stuck in a טיפש פשט bird-brained box thinking unjust legal system! This type of law known as חוקים. Torah common law – judicial courtroom law based upon precedent similar Case/Rule -rulings made by earlier courts. Queer statute law Judaism – utterly perverted.
Torah Law (חוקים) has nothing to do with the absurd-unknowable divine revelation. That’s Xtian and Muslim avoda zarah whose theologies and creed belief systems create their Gods from nothing other than Human belief systems. Mishnaic Common law originated from human experiences and societal needs rather than some pie in the sky divine angelic command like Muhammad’s Koran. Mishnaic common law – Court room judicial rulings.
What does “derived from oral traditions/Oral Torah even mean? The kabbala taught by rabbis Akiva and Yishmael and Yossi HaGalilee פרדס ומידות. Herein defines “Oral Torah”. פרדס not a mystical interpretation but rather a 4 part inductive reasoning logic system. Its stands separate and apart from Plato and Aristotlte’s 3 part syllogism deductive reasoning logic system.
Unlike the syllogistic method of deduction which dominates Greek philosophy (i.e., moving from general principles to specific conclusions), Pardes employs a fluid inductive comparative analysis approach. This means that insights, derived from similar precedent Case/Rule judicial rulings. As a loom has a warp – weft, the Talmud has halacha – aggada.
The latter entails making a דרוש\פשט of T’NaCH prophetic mussar, which the Talmud, which means learning, cleverly weaves through רמז\סוד transforming toldot-secondary commandments & halachot – which do not require k’vanna – unto time-oriented commandments which do require k’vanna. Raising the status of rabbinic halachot to Torah time-oriented commandments defines how the Talmud/Oral Torah halachot – ritual religious observances – qualify as commandments from the Torah revelation at Sinai. Hence the reason why Oral Torah requires common law judicial precedents. Time not determined by a clock but rather prophetic mussar k’vanna. A fundamental רב חסד מאי נפקא מינא.
גופא, which means returning back to the original discussion following a digression. What does a man acquire through the “action” of קידושין? He acquires title to the woman’s “Nefesh O’lam Ha’Bah soul. What does this mean? Answer: her future born children. Based upon the precedent of Avram’s complaint to HaShem: ‘What can you give me seeing that I have no children to inherit my wealth’? This question defines the oath alliance sworn – commonly known as the brit between the pieces, as found in Parsha לך לך – the 3rd Parsha of the Book of בראשית. Upon this bedrock foundation stands the Torah mitzva of both קידושין וגט. We have completed the circle.
Why are the children which an Agunah woman births considered “bastards”? The mitzva of קידושין the man swears a Torah oath before two witnesses and a minyon of 10 men (like the 10 spies in the days of Moshe, or the 10 plagues or the 10 commandments etc – meaning a public event). Swearing a Torah oath/brit cut upon the soul of a man. What defines the soul of a Man? Answer: His children. The birth of his children, understood as his portion in O’lam Ha’bah!
But that רשע who refuses to give his ex wife her “get” too faces a horrific בנין אב precedent! Just as the גר צדק/convert qualifies as a “new creation” so too the Court has the power to impose the ban of נידוי/cherem upon this רשע which makes him a “new creation” – not Jewish. Race or DNA do not determine the Jewishness of a child. Similar to how the ticking of time on a clock likewise does not shape nor determines time-oriented commandments! Only the mother determines the Jewishness of any child born in this world. Hence the court can retroactively annul the original קידושין and issue a גט to this chained woman permitting her to marry a far more worthy man.
The language of the קריא שמע, law essentially interprets language, בכל נפשך – specifically “contract law”. Torah understood as a contract and not a theological creed belief system. Hence the wisdom of the Oral Torah it interprets the contract of the Written Torah oath brit alliance through out the generations. Interpretation of texts fluid like the falling of rain in its due season. פרדס inductive logic a dynamic rather than static syllogism deductive reasoning model. The skill required to design moving parts like as in an internal combustion engine, a completely different engineering skill than designing a fixed bridge which spans a river.
PolubieniePolubienie
Mark the contrast between T’NaCH common law legalism from Xtian propaganda preaching theology.
Proverbs 16:1-10 located within the T’NaCH sugya/sub-chapter of 15:20 – 17:24. The NT avoda zara propaganda rhetoric narishkeit trash “loves” to quote T’NaCH sources taken out of context. The bible abomination of the church perverted translations – Universally corrupt and evil. Taking an idea out of its surrounding contexts defines propaganda NOT T’NaCH common law. The NT Roman forgery would make Joseph Goebbels, the Propganda Minister of Nazi Germany – PROUD.
Taking T’NaCH sources ripped apart from their contexts compares to how abortion clinics employ suction to rip apart heads feet legs of unborn babies from its mothers’ womb for money. God has the same letters as DOG. The NT fulfilling the words of the Prophets – a brutal abortion of T’NaCH literature. The Old Testament bible of the church – an utter abomination! It replaces the natural order of sugya context replaced by the church perversion of Chapters and verses. Pardon me as I puke.
T’NaCH faith all about the pursuit of justice and fair restitution of damages inflicted upon others. The church whore turned faith into a theological creed belief system which created Gods from nothing. The Koran did the same Av tuma avoda zara with the creation of Allah. Both belief systems despise the Torah faith that enshrines the righteous pursuit of judicial justice. Judicial common law courtrooms share nothing in common with Cult of personality decrees; Paul declared to Goyim: YOU ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW. His propaganda half-truth failed to discern that 1) Goyim rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, so naturally Goyim not under the Law. Goyim never taken out of Egypt by HaShem. They remain in foreign lands and countries; the oath sworn to Avraham that the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot would inherit the oath sworn lands of Canaan. And rule those oath sworn brit alliance lands with judicial common law justice. 2) Roman law – statute law not common law. A day vs night difference which the church whore of Babylon has totally ignored for 2000+ years; on par with the church denial of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf. The church bible duplicates the sin of the Golden Calf in that it translates the 1st commandment Spirit Name unto word translations. No word can translate the Name of HaShem – that’s the sin of the Golden Calf!
Xtian believers have no sincerity. Proof: Never in 2000+ years has even a single Xtian or Muslim “believer” ever caught the Golden Calf Av tuma that Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. If only ONE GOD then no need to command the second commandment; all the Books of the Prophets which address the tuma worship of other Gods, starting with Par’o and the Egyptian worship of other Gods, followed by all the kings of Canaan who worshipped other Gods! Goyim have no t’shuva, they remember nothing of their past war crimes against humanity because they have absolutely no shame.
T’NaCH simply not read as a novel. The church whore never grasped the basics of T’NaCH common law. Common law stands upon the foundation of precedents. The arrangement of the Holy Writings within the Books of the T’NaCH serves as a precedent for the later arrangement of the Gemara commentary to the Mishna. Rabbi Yechuda the Chief Justice of the Great Sanhedrin Court codified his common law Mishna in 210 CE. Why did he name this common law codification of Great Sanhedrin judicial ruling by the name Mishna? Because the 5th Book of the Written Torah, known as D’varim, has a second name: Mishna Torah. What does Mishna Torah mean? Answer: Common Law. Hence rabbi Yechuda’s Mishna codifies Great Sanhedrin Courtroom ruling organized as “Common Law” – hence “Mishna”.
As the Holy Writings Books of T’NaCH literature serve as a commentary to the Books of the Prophets of the NaCH so too the Gemara duplicates/mirrors the Holy Writings Books of T’NaCH, it makes a common law commentary to interpret the k’vanna of the language of the Mishna. The whore of Babylon church abomination never grasped the obvious; it preferred to burn the Talmud (which means learning) predating the Nazi book burnings of the 1930s. Goyim have no t’shuva because they do not remember the war crimes committed by generations of church believers across the millennia of their Par’o like injustice and oppression. All the church great cathedrals built through serf slave labor. It took the American and French Revolutions to cast the whore of Babylon church upon the dung heaps of history ie 1) Separation of Church from State 2) citizens rather than feudal serfs. 3) taxation without representation.
T’NaCH a common law legal system – just that simple. Common law stands upon the foundation of making logical Case/Rule judical comparative rulings. The Book of Proverbs serves as a “Gemara” commentary to the Books of the “Mishna” Prophets. That’s how the Game played in order to righteously pursue judicial justice – no fancy dance’n. The sugya of Proverbs aligns with the NaCH Book of Yirmeyahu/Jeremiah 10:22-25. Just as the Gemara serves its Mishna through comparative precedents so too the Holy Writings serves the NaCH Books of the Prophets through comparative precedents. This requires inductive logic as opposed to deductive logic. The church whore of Babylon has never developed a systematic inductive reasoning thought process – not to this very day! How utterly bankrupt and pathetic.
The mussar of the sugya of Proverbs interprets the k’vanna of Yirmeyahu’s prophetic mussar for all generations of Israel. Only Jews within the borders of the oath sworn lands can do mitzvot לשמה, based upon the 1st Commandment of Sinai. HaShem brought Israel out of Egypt, Jews in g’lut remain in Egypt. Therefore Jews in g’lut worship other Gods, just as Par’o worshipped other Gods. Israel accepted only the first Two Sinai commandments till Moshe instructed the rest of the Torah revelation after the Oral Torah interpreted the intent of all Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot – as viewed through the prism of tohor time-oriented Av Torah commandments. The Torah brit – ruling the land with justice vs g’lut. Blessing vs. curse. Life vs. Death — choose.
A D’varim/Mishna Torah בנין אב\precedent: D’varim 5:16-18. Bereshit 3:14 – 21. The story of Adam first introduces g’lut. The story of Cain likewise introduces how a son dishonors his parents by assuming that offering a barbeque to heaven equals dedication through an oath alliance the commitment to pursue justice among the chosen Cohen People.
PolubieniePolubienie
Cześć mosckerr 🙂
Dziękuję za komentarz. Jednak uważam, że ten artykuł nie pasuje do tematu naszej dyskusji i nie wnosi do niej bezpośredniej wartości merytorycznej. Wolę rozmowy, które pozostają na temat i pozwalają lepiej zrozumieć omawiane zagadnienia. Zachęcam do dalszej, bardziej skupionej wymiany zdań.
Pozdrawiam 🙂
Magiczna Lu
PolubieniePolubienie
Podobnie jak T’NaCH podkreśla sprawiedliwość i odpowiedzialność wspólnoty, wsparcie zgromadzenia reprezentuje zjednoczoną tożsamość i wspólny cel, tworząc poczucie przynależności wśród Polaków. Fervor, który można zobaczyć w fandomie sportowym, często odzwierciedla historyczne zmagania o tożsamość i uznanie, podobnie jak dążenie do sprawiedliwości i historyczne krzywdy zakorzenione w narracjach T’NaCH. Wsparcie wspólnoty w sporcie można porównać do tego, jak ramy prawne (takie jak te w T’NaCH) łączą jednostki z wspólnymi wartościami i prawami, które mają na celu dobro społeczeństwa jako całości.
Podobnie jak dyskusje dotyczące T’NaCH wywołują silne emocje związane z klasycznymi żydowskimi sądami Sanhedrynu, które były gorąco sprzeciwiane przez arystokratyczną klasę Tzedduków, zasymilowanych synów Aarona, którzy zaprzeczali istnieniu Oral Torah i indukcyjnego rozumowania na rzecz starożytnych platform dedukcyjnych greckich, gwałtowny opór między tymi dwiema frakcjami w społeczeństwie żydowskim doprowadził do wojny domowej. Czy nie przypomina to intensywności przeciwnych tłumów kibicujących swoim drużynom narodowym? Mecze piłkarskie często symbolizują szersze narracje o zmaganiach i triumfie, podobnie jak historie w T’NaCH, które przekazują lekcje o sprawiedliwości, suwerenności i wyzwaniach, przed jakimi stoją wspólnoty żydowskie walczące o zachowanie swojej tożsamości kulturowej otoczone przez znacznie większe i potężniejsze kultury oraz zwyczaje praktykowane przez imperia asyryjskie, babilońskie, perskie i rzymskie, które podbiły państwo judejskie.
PolubieniePolubione przez 2 ludzi
😊
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
Not enough to cast the grave of Rambam upon the dung heaps of history.
The Avot—Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov—represent different paradigms of connection with God and expressions of faith. Not like Avraham who called it [the Beis Hamikdash] “mountain,” and not like Yitzchak who called it “field,” but rather like Yaakov who called it “house. . .” (Pesachim 88a)… What an utterly pathetic mistranslation!
The story of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov centered upon the wells they dug for their sheep. But only idiots assume that the Avot lived their lives as simple shepherds of sheep and goats! The Beis Hamikdash not some glorified slaughter house! It housed both the Great Sanhedrin and a Small Sanhedrin Federal Courtroom of Common Law!
The story of the korbanot dedicated by Kayin neged Hevel centers upon the choice of who merits to live as the chosen Cohen son! Kayin, like Yishmael, & Esav born as the first born son! A major Torah theme played throughout the Sin of the Golden Calf and the replacement of the first born son with the Tribe of Levi!
The prophetic mussar of the rejection of the korban dedicated by Kayin, HaShem does not recognize korbanot as a barbeque to heaven, a תולדות קום ועשה מצוה!!!! A korban requires that a person swears a Torah oath – through the altar like unto standing before a Sefer Torah – מלכות dedicates as specific tohor middah – like a toldoth “blessing” of oaths requires שם ומלכות – committing to the eternal pursuit of justice/צדק צדק תרידוף. Just that simple.
The Torah does not compare to Av tuma avoda zarah which prioritizes “Great theological themes” concerning belief in different Gods — the Lord vs Allah — any more that the Book of ויקרא commands offering korbanot as a ritual commandment like the קום ועשה תולדות הלכות of the Shulkan Aruch do not require k’vanna! Simple קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות, do not require k’vanna. This definition makes them secondary commandments to time-oriented commandments!
The Talmud has a warp/weft Halacha\Aggada loom like structure which weaves the garments, comparable to the Book of שמות garments made for the House of Aaron! Its not the literal garments of the House of Aaron משל but rather the customs and culture of the House of the Chosen Cohen people נמשל. The נמשל defines the כוונה of the משל; as such time-oriented commandments Av commandments.
The Torah not some glorified Book of Jewish religion similar to the Books of the New Testament and Koran Av tuma avoda zarah! The Torah serves as the Constitution of the Republic of 12 Tribes; it serves the same exact function as the Constitution of the United States – basic Law! Based upon the 1st Sinai Commandment. אני ה’ אלהיך אשר הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים מבית עבדים. This the greatest of all Torah commandments – Jews who live in G’lut cannot accept the Torah as the Constitution of our Republic לשמה. G’lut Jewry cursed like Kayin, forced to worship av tuma avoda zarah as a religious belief system theology rather than as the substance of leaving Egypt to conquer Canaan.
Off the דרך Orthodox Judaism declared their av tuma declaration of faith – in the early Twentieth Century – when they declared Zionism as both secondary and foreign to the Torah faith. Absolutely a direct repetition of the Wilderness Generation which condemned the First Born Generation to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai as not having a portion to the World to Come.
The Avot: falsely perceived as but a simple משל “mountain”, or “field”, or “house”, in equal like manner the משל בית המקדש. The lives of the Avot introduce the נמשל dedication – pursuit of justice within the oath sworn lands of Canaan. G’lut Jews who remain in exile cannot accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai – the first commandment – לשמה, because they live their lives permanently in g’lut with no real or honest intention to make aliya. No different than the Shoah Wilderness Generation which has no portion in the World to Come.
The Book of בראשית introduces אב טהור זימן גרמא מצוות, like the Aggada of the Sha’s makes a דרוש\פשט to the prophetic mussar taught through the Books of the T’NaCH! Wisdom requires “shepherds” to weave the wool and linen threads of Halacha and Aggadah unto “garments” that the House of Aaron can wear in the “Beit HaMikdosh”. Obviously mixing wool & linen requires k’vaana as a time-oriented mitzva!
Only Jews who live in the oath sworn lands, who dedicate their Zionism as the eternal pursuit of self-determination to rule these lands with Sanhedrin lateral common law courts of Federal justice; as the basis of law of the Republic over the secondary Government rule of law by statute government Knesset decrees. Herein defines the meaning of Zionism post ’48 and ’67 Independence Wars victories! Common law judicial law the נמשל priority over Statute Law Knesset משל תולדות law. Do the Toldoth follow the Avot Yes or No? The defining question asked by Mesechtot Shabbat and Baba Kama.
The pursuit of judicial justice shares no common ground with personal belief systems/Creeds of faith about Gods in Heaven. Torah justice in this Earth, not in the Heaven skies above. Theological belief systems Av tuma avoda zarah. G’lut Jews cannot, by definition of the first Sinai commandment, possess genuine intention or moral integrity to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, they remain in g’lut. Only within the borders of the oath sworn lands of alliance can Jews establish self determination of ruling the lands of Canaan with righteous Judicial common law justice. Sanhedrin common Law, UNLIKE the Rambam, Tur, Beit Yosef & Shulkan Aruch statute religious codes of ritual halacha,, centers upon judicial rulings which achieve fair restitution of damages inflicted by Jews upon other Jews.
Ritual religious observances do not weave the woolen & linen garments as time-oriented commandments. Av tohor time-oriented commandments they weave the culture and customs practiced by the Chosen Cohen Nation within the borders of the Jewish State of Israel.
G’lut Jews their Beit Din – a joke. The three Justices of their Torts court, do not divide their duties as Prosecuting כנגד Defense justices – who argue their opposing cases before one another through bringing halachic precedents, like as the Gemara does to each and every Mishna which it comments upon!
Religious ritual observances share no common ground with righteous common law courts of law; any more than do the Yad, Tur, Aruch assist students to study Talmudic common law. Torah does not “compare” to a Constitution any more than does a דיוק נמשל actually compares to its משל metaphor.
Employment of משל\נמשל a method of Hebrew speech. Children only understand the simple stories. Adults who cling to the understanding of children – what an utter disgrace. The challenge of maintaining a strong Jewish identity in g’lut … antisemitism-the curse of Amalek.
Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with Goyim invokes the curse of the 2nd Sinai commandment from generation to generation. Herein explains why the B’HaG ruled that the mitzva of reading the M’gillah qualifies as a time oriented commandment from the Torah.
The ever repeated conclusions made by generation after generation of g’lut Jews, that they can live in peace in g’lut – utterly false. Herzl understood that the curse of European antisemitism has no cure. Its a cancer of the Goyim minds which no doctor can heal. Only Jews who commit to leaving g’lut Egypt, a לאו דוקא משל, and making aliya to Israel — possess the potential to acquire Zionism – Jewish self determination to pursue justice among and between our own people.
PolubieniePolubienie
The complexity of comparative thought forced me to re-write and edit my previous set of learning on mesechta קידושין.
משנה תורה – קידושין סוגיה א
To date we have weighed how the precedents of the maturity of the etrog, coupled with the dispute which differentiates the time that the fruit sprouts vs the time of the fruit harvested as precedents, to understand why its forbidden for a man to force a child who lacks the mental maturity to understand how the sex act accomplishes the Torah mitzva of קידושין. In point of fact this abstract idea even accomplished and famous rabbis lack clarity over what actually a man acquires through the mitzva of קידושין. Never met a single student in Yeshiva, when asked this basic question – that answered: קידושין acquires Title to the Nefesh O’lam Ha’Bah souls born into the future of this marital relationship. Our focus has centered upon perhaps the two most famous rabbinic buffoons Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale.
Gemara Halacha does not stand upon its own two legs as the statute halachic codifications infamously proclaim while preaching from their pedestals. Halacha ripped from the context of its Gemara sugiya directly compares to the פשט Chumash commentaries written by some of the most famous Reshonim, starting with Rashi’s commentary read in the manner, (according to the Chabad Moshiach Rebbe’s Rashi commentary), by a 5 year old child. Rashi p’shat does not stand divorced from its Primary Source precedents and how much more so from the Chumash to which it comments upon. This כלל applies to all Reshonim commentaries made upon the Chumash, the Talmud, and the Midrashim. My first year studying in a Yeshiva in Israel, it shocked me that my rabbinic instructors did not have the least bit of a clue how the Siddur serves as the model for the organization of the Sha’s Talmud!
The Yerushalmi, which I started to learn within my first month in Yeshiva, teaches that over 247 prophets – occupied in writing the Shemone Esrei. How many words does the 18 blessings of the Yerushalmi Shemone Esrei contain? The Shemone Esrei stands as the quintessential model wherein the Framers and editors of the Sha’s Talmud(s) edited and organized those most essential common law texts. Sha’s Sugiyot directly compare to the ברכות contained within the Shemone Esrei.
The Magen Avraham (מגן אברהם) opening blessing, directly aligns with the closing “Sim Shalom” closing blessing. This latter blessing, part of the Jewish liturgy which focuses tefillah, ie an oath created Angel – for peace, goodness, and blessings. The sugyot of the Talmud opens and closes with a “thesis statement” and a restated משנה תורה thesis statement. Likewise all points and issues raised in the body of each and every sugiya of Gemara falls within the sh’itta/line of the opening & closing thesis statement expressed in each and every sugiya of Gemara texts.
Siddur contains the שרש, meaning its a verb rather than a noun, like מלאכה – a verb rather than a noun, or like shalom כנגד peace a verb rather than a noun. This word מלאכה compares to – run or walk – verbs which describe actions. In like manner מלאכה describes the actions of skilled labor. Thus making it a verb and not a noun. It represents a different unique verb that does not communicate a specific clear action. Run & Walk as Olympic sports has an entirely different meaning than Run & Walk in normal usage.
Skilled labor or the need for trust for shalom to exist, separates the foundation of verbs from nouns. By focusing on actions, such as the action required to learn an off the dof precedent from a different mesechta of the Sha’s Bavli, this action rather than a passive noun of reading Reshonim commentary secondary sources, embodies dynamic relationships rather than merely conveying static Tur repeated Reshonim opinions. Its this unique quality which separates פרדס inductive reasoning from syllogism deductive reasoning. The one a dynamic logic format whereas the other a static logic format.
Learning an off the dof sugya of Gemara requires weaving that sugya perspective back to re-interpret both the language of that off the dof Mishna, as well as viewing the current studied sugya of Gemara viewed from a different perspective, and also making a משנה תורה re-interpretation of the language of the Home Mishna. By contrast reading a secondary source commentary focuses only upon the specific language contained within the sugya of the Home Gemara. Even the Baali Tosafot did not employ their off the dof precedents to re-interpret the original language of their Home Mishna!
The sin of the Golden Calf clearly proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that words have their limitations. Word translations of Divine Names or middot not equal nor the same as the Spirits which breath life within Divine Names and tohor middot. The latter revelation of the 13 middot introduced the tohor Spirits which define the Oral Torah at Horev! A Venn diagram might best describe how verbs, nouns, words & Spirits overlap and interweave with one another. This subtle distinction the Creed based belief system theologies do not grasp. John 1:1 – In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Perhaps this one gospel verse best encapsulates the exact nature of Av tuma avoda zarah – expressed through the NT and the Koran creed belief system theologies which creates Gods from nothing.
Boris’s Arabic translation of Moreh Nevukim – Greek philosophy interpretation of Torah, baptized as Greek philosophy compares to the Hebrew T’NaCH translated unto the Xtian Old Testament bible perversions! Boris translated middot spirits as “physical attributes” – simply false, and totally wrong. The latter gross mistranslation of middot as physical attributes, implies that these spirits exist as physical qualities when in point of fact they do not. Middot serve as the basic elements which produce prophetic mussar, something like as do atoms in forming elements and molecules, proteins and fats as expressed through biology.
Concepts get lost through translations. An undergraduate scholar gets by with reading translated texts – as an introduction to the subject. A PhD scholar studies texts in their original languages. Because the NT, originally written in Greek, Xtian “scholars” (what a joke) they confuse Primary Sources with secondary translation, the priority of learning Hebrew and Aramaic of secondary importance to learning Greek & Latin. All Xtian translations of their bible abominations of av tuma avoda zarah stink with the foul smell of death corruption – like unto decaying bodies in Nazi mass graves of murdered Jews within the Death Camps. By their fruits you shall know them.
Modern 20th Century attempts to translate the Talmud, almost as corrupt as Xtian bible translations or the Muslim Koran throughout the Ages. Time-oriented tohor commandments create מלאכים יש מאין. Yet the Angel Gavriel dictated the Koran to Muhammad when that illiterate never learned the T’NaCH time-oriented wisdom. Who refers repeatedly about himself as “the prophet”. כלל: A person who testifies about himself – never believed. Why? Because he’s touching the matter, he has an ax to grind.
Boris’s Arabic Moreh Nevukim directly resembles Arabic writing styles, post publication of the Koran. He too writes extensively concerning prophets. Yet both Boris and Muhammad fail to grasp that T’NaCH prophets, like Sanhedrin courts, their jurisdiction limited strictly and only within the borders of the brit lands. Hence some mockers within the 10 Tribal kingdom of Israel would deride prophets, telling them to go back to the kingdom of Yechuda! The false prophets exposed within the Books of the NaCH, compare to both Boris and Muhammad. No Sanhedrin courts of common law No prophets – just that simple.
Prophets serve as police enforcers of Sanhedrin Judicial rulings. The prophet Yonah compares to the precedent set by Moshe Rabbeinu who established 3 Cities of Refuge with their small Sanhedrin Capital Crimes Courtrooms on the other side of the Jordan river. The Tannaim within the pages of the Jerushalmi Talmud debated whether king David established a small Sanhedrin court in the city of Damascus. A small Sanhedrin court in newly conquered land means that the government has nationalized this land as part of the borders of Israel.
Profound deep ideas compare to the layers of an onion. Peeling an onion often entails shedding of tears. Impossible to read a translation and understand complex abstract ideas. Any more that mobs of screaming assimilated Jews in New York holding up placards: “Not in Our Name”, who base their emotional assimilated mob mentality upon little more than Newspaper copy or pictures and gossip! The political assassination of Charlie Kirk testifies that mob emotional over reactions can no more bear rational thought than can diseased European minds can heal their brain cancer of antisemitism.
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
הלוקח לולב מחבירו בשביעית נותן לו אתרוג במתנה לפי שאין רשאי ללוקחו בשביעית. גמ. לא רצה ליתן לו במתנה. מהו? אמר רב הונא, מבליע ליה דמי אתרוג בלולב וליתיב ליה בהדיא לפי שאין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ
Profaning shabbat in a public manner qualifies as a חילל השם, the same equally applies to profaning shemitah etrog/4 species in public. Selling or giving shemitah fruits to someone untrustworthy Heter Mechira modern orthodox who publicly display a lack of reverence for holy produce, resulting in חילול השם – showing public contempt for Torah obedience. Allowing and paying workers to work on Shabbat could result in חילול השם, as it not only violates Shabbat laws but also potentially influences public perception of Torah honor and obedience.
Torah in this sense compares to honoring ones’ father and mother. In both cases, the essence of חילול השם centers on public behavior that disrespects sacred traditions. Whether through giving shemitah produce to the untrustworthy Heter Mechira modern orthodox or allowing work on Shabbat while providing compensation, both situations risk undermining the sanctity of our common law judicial system as its respect applies in a communal context. Members of Israeli society bear full responsibility for upholding the values and integrity of the Torah as the Constitution of our Republic. The idea of חילול השם ברבים equally applies to קידושין witnessed by at least two kosher shabbat observant witnesses and a minyan of Israel. Forced child marriage likewise qualifies as a public חילול השם. That our “friend” Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale validate קטנה ביאה קידושין would seem to qualify as לפי שאין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ.
אמר רב מחלוקת בפרי ראשון אבל בפרי [מעשר] שני דברי הכל בין דרך מקח בין דרך חילול והא דקתני לקח לקח איידי דתנא רישא לקח תנא נמי סיפא לקח איתיביה רבינא לרב אשי מי שיש לו סלע של שביעית וביקש ליקח בו חלוק כיצד יעשה ילך אצל חנווני הרגיל אצלו ואומר לו תן לי בסלע פירות ונותן לו וחוזר ואומר לו הרי פירות הללו נתונים לך במתנה והוא אומר לו הא לך סלע זו במתנה והלה לוקח בהן מה שירצה והא הכא דפרי שני הוא וקתני דרך מקח אין דרך חילול לא אלא א”ר אשי מחלוקת בפרי שני אבל בפרי ראשון ד”ה דרך מקח אין דרך חילול לא והא דקתני אחד שביעית ואחד מעשר שני מאי שביעית דמי שביעית דאי לא תימא הכי מעשר מעשר ממש והא כתיב (דברים יד) וצרת הכסף בידך אלא דמי מעשר הכא נמי דמי שביעת “דרך מקח”
(Derech mekkach) means (purchase), while “דרך חילול” refers to the concept of redemption or sanctifying items. Rav Ashi clarifies that the handling of מעשר שני fruits (which are viewed with less sanctity) has different rules compared to שביעית fruits. He emphasizes that while it’s permitted to purchase second fruits, it’s not permitted to engage in an act of redemption for them. The concept of how shemitah and מעשר שני respected, significantly impacts interactions among communal economic and agricultural practices, ensuring respect for Constitutional “rights” even in financial matters.
Rav Ashi does indicate that different rules for managing מעשר שני compared to שביעית. Specifically, he clarifies that while one may engage in transactions involving second tithe fruits, it’s not permissible to perform an act of redemption on them. Does this precedent imply that a father can sell his בת קטנה שאין לה דעת [in] קידושין על ידי ביאה? Based upon the Torah which evaluates the worth of young and old, based upon their different ages.
A bat ketana, a girl between the ages of 3 to 6 years, her father has the authority to make certain decisions on her behalf. The father can arrange a marriage for his bat ketana. He can sell her as a servant, on condition of קידושין at an age where she has דעת. Such a conditional קידושין must adhere to halachic principles, emphasizing the welfare and dignity of the child remain protected and respected.
Jewish law requires consent and respect for the individual’s autonomy, even if a father can Constitutionally sell off his בת קטנה as a maid servant. While a father has Constitutional rights regarding his bat ketana, these rights, definitely limited and restricted. Not absolute, and must be exercised in a manner that respects the child’s dignity and well-being. רבקה שאלה אם היא מסכימה ללכת עם אליעזר. Using bi’ah to effectuate kiddushin for a bat ketana, even one between the ages of 3 and 6, definitely problematic, both halachically and ethically. Thus, while the father has rights to make decisions on behalf of his daughter, the implications of those decisions must align with Jewish values and laws aimed at protecting the dignity of all individuals, most especially minors.
Having presented the first two legs of the syllogism now turn to the conclusion reached that follows our Gemara’s shared “sh’itta” line of reasoning.
אי הכי אתרוג נמי בת ששית הכנסת לשביעית היא, אתרוג בתר לקיטה אזלינן. והא בין ר”ג ובין ר’ אליעזר לענין שביעית אתרוג בתר חנטה אזלינן דתנן אתרוג שוה לאילן בג’ דרכים לערלה ולרבעי ולשביעית ולירק בדרך אחד שבשעת לקיטתו עישורו דברי רבן גמליאל. ר’ אליעזר אומר אתרוג שוה לאילן לכל דבר הוא
According to Rabbi Gamliel, while the etrog may be treated like a tree for most laws, it follows the rules of vegetables at the time of harvesting. This implies that the classification might depend on when it is picked rather than when it first sprouted. Rabbi Eliezer argues that the etrog, treated like a tree in every respect, suggesting that its status remains constant and influenced more by when it first buds (hantah) rather than when it is harvested. Boris indeed rules that the halacha follows the opinion of Rabbi Gamliel, indicating that the status of the etrog is determined at the time of harvesting (lekita) rather than when it first sprouts. This aligns with Rabbi Gamliel’s view that the etrog functions like a vegetable in this regard.
חדושי הרשב”א השלם. אתרוג שוה לאילן בג’ דרכים: אבל בתוס’ הקשו ליתני לכלאים. דירק בכרם אסור ואילן שרי. וליתני ארבעה כאילן ומשום הכי פירשו דהכא דין חנטה ולקיטה קתני. כלומר לערלה ולרבעי ולשביעית בתר חנטה כאילן. ולמעשר בתר לקיטה כירק. וכן פרש”י בעצמו במס’ ר”ה יד:ב.
According to the Rashba and as aligns with Rabbi Gamliel’s earlier position, the etrog – treated as a tree regarding certain mitzvot (like orlah and shemitah) and akin to a vegetables regarding ma’aser. The classification depends on two criteria: hantah (budding) for determining its status as a tree for certain laws and lekita (harvesting) for determining its status for others. For the purposes of shemitah, Rabbi Gamliel treats the etrog like a tree regarding issues like orlah and fruits of the shemitah year (as discussed, treated according to hantah). Understood in the contexts of קידושין, as the maturity of a young girl as the determinant for the mitzva of קידושין.
However, for ma’aser, he positions it as being determined at harvesting (lekita), indicating that the status of the etrog as a mitzvah based on its maturity at the time of picking impacts its halachic standing. The mitzva of קידושין does not recognize ma’aser as a valid precedent for קידושין. Rabban Gamliel does treat the etrog regarding shemitah in terms of when it has spouted, using that hantah for its classification. This means that its maturity and the time of picking (lekita) play roles in establishing its halachic status as a mitzvah for the four species on Sukkot. The laws governing קידושין operate under distinct principles and cannot simply rely on agricultural analogy.
The concept of using the etrog’s classifications (particularly regarding hantah and lekita) primarily applies in agricultural contexts and may not directly translate into personal status cases or marriage contracts. Hantah applies specifically to agricultural laws (like shemitah and orlah) and relates to factors affecting status at sprouting rather than directly influencing legal determinations regarding personal relationships.
Addressing the subject of קידושין, the maturity of a קטנה absolutely essential. Halachically, a קטנה can enter into a marriage contract, but her legal status regarding consent and obligation differs from more mature individuals. Both Torah & Halacha recognizes maturity through biological and social frameworks, focusing more on age and maturity, rather than agricultural analogies. Whatever the age of Rivka, she possessed the maturity to actively offers to draw water for both the servant and his camels, displaying generosity and initiative. Rivka exhibits kindness, industriousness, and a sense of responsibility. She acts decisively and goes beyond what is requested of her.
While the etrog serves as a useful metaphor under specific contexts, it doesn’t conclusively establish precedents for understanding ביאה with regard to a קטנה. The legal discussions surrounding קידושין involve different principles, such as consent, maturity, and the ability to fulfill the obligations of marriage—factors not inherently comparable to the agricultural considerations surrounding the etrog. The precedent of the etrog, while informative in its own right concerning agricultural laws, does not equate or qualify as a valid halachic source for learning about ביאה and קידושין as applicable to a קטנה. The laws governing these matters, distinctly nuanced and require principles rooted in personal status, consent, and maturity rather than agricultural classifications.
Boris divorced his statute law halachic code unto shoe-box legal classifications. As such he failed to weigh the halachic value measured as a precedent by which to interpret the k’vanna of the Home Mishna. This failure condemns his Yad/Tur\Aruch sh’itta of learning as false and wrong. Simply because his halachic codes fails to understand the Talmud in the context of the Talmud’s own usage of halachic precedents. This gross fundamental flaw, this flagrant error perverts his halachic opinions and makes them נידוי in comparison to the halachic common law code of the B’HaG, Rif, and Rosh.
Hantah relates to the classification of agricultural products and the conditions under which they grow. It’s primarily concerned with agricultural laws, especially regarding the timing of certain commandments like shemitah and orlah. This concept focuses on the biological aspects of plant growth and does not lend itself well to personal or legal status issues such as marriage.
The maturity of a קטנה (minor girl) is crucial in the context of kiddushin. While a קטנה can technically enter into a marriage contract, her legal status regarding consent, obligations, and responsibilities is different from that of more mature individuals. Halachic discourse emphasizes biological and social maturity as essential criteria for entering into kiddushin. The focus remains on the individual’s capacity to understand and fulfill marital obligations.
While the etrog serves as a metaphorical example in some contexts, it lacks direct applicability to personal status cases, particularly regarding bi’ah and kiddushin. Legal discussions about marriage require principles rooted in individual consent, maturity, and the responsibilities that come with marital commitments, simply not inherently connected to agricultural classifications.
By divorcing statute law from common law precedents together with the nuanced halachic historical and cultural contexts, Boris misinterpreting the Talmud’s own legal framework and principles. Common law makes a פרדס depth analysis by means of making comparative precedents. But the style of the Sha’s Talmud of ‘Difficulty and Answer’ – requires that down stream generations challenge the validity and strength of precedents which the Gemara introduces. Its this essence which makes Talmud in point of fact to actually mean “study”.
A scholar must train his mind to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of precedents introduced. In a Court of Law; the Defense and Prosecuting Attorney absolutely must weigh the precedents raised by their opposing Justice. And compare a precedent introduced in the opposing Justice brief weighed against the merits of his own counter precedents.
The purpose of lateral Sanhedrin courtrooms, they pit an equal number of judges against an equal number of opposing justices. This Court hears a Case by pitting the two opposing sets of precedential briefs head to head one against the other. Court justices have the training and obligation to weigh the merits & demerits of a precedent weighed against different counter precedents.
A Sanhedrin Court does not “race” to determine religious ritual practices! This error the Reshonim commentaries expressly transgressed. The Talmud serves to introduce precedents in a Court Case, and not a religious debate of how to keep ritual halacha according to some specified authority figure – as it halacha depends upon some cult of personality. G’lut Jewry during the Dark and Middle Ages of absolute church tyranny, this harsh reality twisted rabbinic Judaism into establishing fixed religious practices and prioritizes rabbinic opinions over other equally valid rabbinic opinions. Dispersed Jewish g’lut communities with little or no inter-state communications required a simplified standardization of halacha.
These cruel harsh realities of g’lut forced leaders like the B’HaG, Rif, Baali Tosafot, and Rosh to concede to the public need to organize ritual religious halacha into some simplified codes of halachic law; the Smag – a Baali Tosafot pro Rambam halachic codifier. The racist violence G’lut Jewry had to endure meant that the common man did not have the means to study Talmudic common law; the chief justification for Boris’s over-simplified Yad. Only the cream of the crop merited to study in Yeshivot.
Boris’s Sefer HaMitzvot, another over-simplified static codification of Torah commandments which divorced Talmudic Oral Torah halacha, like his code likewise divorced his halachic organization from their Home Mishnaot and halacha from aggadic sources. His sefer Ha’Mitzvot perverted Torah commandments, reduced to positive and negative commandments restricted only to the language of the Written Torah. This utter bone headed mistake makes his Sefer Ha’Mitzvot on par with his Yad travesty of justice. Acceptance of the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven entails the k’vanna of the chosen Cohen people; the unification of Written Torah and Oral Torah as ONE set of time-oriented Torah commandments. The perversion of ONE interpreted as justification for belief in Monotheism – an utter Torah abomination.
As the statute halachic codes perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law; the same exact thumb up the ass error made with the Written Torah vs the Oral Torah justification of exactly why the church condemned the Talmud as having no part with the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. The Sefer בראשית introduces Av mitzvot time-oriented commandments – inclusive of the halachot within the Sha’s whose k’vanna determined by the Aggadic and Midrashic drosh made upon prophetic mussar from the T’NaCH.
This crucial component of the Sha’s Bavli all the halachic codes totally ignored. Jews simply stopped or forgot that the framers of Midrash wrote those texts to serve as a commentary to the Aggada of the Talmud. The Aggada makes a פרדס דרוש\פשט directly to the T’NaCH Primary Sources. Prophetic mussar planted as seeds within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within our heart blooms into unique understandings. These understandings become the פשט meaning of Aggadic stories original intent. The next three Books of the Written Constitution of the Republic of Israel introduces קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה תולדות בניני אבות מצוות שלא צריך כוונה. The last Book of the Written Constitution of the Republic of Israel introduces משנה תורה-Common law courts. Common law stands upon the יסוד של בניני אבות precedents, based upon Sefer דברים. Herein defines the Order of the Sha’s Bavli and Yerushalmi.
Talmudic scholarship, according to the k’vanna of its Framers, seeks that down stream generations weave Aggadic prophetic mussar p’shat as the heart dedication of keeping halachic mitzvot whose aliya unto tohor time-oriented commandments which require k’vanna raises these rabbinic ritual observances unto mitzvot דאורייתא through פרדס רמז\סוד logic. Boris abandoned and caused Israel to forget the Oral Torah; he blew out the Hanukkah lights.
Zionism, which means Jewish self determination in the Middle East, denounces g’lut Jewry. It empathizes with their cruel plight Goyim barbarians forced them to endure. But it denounces as a war crime the Roman obliteration of Judean Judicial Constitutional common law courts perverted over the Centuries unto ritual religious observances.
Post the ’48 and ’67 two Wars of National Independence, can our people find it within their hearts to pursue the Zionist dream and achieve self-determination which restores the Written Torah as the Constitution of our Republic of 12 Tribes and the Sanhedrin common law courtroom Federal system of common law enforced by means of Prophetic police. Emphasis upon “common law”, because Boris and his Snidely Whiplash boot licking cronies have perverted T’NaCH\Talmudic common law unto Greek/Roman egg-crate statute law. Can our people achieve self-determination and achieve Legislative Review as a Torah mandate for the Great Sanhedrin Court to regulate, in the manner that a bureaucracy has overview upon Industry, all statute laws passed by our Knesset Parliament?
משנה תורה – קידושין סוגיה א
To date we have weighed how the precedents of the maturity of the etrog coupled with the dispute which differentiates the time that the fruit sprouts vs the time of the fruit harvested as precedents to understand why its forbidden for a man to force a child who lacks the mental maturity to understand how the sex act accomplishes the Torah mitzva of קידושין. In point of fact this abstract idea even accomplished and famous rabbis lack clarity upon. Our focus has centered upon perhaps the two most famous rabbinic buffoons Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale.
Gemara Halacha does not stand upon its own two legs as the statute halachic codifications infamously declared. Halacha ripped from the context of its Gemara sugiya directly compares to the פשט Chumash commentaries written by some of the most famous Reshonim, starting with Rashi’s commentary. Rashi p’shat does not stand divorced from the Chumash to which it comments upon. This כלל applies to all Reshonim commentaries made upon the Chumash, the Talmud, and the Midrashim. My first year studying in a Yeshiva in Israel, it shocked me that my rabbinic instructors did not have the least bit of a clue how the Siddur serves as the model for the organization of the Sha’s Talmud!
The Yerushalmi, which I started to learn within my first month in Yeshiva, teaches that over 247 prophets – occupied in writing the Shemone Esrei. How many words does the 18 blessings of the Yerushalmi Shemone Esrei contain? The Shemone Esrei stands as the quintessential model wherein the Framers and editors of the Sha’s Talmud(s) edited and organized those most essential common law texts. Sugiyot directly compare to ברכות contained within the Shemone Esrei.
The Magen Avraham (מגן אברהם) opening blessing, directly aligns with the closing “Sim Shalom” blessing. This blessing is part of the Jewish liturgy and focuses on a prayer for peace, goodness, and blessing. The sugyot of the Talmud open and close with a “thesis statement” and a restated משנה תורה thesis statement. All points and issues raised in the body of each and every sugiya of Gemara falls within the sh’itta/line of the opening & closing thesis statement expressed in each and every sugiya of Gemara text.
Siddur contains the שרש, meaning its a verb rather than a noun, like מלאכה a verb rather than a noun or like shalom כנגד peace a verb rather than a noun. This word מלאכה compares to – run or walk – which describes actions. In like manner מלאכה describes the actions of skilled labor. Thus making it a verb and not a noun. It represents a different unique verb that does not communicate a specific clear action. Skilled labor or the need for trust for shalom to exist stands upon the foundation of verbs rather than nouns. By focusing on actions, such as the action required to learn an off the dof precedent from a different mesechta of the Sha’s Bavli, this action rather than a passive noun word (Reshon commentary) embodies dynamic relationships rather than merely conveying static regurgitated ideas, perhaps most famously expressed through the Tur halachic code. Its this unique quality which separates פרדס inductive reasoning from syllogism deductive reasoning. The one a dynamic logic format whereas the other a static logic format.
The sin of the Golden Calf clearly proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that words have their limitations. Word translations of Divine Names or middot not equal, nor exist on the same plane as the Spirits which breath life within Divine Names and tohor middot. The latter revelation of the 13 middot introduced the Spirit of the Oral Torah at Horev! A Venn diagram might best describe how verbs, nouns, words & Spirits overlap and interweave with one another. This subtle distinction the Creed based belief system theologies do not grasp. John 1:1 – In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Perhaps this one gospel verse best encapsulates the exact nature of Av tuma avoda zarah – expressed through the NT and the Koran.
Boris’s Arabic translation of his Moreh Nevukim, Greek philosophy interpretation of Torah, framed through Greek philosophy formats, compares to translations of the Hebrew T’NaCH unto the Xtian Old Testament bible! Boris translated middot spirits as “physical attributes” -simply false and totally wrong. The latter gross mistranslation of middot as attributes, implies that these spirits exist as physical qualities when in point of fact they do not. Middot serve something like as do atoms in forming elements and molecules, proteins and fats as expressed through biology. Atoms speculated upon, Aristotle perceived reality limited to 5 elements.
Concepts get lost through translations. An undergraduate scholar gets by with reading translated texts. A PhD scholar studies texts in their original languages. Because the NT, originally written in Greek, Xtian “scholars” (what a joke) confused the priority of learning Hebrew and Aramaic as secondary to learning Greek. All Xtian translations of their bible abominations of av tuma avoda zarah stink with the foul smell of death corruption – like unto decaying bodies in Nazi mass graves of murdered Jews within the Death Camps.
Modern 20th Century attempts to translate the Talmud almost as corrupt as Xtian bible translations or the Muslim Koran throughout the Ages. Time-oriented tohor commandments create מלאכים יש מאין. Yet the Angel Gavriel dictated the Koran to Muhammad when that illiterate never learned T’NaCH wisdom מעשה בראשית? But repeatedly flatters himself as “the prophet”. כלל: A person who testifies about himself – never believed. Why? Because he’s touching the matter, he has an ax to grind.
Boris’s Moreh Nevukim directly resembles Arabic styles, post the publication of the Koran. He too writes extensively concerning prophets. Yet both Boris and Muhammad fail to grasp that T’NaCH prophets, like Sanhedrin courts, their jurisdiction limited strictly and only within the borders of the brit lands. Hence the mockers within the 10 Tribal kingdom of Israel would deride prophets, telling them to go back to the kingdom of Yechuda! The false prophets exposed within the Books of the NaCH, compare to both Boris and Muhammad. No Sanhedrin Court No prophets – just that simple.
Prophets serve as police enforcers of Sanhedrin Judicial rulings. The prophet Yonah compares to the precedent set by Moshe Rabbeinu who established 3 Cities of Refuge with the small Sanhedrin Capital Crimes Courtrooms on the other side of the Jordan river. The Tannaim within the pages of the Jerushalmi Talmud debated whether king David established a small Sanhedrin court in the city of Damascus.
Profound deep ideas compare to the layers of an onion. Impossible to read a translation and understand complex abstract ideas. Any more that mobs of screaming assimilated Jews in New York holding up placards: “Not in Our Name”, who base their emotional assimilated mob mentality upon little more than Newspaper copy or pictures! The political assassination of Charlie Kirk testifies that mob emotional over reactions can no more bear rational thought than can diseased European minds heal their brain cancer of antisemitism.
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
הלוקח לולב מחבירו בשביעית נותן לו אתרוג במתנה לפי שאין רשאי ללוקחו בשביעית. גמ. לא רצה ליתן לו במתנה. מהו? אמר רב הונא, מבליע ליה דמי אתרוג בלולב וליתיב ליה בהדיא לפי שאין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ
Profaning shabbat in a public manner qualifies as a חילל השם, the same equally applies to profaning shemitah etrog/4 species in public. Selling or giving shemitah fruits to someone untrustworthy could publicly display a lack of reverence for holy produce, resulting in חילול השם – showing public contempt for Torah obedience. Allowing and paying workers to work on Shabbat could result in חילול השם, as it not only violates Shabbat laws but also potentially influences public perception of Torah honor and obedience. Torah in this sense compares to honoring ones’ father and mother. In both cases, the essence of חילול השם centers on public behavior that disrespects sacred traditions. Whether through giving shemitah produce to the untrustworthy or allowing work on Shabbat while providing compensation, both situations risk undermining the sanctity of our common law judicial system as its respectfully applies in a communal context. Members of Israeli society bear full responsibility for upholding the values and integrity of the Torah as the Constitution of our Republic. The idea of חילול השם ברבים equally applies to קידושין witnessed by at least two kosher shabbat observant witnesses and a minyan of Israel. Forced child marriage likewise qualifies as a public חילול השם. That our “friend” Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale validate קטנה ביאה קידושין would seem to qualify as לפי שאין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ.
אמר רב מחלוקת בפרי ראשון אבל בפרי [מעשר] שני דברי הכל בין דרך מקח בין דרך חילול והא דקתני לקח לקח איידי דתנא רישא לקח תנא נמי סיפא לקח איתיביה רבינא לרב אשי מי שיש לו סלע של שביעית וביקש ליקח בו חלוק כיצד יעשה ילך אצל חנווני הרגיל אצלו ואומר לו תן לי בסלע פירות ונותן לו וחוזר ואומר לו הרי פירות הללו נתונים לך במתנה והוא אומר לו הא לך סלע זו במתנה והלה לוקח בהן מה שירצה והא הכא דפרי שני הוא וקתני דרך מקח אין דרך חילול לא אלא א”ר אשי מחלוקת בפרי שני אבל בפרי ראשון ד”ה דרך מקח אין דרך חילול לא והא דקתני אחד שביעית ואחד מעשר שני מאי שביעית דמי שביעית דאי לא תימא הכי מעשר מעשר ממש והא כתיב (דברים יד) וצרת הכסף בידך אלא דמי מעשר הכא נמי דמי שביעת “דרך מקח”
(Derech mekkach) means transactions (purchase), while “דרך חילול” (derech hilul) refers to the concept of redemption or sanctifying items. Rav Ashi clarifies that the handling of מעשר שני fruits (which are viewed with less sanctity) has different rules compared to שביעית fruits. He emphasizes that while it’s permitted to purchase second fruits, it’s not permitted to engage in an act of redemption for them. The concept of how shemitah and מעשר שני respected, significantly impacts interactions among communal economic and agricultural practices, ensuring respect for Constitutional “rights” even in financial matters.
Rav Ashi does indicate that different rules for managing מעשר שני compared to שביעית. Specifically, he clarifies that while one may engage in transactions involving second tithe fruits, it’s not permissible to perform an act of redemption on them. Does this precedent imply that a father can sell his בת קטנה שאין לה דעת [in] קידושין על ידי ביאה? Based upon the Torah which evaluates the worth of young and old based upon their different ages.
A bat ketana, a girl between the ages of 3 to 6 years, her father has the authority to make certain decisions on her behalf. The father can arrange a marriage for his bat ketana. He can sell her as a servant, on condition of קידושין at an age where she has דעת. Such a conditional קידושין must adhere to halachic principles, emphasizing the welfare and dignity of the child remain protected and respected.
Jewish law requires consent and respect for the individual’s autonomy, even if a father can Constitutionally sell off his בת קטנה as a maid servant. While a father has Constitutional rights regarding his bat ketana, these rights, definitely limited and restricted. Not absolute, and must be exercised in a manner that respects the child’s dignity and well-being. רבקה שאלה אם היא מסכימה ללכת עם אליעזר. Using bi’ah to effectuate kiddushin for a bat ketana, even one between the ages of 3 and 6, would definitely be problematic both halachically and ethically. Thus, while the father has rights to make decisions on behalf of his daughter, the implications of those decisions must align with Jewish values and laws aimed at protecting the dignity of all individuals, most especially minors.
Having presented the first two legs of the syllogism now turn to the conclusion reached that follows the “sh’itta” line of reasoning.
אי הכי אתרוג נמי בת ששית הכנסת לשביעית היא, אתרוג בתר לקיטה אזלינן. והא בין ר”ג ובין ר’ אליעזר לענין שביעית אתרוג בתר חנטה אזלינן דתנן אתרוג שוה לאילן בג’ דרכים לערלה ולרבעי ולשביעית ולירק בדרך אחד שבשעת לקיטתו עישורו דברי רבן גמליאל. ר’ אליעזר אומר אתרוג שוה לאילן לכל דבר הוא
According to Rabbi Gamliel, while the etrog may be treated like a tree for most laws, it follows the rules of vegetables at the time of harvesting. This implies that the classification might depend on when it is picked rather than when it first sprouted. Rabbi Eliezer argues that the etrog is treated like a tree in every respect, suggesting that its status remains constant and is influenced more by when it first buds (hantah) rather than when it is harvested. Boris indeed rules that the halacha follows the opinion of Rabbi Gamliel, indicating that the status of the etrog is determined at the time of harvesting (lekita) rather than when it first sprouts. This aligns with Rabbi Gamliel’s view that the etrog functions like a vegetable in this regard.
חדושי הרשב”א השלם. אתרוד שוה לאילן בג’ דרכים: אבל בתוס’ הקשו ליתני לכלאים. דירק בכרם אסור ואילן שרי. וליתני ארבעה כאילן ומשום הכי פירשו דהכא דין חנטה ולקיטה קתני. כלומר לערלה ולרבעי ולשביעית בתר חנטה כאילן. ולמעשר בתר לקיטה כירק. וכן פרש”י בעצמו במס’ ר”ה יד:ב.
According to the Rashba and as aligns with Rabbi Gamliel’s earlier position, the etrog is treated as a tree regarding certain mitzvot (like orlah and shemitah) and is akin to a vegetable regarding ma’aser (tithe). The classification depends on two criteria: hantah (budding) for determining its status as a tree for certain laws and lekita (harvesting) for determining its status for others. For the purposes of shemitah, Rabbi Gamliel treats the etrog like a tree regarding issues like orlah and fruits of the shemitah year (as discussed, treated according to hantah). Understood in the contexts of קידושין as the maturity of a young girl as the determinant for the mitzva of קידושין.
However, for ma’aser, he positions it as being determined at harvesting (lekita), indicating that the status of the etrog as a mitzvah based on its maturity at the time of picking impacts its halachic standing. The mitzva of קידושין does not recognize ma’aser as a valid precedent for קידושין. Rabban Gamliel does treat the etrog regarding shemitah in terms of when it has spouted, using that hantah for its classification. This means that its maturity and the time of picking (lekita) play roles in establishing its halachic status as a mitzvah for the four species on Sukkot. The laws governing קידושין operate under distinct principles and cannot simply rely on agricultural analogy.
The concept of using the etrog’s classifications (particularly regarding hantah and lekita) primarily applies in agricultural contexts and may not directly translate into personal status cases or marriage contracts. Hantah applies specifically to agricultural laws (like shemitah and orlah) and relates to factors affecting status at sprouting rather than directly influencing legal determinations regarding personal relationships.
Addressing the subject of קידושין, the maturity of a קטנה absolutely essential. Halachically, a קטנה can enter into a marriage contract, but her legal status regarding consent and obligation differs from more mature individuals. Halacha recognizes maturity through biological and social frameworks, focusing more on age and maturity, rather than agricultural analogies.
While the etrog serves as a useful metaphor under specific contexts, it doesn’t conclusively establish precedents for understanding ביאה with regard to a קטנה. The legal discussions surrounding קידושין involve different principles, such as consent, maturity, and the ability to fulfill the obligations of marriage—factors not inherently comparable to the agricultural considerations surrounding the etrog. The precedent of the etrog, while informative in its own right concerning agricultural laws, does not equate or qualify as a valid halachic source for learning about ביאה and קידושין as applicable to a קטנה. The laws governing these matters are distinctly nuanced and require principles rooted in personal status, consent, and maturity rather than agricultural classifications.
Boris divorced his statute law halachic code into legal classifications. As such he failed to weigh the halachic value measured as a precedent by which to interpret the k’vanna of the Home Mishna. This failure condemns his Yad/Tur\Aruch sh’itta of learning as false and wrong. Simply because his halachic codes fails to understand the Talmud in the context of the Talmud’s own usage of halachic precedents. This gross flaw its what perverts his halachic opinions and makes them נידוי in comparison to the halachic common law code of the B’HaG, Rif, and Rosh.
Hantah relates to the classification of agricultural products and the conditions under which they grow. It’s primarily concerned with agricultural laws, especially regarding the timing of certain commandments like shemitah and orlah. This concept focuses on the biological aspects of plant growth and does not lend itself well to personal or legal status issues such as marriage.
The maturity of a קטנה (minor girl) is crucial in the context of kiddushin. While a קטנה can technically enter into a marriage contract, her legal status regarding consent, obligations, and responsibilities is different from that of more mature individuals. Halachic discourse emphasizes biological and social maturity as essential criteria for entering into kiddushin. The focus remains on the individual’s capacity to understand and fulfill marital obligations.
While the etrog serves as a metaphorical example in some contexts, it lacks direct applicability to personal status cases, particularly regarding bi’ah (intercourse) and kiddushin. Legal discussions about marriage require principles rooted in individual consent, maturity, and the responsibilities that come with marital commitments, which are not inherently connected to agricultural classifications.
By divorcing statute law from the nuanced halachic historical and cultural contexts, Boris misinterpreting the Talmud’s own legal framework and principles. Common law makes a פרדס depth analysis by means of making comparative precedents. But the style of the Sha’s Talmud of ‘Difficulty and Answer’ – requires that down stream generations challenge the validity and strength of precedents which the Gemara introduces. Its this essence which makes Talmud in point of fact to actually mean “study”.
A scholar must train his mind to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of precedents introduced. In a Court of Law the Defense and Prosecuting Attorney absolutely must weigh the precedents raised by their opposing Justice. And compare a precedent introduced in the opposing Justice brief weighed against the merits of his own counter precedents.
The purpose of lateral Sanhedrin courtrooms they pit an equal number of judges against an equal number of opposing justices. This Court hears a Case by pitting the two opposing sets of precedential brief head to head one against the other. Court justices have the training and obligation to weigh the merits & demerits of a precedent weighed against like manner counter precedents.
A Sanhedrin Court does not “race” to determine religious ritual practices! This error the Reshonim commentaries expressly transgressed. The Talmud serves to introduce subjects as a Court Case and not a religious debate of how to keep ritual halacha. G’lut Jewry during the Dark and Middle Ages of absolute church tyranny, this harsh reality twisted rabbinic Judaism into establishing fixed religious practices wherein the cultures and customs of spread out and dispersed Jewish communities with little or no inter-state communications could hold and maintain a Jewish distinct identity in a most hostile g’lut environment.
These cruel harsh realities of g’lut forced leaders like the B’HaG, Rif, Baali Tosafot, and Rosh to concede to the public need to organize ritual religious halacha into simplified codes of halachic law. The racist violence G’lut Jewry had to endure meant that the common man did not have the means to study Talmudic common law. Only the cream of the crop merited to study in Yeshivot. Boris’s Sefer HaMitzvot simplified Torah commandments divorced Talmudic Oral Torah halacha from the written commandments wherein his perverted code limited Torah commandments restricted to the words contained within the Written Torah. This too an utter bone headed mistake which made his Sefer Ha’Mitzvot on par with his Yad travesty of justice.
As the statute halachic codes perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law; the same exact thumb up the ass error made with the Written Torah vs the Oral Torah justification of exactly why the church condemned the Talmud as having no part with the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. The Sefer בראשית introduces Av mitzvot time-oriented commandments – inclusive of the halachot within the Sha’s whose k’vanna determined by the Aggadic and Midrashic drosh made upon prophetic mussar from the T’NaCH.
This crucial component of the Sha’s Bavli all the halachic codes totally ignored. Jews simply stopped or forgot that the framers of Midrash wrote those texts to serve as a commentary to the Aggada of the Talmud. The Aggada of the makes a פרדס דרוש\פשט directly to the T’NaCH Primary Sources. Prophetic mussar planted as seeds within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of our heart blooms into unique understandings. These understandings become the פשט meaning of Aggadic stories original intent. The next three Books of the Written Constitution of the Republic of Israel introduces קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה תולדות מצוות שלא צריך כוונה. The last Book of the Written Constitution of the Republic of Israel introduces משנה תורה-Common law courts. Common law stands upon the יסוד של בניני אבות precedents. Herein defines the Order of the Sha’s Bavli and Yerushalmi.
Talmudic scholarship, according to the k’vanna of its Framers, seeks that down stream generations weave Aggadic prophetic mussar p’shat as the heart dedication of keeping halachic mitzvot whose aliya unto tohor time oriented commandments which require k’vanna raises these rabbinic ritual observances unto mitzvot דאורייתא through פרדס רמז\סוד logic. Boris abandoned and caused Israel to forget the Oral Torah; he blew out the Hanukkah lights.
Zionism, which means Jewish self determination in the Middle East, denounces g’lut Jewry. It empathizes with their cruel plight Goyim barbarians forced them to endure. But it denounces the perversion of Judicial Constitutional common law courts perverted into ritual religious observances. Post the ’48 and ’67 two Wars of National Independence, can our people find it within their hearts to pursue the Zionist dream and achieve self-determination which restores the Written Torah as the Constitution of our Republic of 12 Tribes and the Sanhedrin common law courtroom Federal system of common law. Emphasis upon “common law” because Boris and his Snidely Whiplash boot licking cronies have perverted T’NaCH\Talmudic common law unto Greek/Roman egg-crate statute law. Can our people achieve self-determination and achieve Legislative Review as a Torah mandate for the Great Sanhedrin Court to regulate, in the manner that a bureaucracy has overview upon Industry, all statute laws passed by our Knesset Parliament?
PolubieniePolubienie
Cześć mosckerr 🙂
Dziękuję za wnikliwą analizę Tanach jako common law z precedensami indukcyjnymi – ‚Księga Przysłów jako Gemara proroków’ to genialna paralela! Im więcej wiem o halasze, tym bardziej czuję, że ‚im więcej wiem, tym mniej wiem’.
Pozdrawiam
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
:)))
PolubieniePolubienie
The opening sugya of each and every mesechta of the Talmud compares to the first ברכה in the Shemone Esrei; only this ברכה employs the שם ומלכות requirement k’vanna אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב. Impossible to translate שם ומלכות with a טיפש פשט literal translation. ברכת כהנים, קריא שמע, תפילה, וקדיש all av ברכות lack the literal שם ומלכות expressed through rabbinic ברכות which start with the classic opening of swearing a Torah oath: ברוך אתה ה’ אלהינו מלך עולם.
The wisdom of שם ומלכות the fundamental difference between מלאכה from עבודה, based upon the first commandment of Sinai – the greatest commandment in the entire Torah: אנכי ה’ אלהיך אשר הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים מבית עבדים. Israel in g’lut of Egypt (לאו דוקא) all lands outside of the brit oath sworn lands amount to g’lut. Hence the first commandment only applicable to Jews who live and rule our oath brit homelands. Jews in g’lut remain in „Egypt” and therefore the first Sinai commandment does not apply to them.
The revelation of the Torah at Sinai makes a clear הבדלה through the משל\נמשל metaphor of the Mishkan, as expressed through the Book of שמות. G’lut slaves forced to live their lives drudging through the cursed Earth of working/עבודה making a living off the sweat of their brow. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai introduces, specifically through the mitzva of Shabbat, & the construction of the vessels of the Mishkan a „wisdom” form of work known as מלאכה. Therefore all mesechtot of the Sha’s Talmud prioritize the need to differentiate cursed g’lut עבודה from blessed wisdom מלאכה. Both Goyim and Joys struggle to marry and raise children. But only the latter elevate this basic fundamental task unto a blessed מלאכה which causes the first born chosen Cohen people to live from generation to generation dedicated to the מלאכה of elevating קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות שלא צריך כוונה לטהר זימן גרמא מצוות שנזקוק כוונה.
What separates or רב חסד\מאי נפקא מינא the verb נזקוק from the verb צריך? Specifically in the matter of קידושין, a Man marries a woman in order to give birth to the next generations of the Chosen Cohen People. נזקוק „We will need”; צריך „Need” or „necessary”. נזקוק Future tense, first-person plural; צריך Infinitive form. נזקוק Used when referring to a specific future need or requirement – known as O’lam Ha’bah. צריך Generally indicates necessity, often used in various contexts. נזקוק Implies a planned or anticipated need; צריך More immediate or general need.
Why do טהר זימן גרמא מצוות נזקוק כוונה? Whereas קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות לא צריך כוונה? The former a wisdom מלאכה, whereas the latter, like doing mitzvot because the Shulkan Aruch says so neither a wisdom nor a מלאכה. Hence this type of Torah observance known as עבודת השם. People can do mitzvot by rote, or by the numbers, simply out of habit and mindless tradition. The difference between these two critically different verbs … the difference between ruling the oath sworn lands with righteous judicial justice imposing courts together with prophet police enforcers from religiously observing mitzvot in what ever land a Jew happens to reside therein.
זימן גרמא מצוות נברא מלאכים תולדות מצוות לא נברא מלאכים. Its this fundamental distinction which permits the Jews living in ארץ ישראל to either defeat our enemies in any and all wars or fall before the swords of our hated enemies and go into g’lut. The מלאכה of the study of T’NaCH and Talmudic common law spins continuously around this Central axis…everything else simply commentary. Elevating stam mitzvot unto tohor time oriented Av Torah commandments … herein defines the essence of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai in a single sentence.
The Bullwinkle characters, otherwise known as the Reshonim, they lacked this essential clarity of what defines all T’NaCH and Talmud scholarship. Why? Because cursed g’lut Jews cannot do mitzvot לשמה.
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
הא קמשמע לן דאתרוג כירק מה ירק דרכו ליגדל על כל מים ובשעת לקיטתו עישורו, אף אתרוג דרכו ליגדל על כל מים ובשעת לקיטתו עישורו. והא דתנן כוי יש בו דרכים שוה לחיה וש דרכים שוה לבהמה
In terms of kashrut a כוי, qualifies as a tumah animal. The כוי can symbolize certain qualities or behaviors that need to be understood when applying moral or ethical teachings in Jewish law. The Talmud often presents specific cases where the status of the כוי comes into play, including questions of ownership, tithing, and other relational dynamics with humans. The subject of קידושין addresses the subject of „ownership” through the acquisition of the Nefesh O’lam Ha’Bah of the woman’s soul, specifically title to the children born into the future through this marital union.
ויש בו דרכים שאינו שוה לא לחיה ולא לבהמה. ניתני דברים ותו הא דתנן זו אחת מן הדרכים ששוו גיטי נשים לשחרורי עבדים ניתני דברים אלא כל היכא דאיכא פלוגתא תני דרכים וכל היכא דליכא פלוגתא תני דברים דיקא נמי דקתני סיפא ר”א אומר אתרוד שוה לאילן כל דבר ש”מ.
The 8th middah אמת understood under the heading of דרכים as opposed to דברים! Goyim by stark contrast employ truth as if no dispute exists. That truth stands as irrefutable. The culture and customs of the Jewish people reject this definition of „truth” as utter arrogance and hypocrisy and if power determines truth. The schism with splits and divides all the many and diverse divisions of both Xtianity and Islam centers upon who controls the monopoly of religious belief and practice.
As an Israeli living in the Jewish state clearly my opinion takes a rather dim view of the Bullwinkle Reshonim scholarship upon both the T’NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur. The עשרת הדברות serves as a clear example. The Talmud understands that Israel only accepted the First TWO Sinai Commandments before we demanded that Moshe receive the rest of the Torah; the repetition of the „Xtian” ten commandments, in the Book of דברים, serve as „Mishna” precedents to understand the Torah commandment, to remember the deliverance from Egyptian exile – contained within the first Sinai commandment and the קריא שמע acceptance of the yoke of the kingdom of heaven; meaning the obligation to do tohor time-oriented commandments to תמיד מעשה בראשית created the chosen Cohen people יש מאין through the wisdom of מלאכה.
The so called 10 commandments serve as a בנין אב to remember how HaShem judged the Gods of Egypt through the 10 plagues – to forever discern g’lut from ruling the oath sworn lands of Canaan with righteous judicial lateral court common ‚legislative review’ law. The first two Torah commandments contain the whole of the Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev! All the rest of the Torah commandments and Talmudic Halachot function merely as commentaries.
Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina, they sealed the Sha’s Bavli; Rabbis Yohanan, Abbahu, and Hiyya sealed the Yerushalmi Talmud. G’lut Jewry has since placed the Bullwinkle Reshonim upon a pedestal and made them into cults of personality. But the wisdom of our sages accomplished a מלאכה, by sealing the T’NaCH, Talmud, and Siddur they „sealed” an identical masoret to all generations of the Jewish people. Rashi thereafter learned in his commentary to the Talmud that post sealing of the Sha’s Jews need only employ the קל וחומר the last middah of rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot. Meaning that this one rule permits employment of all the middot of rabbi Yishmael, to learn precedents from one Gemara compared to other mesechtot of the Sha’s. Sealing the Sha’s gave all down stream generations of Israel an identical masoret. The secondary Reshonim commentaries do not in any way resemble the sealed masoret established by the Framers of the Talmud.
תוס. דף ב: אתרוג שוה לאילן בג’ דרכים. פי’ בקונטרס לערלה ולרבעי ולשביעית דלענין שביעית הולכין בפירותיו אחר חנטה כאילן ולא בתר לקיטה כירק. וא”ת השתא משמע דרבעי נוהג באתרוג א”כ קשה מהכא למ”ד תני כרס רבעי בריש כיצד מברכין (ברכות דף לה.) דמשמע דאין רבעי נוהג בשאר אילנות. וי”ל דה”ק כרם רבעי כל היכא דמצי למתני דהיכא דל”מ למתני לא פליגי עליה דלא פליגי התם לומר שלא יסבור שום תנא נטע רבעי דשמא בר מההיא דאתרוג איכא פלוגתא דתנאי בהדיא בשום מקום ולא נחלקו אלא לסתום המשניות דסוף מס’ מעשר שני ובשאר דוכתין אי כמאן דסבר (ברכות דף לה.) נטע רבעי אי כמאן דסבר (שם) כרס רבעי לידע כמאן הלכתא וי”מ דאפי’ מאן דתני כרס רבעי מודה בשאר אילנות דמדרבנן נוהג והכא מדרבנן קאמר ויש לנו נפקיתא בדבר דאי פלידי דמאן דתני דכרס רבעי דוקא אבל בנטע אין רבעי כלל אפילו מדרבנן ואמרו (שבת דף קלט.) כל המיקל בארץ הלכה כמותו בחוצה לארץ וא”כ עכשיו בחו”ל אין דין רבעי נוהג באילנות ואי מדרבנן כ”ע מודו דנוהג בשאר אילנות ה”ה בחו”ל דרבעי נוהג מדרבנן ומה שפי’ בקונטרס לשביעית אזלינן בתר חנטה כאילן ולא בתר לקיטה כירק משמע מתוך פירושו דבירק אזלינן בתר לקיטה לענין שביעית ולא דק דבמס’ שביעית (פ”ט מ”א) תנן כל הספיחים מותרין חוץ מספיחי כרוב והקשה רבינו נסים דבפרק מקום שנהגו (פסחים דף נא:) תני איפכא ותרץ דבההיא דמס’ שביעית דקתני כל הספיחים מותרין מיירי בספיחים של ערב שביעית שנכנסו בשביעית דכיון שגדלו רובן בששית הם כשל ששית ומותרין אף לסחורה חוץ מזפיחי כרוב שהם אסורין לדחורה כדין שביעית או אחר הביעור לאכילה כדמפרשינן בירודלמי דכל ירק אתה יכול לעמוד עליו בין חדש בין ישן אבל ספיחי כרוב שדרכו לגדל אמהות אמהות ויש עלין שהם גדלים בשביעית ושמא יקח מן העלין שהן אסורין ויאמר מן האמהות לקחתי וההוא דמקום שנהגו (שם) דקתני כל הספיחים אסורים מיירי בספיחים שגדלו בשביעית ואליבא דרבי עקיבא דדריש וכי מאחר שלא נזרע מהיכן אוספין אלא לימד על הספיחים שהן אסורים אפילו לאכילה וכ”ש לסחורה וסבר דספיחים אסורין בשביעית מדאורייתא ואפילו קודם זמן הביעור וכשיצאו למוצאי שביעית אסור מדרבנן בכדי שיעשו כיוצא בהן וקסבר כל שאר ספיחים אסורים במוצאי שביעית אבל ספיחי כרוב שאין כיוצא בהן בירקות השדה לא גזריני בהם משום שאר ספיחים דהא מינכרא מילתא ומה שגידל אמהות הרי היא של שביעכית ואסור ומה שלא הגיע הרי הוא של מוצאי שביעית ושרי ומאן דחוי לגבר אינש דאכל ספיחי כרוב למוצאי שביעת לא אתי למיכל שאר ספיחים דהא שאני משאר ספיחים ולא גזרינן היתירא משום איסורא מ”מ ש”מ דלא אזלינן כלל בירק בתר לקיטה אלא בתר וב גידולים מדשרי ספיחי ששית שנכנסו לשביעית וי”ל דנהי דההיא דלא אזלינן בתר לקיטה מ”מ בתר חנטה נמי לא אזלינן אלא הגדל באיסור אסור בהיתר מותר מה שאין כן באתרוג ושאר אילן דאזלינן לגמרי בתר חנטה דאם חנט באיסור אפי’ מה שגדל בהיתר אח”כ אסור והשתא לשביעית שוה לאילן דאי הוה כירק הוה אזלינן תבר רוב גידול
A minor girl lacks the maturity to give her consent to קידושין acquisition, be it through כסף שטר או ביאה. Because she lacks the required mental maturity to give her consent, therefore none of these three ways – accomplishes the mitzva of קידושין. The Tosafot commentary emphasizes the importance of understanding the dynamics of learning common law precedents, to ensure that interpretations of how this etrog precedent בנין אב applies to the Case of קידושין. Specifically to the Case of a minor girl. The distinct acquisition methods (money, document, cohabitation) reflect appropriate legal qualifications, based upon certain implied basic limitations based upon age and maturity. A contract must follow and obey its pre-conditions wherein the signing parties to the contract stipulate their agreement.
Let’s now contrast Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale and their tits on a boar hog narishkeit puke commentaries which perverted Talmudic common law unto assimilated Roman statute law noise.
הלכות נזירות פ”ב:י.
היו מהלכין בדרך וראו את הכוי מרחוק ואמר אחד מהם הריני נזיר שזה חיה. ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שזה בהמה. ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין זה חיה. וטמא טחא הריני נזיר שאין זה בהמה. ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שאין זה לא חיה ולא בהמה. ואמר אחר הריני נזיר שזה בהמה וחיה הרי כולם נזירים. מפני שהכוי יש בו דרכים שוה בהן לחיה ויש בו דרכים שוה בהן לבהמה. ויש בו דרכים שוה לחיה ולבהמה ויש בו דרכים שאינו שוה לא לבהמה ולא לחיה. והוא הדין אם ראו אנדרוגינוס ונחלקו בו אם הוא איש או אשה ונדרו על דרך שנדרו אלו בכוי הרי כוךם נזירים. שהאנדרוגינוס יש בו דרכים שוה בהן לאיש. ודרכים שוה בהן לאשה. ודרכים שאינו שוה בהן לא לאיש ולא לאשה. ודרכים שהן שוין לאיש ולאשה.
כסף משנה — היו מהלכים בדרך וראו את הכוי מרחוק וכו’. משנה שם. מ”ש וה”ה אם ראו אנדרוגינוס וכו’. בתוספתא פ”ג
Neither this nor that provides any understanding of how the precedent of כוי serves to amplify how to correctly understand how a young girl compares or differs from a mature adult young woman! None of the assimilated statute legalist book lickers contribute squat to how the Case of כוי directly applies to the opening words of the Av Mishna of קידושין. The issue at hand has nothing what so ever to do with נזיר. Worthy trees cut down for this utter total noise narishkeit! Centuries of scholars and not one of them asked what נזיר has to do with a minor girl vs a mature young woman on the issue of קידושין.
Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale and all the Snidely Whiplash brown nose bootlickers who worship their Reshon placed upon a pie in the sky ירידות הדורות pedestal – their scholarship all Av tuma tits on a boar hog treif tuma garbage.
PolubieniePolubienie
The Reformation did not liberate Europe from the Church; it exported the Church’s theological hatred and intolerance into multiple competing sects which promoted Supersessionism, Demonization of Jews, Replacement theology, and Sanctification of violence for ideological purity.
Calvin’s Letter to Bullinger, About Luther, on 25 November 1544
In a letter to Bullinger, dated November 25, 1544, he adjured him to treat the great man, meaning Luther, with respect. A lot of good that letter had! Both Calvin and Luther together with the Poop of Rome all directly contributed to the 30 year war blood bath. The theological absolutism of Xtianity became the political absolutism of the modern European nation-state.
The Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), a political earthquake. This devastating conflict in Europe, involving numerous states and religious factions. Indeed, the theological and political tensions fostered by figures like Calvin, Luther, and the Papacy played significant roles in its escalation. The Protestant Reformation, led by Calvin and Luther, splintered Xtianity in Europe. This division created deep-rooted animosities that fueled the 30 years Civil War between Protestant and Catholic states.
Only the WWI and WWII Civil Wars slaughtered such a gross and disgusting blood bath. The Catholic Church, being a central institution during this period, sought to maintain its power against the growing Protestant movements. Actions taken by the Papacy often intensified the conflict. Religious Intolerance branded Europe just like as did Nazi racism. This inherited, perhaps genetic intolerance, perpetuated by leaders across Europe. Proved and validated: scratch a European and find a barbarian; 2023–2024: Europe slanders Israel and enables pogrom mobs on University Campuses while pretending moral authority.
Calvin and Luther contributed to the intense hatred, matched only by the Nazi hatred of Jews! Their legacies directly responsible for the 30 years war where Xtianity as a religion proved itself as worthless tits on a boar hog avoda zarah. UN Hypocrisy as the Direct Inheritance of European Xtian Super-sessionist Ideology. Palestinian Nationalism as a Post-1964 European-Framed Gospel mythology!
Calvin and Luther did play roles in shaping the religious landscape of Europe. The context in which they worked, marked by significant corruption within and across the church Av tuma avoda zarah. Goyim throughout European history – utterly barbaric in their violence. The Crusades stand out as but just one example of this Dead God religion, an expression of the nadir of the barbaric animal soul of European sub-human man. Europe Has No Moral Standing Over Israel.
The violence witnessed in the Thirty Years’ War, the World Wars, and other conflicts certainly reflect a human propensity for brutality, especially when ideologies at stake. The capacity for intolerance and hatred has shadowed many aspects of human history, leading to tragic outcomes. Herzl wrote his “Jewish State” because he argued that Europeans, impossible for them to heal themselves from their anti-Semitism cancer infected minds.
Europeans utterly addicted to ideology in shaping human behavior and societal structures. Honest discourse and acknowledgment of past atrocities immediately flies out the window whenever mob Jew hating protests condemn Jews. The disgrace of Europe during the anti-Jewish Oct 7th massacre by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and UNWRA stands proves that Europeans memory of their past crimes “forgotten” in their Holocaust Denial where the ICC assumes it has jurisdiction over Israel despite Israel’s rejection of the Rome Accords!
The slander accusations which call Israel a genocide state matched only by the violence of Nazi inferior race propaganda that reached a pre-War cracindo during the pogrom “Night of Shattered Glass”. Long-standing struggles with intolerance and hatred define the corrupt European soul. The Thirty Years’ War illustrates how religious divisions, combined with political ambitions, lead to catastrophic violence and suffering, with devastating impacts on civilian populations. The persistent presence of anti-Semitism in European history reflects deep-seated biases that have manifested in various forms of violence and discrimination.
UN accusations of genocide, despite the UNWRA participation in the Oct 7th massacre, never presented by the reactionary propaganda MSM press as accusations – but rather as cold proven facts. This reality proves the mental insanity that Europeans pass down from generation to generation. The Palestinian “Passion Play” over made up imaginary facts. Palestine ceased to exist as a UN protectorate territory the instant Ben Gurion declared Jewish national independence in 1948. Goyim hatred of Jews who defeated Arab Armies – dedicated to throw the Jews into the Sea and fulfill like Jesus did the words of the prophets, the Nazi Shoah across Europe; despite the PLO charter explicitly declaring that only ’48 Israel qualified as “Occupied Territories”, the UN declared post ’67 that Samaria and Gaza as “Occupied Territories”. Yet Goyim mental insanity fails to catch the UN lie.
The empty platitude: An honest and thorough examination of the past is essential for creating a more tolerant future. Tits on a boar hog empty drum noise. Recognizing the role ideologies play in shaping societies and the harm they can cause, this the diseased minds of European governments simply cannot do. Not in the days of Calvin and Luther and not today. The common denominator which ties all European society together … their cold dead religion of Xtianity’s rabid hatred of Jews.
Post WWII Jews say Never Again. Meaning Never Again shall European governments dictate any other “solution” for “the Jewish problem” post Shoah. Israel’s response to UN Resolutions 242, 338, 446, 2334 etc … NEVER AGAIN. The longstanding strains of anti-Semitism in Europe, indeed intertwined with historical events, creating cycles of prejudice that Europeans – without fail – always ignore or minimize every time that mobs rage across European cities. This persistent hatred has roots in religious, economic, and social contexts. UN accusations and resolutions reflect broader political agendas of biased assessment of reality, leading to distorted perceptions and narratives. Israel has washed its hands of Europe like Pontius Pilate washed his hands over the false messiah JeZeus. Jews, post Shoah, no longer accept responsibility for Blood Libels, or poisoning the wells etc.
Anti-Semitism in Europe has no cure other than Jews breaking all diplomatic relations with European governments as possible allies in international relations. The instances of mob behavior and anti-Semitic sentiment in cities across Europe reveal a consistent repeated pattern of Jewish hatred and historical biases, specifically that Ottoman Greater Syria never referred to by the name Palestine other than in European made maps which the “Sick Man of Europe” bought and acquired after Napoleon.
The role of the UN, a betrayal of the Balfour Declaration/League of Nation Palestine Mandate to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. UN revisionist history which promotes the Arafat lie that Arabs lived as Philistine boat-people who originally invaded Gaza from the Greek Islands, yet fails to confront the inconvenient fact that Arab people never originated from European countries. Ignored that not till 1964 did Arab propaganda opportunistically embrace the name Palestine! Yet amazingly European and Arab propaganda promotes the lie that Jews occupy Palestine mandate lands of Samaria despite England’s separation of the Palestine Mandate territory from Trans-Jordan at the Jordan River in 1923.
The reference to “Palestine” in historical contexts reflects colonial influences rather than indigenous identity. The narrative that Arab identity shifted around the name “Palestine” post-1964 a political maneuvering that utterly distorts and perverts history. This revisionist history denies the Balfour Declaration and the League Palestine Mandate and substitutes UN 3379 Zionism is Racism slander only matched by the recent Israel commits genocide slander.
The persistence of anti-Semitic actions and sentiments in Europe, a cyclical and deeply rooted mental insanity, invariably ignored or minimized by those in power for the entire Easter period passion play. European Xtians prioritize “I am saved” stupidity which they drum into the heads of their fellow believers to remain oblivious to their blood soaked, cruel and puke history as a people. Anti-Semiticism morphed into Colonialism and later into imperialism. Dominant European states addicted to ruling the roost of the balance of power across the major regions of the Planet Earth.
After the fact, Spanish sincere apologies for expelling the Jews from Spain in 1492 compare to a screen door on a submarine German sorrow over the slaughter of 75% of Western European Jewry and Rome’s most sincere remorse over the post WWII Nazi Rat lines or Poland’s anti-Jewish pogroms! Europeans lie, just that simple. They do not possess a shred of human sincerity simply because as soon as the immediate disgrace of their inhumanity to man gets passed over through the passage of time, European behave like dogs who return and eat their own vomit again and again and again.
The complexities of Jewish identity, historical narratives, and the struggles against Amalek/anti-Semitism resonate deeply in contemporary discourse. Propaganda narratives around “Palestine”, influenced by colonial European motivations emphasizes the impact of power dynamics in shaping identity and historical memory. The idea of post-1964 Arab identity being a political maneuver underscores the contested nature of history in this context.
Hostile pro Arab narratives touching “Palestine”, in essence seek to deny both the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Palestine as the establishment of a Jewish National Home. All Arab wars fought, including the 1948 Independence War, the Arab rejection that dhimmi refugee Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East. UN Resolution 3379 – Zionism is Racism, and current chants: From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free reject the European red herring “Land for Peace”. Arafat offered East Jerusalem and 98% of Samaria and Gaza as a Palestinian State. Hamas took over a Gaza independent state and immediately made repeated wars that culminated in the Oct7th Abomination 2023 War.
The British French propaganda expressed in post ’67 UN Resolution 242 exposed as revisionist history. Russia and Poland occupy Prussia to this day! The Allies made a forced 14 to 20 million population transfer of Germans living for generations in Prussia and the Czech Republic. The Indian/Pakistan mass population transfer Britain and other Western Powers praised to achieve “peace”. Such revisionist history never to this day denounced as a blaggard lie. European imperialist vs. Israel follow the rule: Do as I say but not as I do.
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
Cześć mosckerr 🙂
Dziękuję za tak wnikliwy i inspirujący komentarz, który pięknie łączy starotestamentowe źródła z praktyką halachiczną dotyczącą agunah. Szczególnie poruszyła mnie idea, że dzieci są częścią duszy mężczyzny i że sąd ma moc „nowego stworzenia” w prawie żydowskim. Temat ten jest niezwykle ważny dla rozwiązywania sytuacji uwięzienia kobiet w małżeństwie.
Pozdrawiam
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
:)))
PolubieniePolubienie
Eisengesis vs. Exegesis
Exegesis, a disciplined approach focused on extracting meaning from a text through careful analysis through Oral Torah פרדס inductive reasoning. Eisengesis, on the other hand, replaces the kabbalah of פרדס inductive logic, as taught by rabbis Akiva, Yishmael, and Yosse HaGal with Plato\Aristotle 3-part syllogism deductive logic. Exegesis scholarship includes looking at cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts to uncover what the author intended to convey. Meaning, learning the T’NaCH texts viewed from the perspectives of Jewish culture, customs, and accepted practices – called minhagim. Exegesis schlarship simply crucial in Torah Constitutional studies. It promotes deeper, more accurate understandings of exactly how the Jewish people understand and interpret sacred texts.
Examples of Eisengesis: The Nicene Council which introduced with the power of established church dogma the creed of Trinity belief as „the mystery of Monotheism”, Illustrates the process of interpreting a text, specifically how the New Testament interprets the Hebrew T’NaCH, based on the interpreter’s own biases and preconceptions. Perspective: Subjective; the writings of Paul his subjective beliefs and clear ideologies. A sample of Paul’s skewed eisengesis, his declaration that circumcision ceased being a mitzva from the Torah. His declaration of JeZeus as the son of God; his substitute theology which prioritized „original sin of Adam” and replaced the Universal theme of the Torah of blessing/curse – life/death = g’lut\exile. Paul’s eisengesis requires the resurrection of JeZeus to atone for Adam’s original sin.
Approach: Reads into the text and imposes meanings that may not be supported by the text itself. Torah a Case/Law common law system. Paul’s unilateral declaration that „Goyim are not under the Law”. Paul’s unilateral declaration that „Goyim are not under the Law”; an absurd declaration because Goyim universally rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Therefore of course ‚Goyim not under the Law’? So why make this obvious declaration when Goyim never accepted Torah common law. Answer: Paul substituted the dominant Roman statute law for Jewish common law. Goyim only knew Statute law. Therefore they simply and falsely assumed that „not under the law” referred to the statute law with which they were intimately familiar.
This distinction highlights how cultural and legal backgrounds shape understanding of T’NaCH Constitutional texts understood as biblical religious texts. The conversion from Jewish common law to Roman statute law reflects the complexities in early Christian thought regarding „the Law”; it implies that belief in JeZeus grafted them into the Chosen Cohen People. An utterly false idea. Paul rejected keeping the commandments; circumcision, kashrut, tohor & tuma etc. These key central concepts of T’NaCH Constitutional common law became totally alien to Xtian beliefs and their Av tuma avoda zarah religion.
In particular, the propaganda of Paul completely subsumed and ignored the key Torah theme that HaShem brought Israel out of Egyptian slavery to bring them in to conquer the lands of Canaan as sworn unto the Avot as the eternal Cohen people inheritance lands. This substitute theology post the JeZeus false messiah theology impacted Goyim to prioritize being saved by the blood of the lamb rather than conquer and rule the oath sworn lands with righteous judicial common law justice which dedicates to make fair restitution of damages. The First commandment of Sinai the New Testament totally negates. Goyim by definition live in lands outside of Israel. Whereas Moshe brought Israel out of Egypt to rule Canaan.
Outcome. The introduction of the „New Testament” imposed an immediate void upon the Hebrew T’NaCH, now labeled as „Old Testament”. That Xtian religion share more in common with Muslim strict Monotheism than the T’NaCH local God linked directly to the oath sworn lands; the God of the chosen Cohen People. The NT totally obliviates the concept of the chosen Cohen People, replaced by believers in JeZeus being saved from burning for eternity in Hell. The T’NaCH concept of „the devil” metaphor (משל\נמשל) inference דיוק logic of reading T’NaCH texts refers to the Yatzir Ha’Raw within the heart. Not to some imaginary king of Demons who got expelled from Heaven following a failed rebellion against God.
Applications: Blood libels, ghetto gulag imprisonment for 3 Centuries duration till the French revolutionaries & Napoleon expelled the Catholic church from its co-rulership of the French monarchy; the American revolution separated Church from State. Church dogmatism declared Jews as cursed and the spawn of the devil; condemned to walk the face of the earth as despised refugees. This theological narishkeit culminated in the Shoah where Nietzsche declared prior to WWII that God was dead.
PolubieniePolubienie
Not enough to cast the grave of Rambam upon the dung heaps of history.
The Avot—Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov—represent different paradigms of connection with God and expressions of faith. Not like Avraham who called it [the Beis Hamikdash] “mountain,” and not like Yitzchak who called it “field,” but rather like Yaakov who called it “house. . .” (Pesachim 88a)… What an utterly pathetic mistranslation!
The story of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov centered upon the wells they dug for their sheep. But only idiots assume that the Avot lived their lives as simple shepherds of sheep and goats! The Beis Hamikdash not some glorified slaughter house! It housed both the Great Sanhedrin and a Small Sanhedrin Federal Courtroom of Common Law!
The story of the korbanot dedicated by Kayin neged Hevel centers upon the choice of who merits to live as the chosen Cohen son! Kayin, like Yishmael, & Esav born as the first born son! A major Torah theme played throughout the Sin of the Golden Calf and the replacement of the first born son with the Tribe of Levi!
The prophetic mussar of the rejection of the korban dedicated by Kayin, HaShem does not recognize korbanot as a barbeque to heaven, a תולדות קום ועשה מצוה!!!! A korban requires that a person swears a Torah oath – through the altar like unto standing before a Sefer Torah – מלכות dedicates as specific tohor middah – like a toldoth “blessing” of oaths requires שם ומלכות – committing to the eternal pursuit of justice/צדק צדק תרידוף. Just that simple.
The Torah does not compare to Av tuma avoda zarah which prioritizes “Great theological themes” concerning belief in different Gods — the Lord vs Allah — any more that the Book of ויקרא commands offering korbanot as a ritual commandment like the קום ועשה תולדות הלכות of the Shulkan Aruch do not require k’vanna! Simple קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה מצוות, do not require k’vanna. This definition makes them secondary commandments to time-oriented commandments!
The Talmud has a warp/weft Halacha\Aggada loom like structure which weaves the garments, comparable to the Book of שמות garments made for the House of Aaron! Its not the literal garments of the House of Aaron משל but rather the customs and culture of the House of the Chosen Cohen people נמשל. The נמשל defines the כוונה of the משל; as such time-oriented commandments Av commandments.
The Torah not some glorified Book of Jewish religion similar to the Books of the New Testament and Koran Av tuma avoda zarah! The Torah serves as the Constitution of the Republic of 12 Tribes; it serves the same exact function as the Constitution of the United States – basic Law! Based upon the 1st Sinai Commandment. אני ה’ אלהיך אשר הוצאתיך מארץ מצרים מבית עבדים. This the greatest of all Torah commandments – Jews who live in G’lut cannot accept the Torah as the Constitution of our Republic לשמה. G’lut Jewry cursed like Kayin, forced to worship av tuma avoda zarah as a religious belief system theology rather than as the substance of leaving Egypt to conquer Canaan.
Off the דרך Orthodox Judaism declared their av tuma declaration of faith – in the early Twentieth Century – when they declared Zionism as both secondary and foreign to the Torah faith. Absolutely a direct repetition of the Wilderness Generation which condemned the First Born Generation to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai as not having a portion to the World to Come.
The Avot: falsely perceived as but a simple משל “mountain”, or “field”, or “house”, in equal like manner the משל בית המקדש. The lives of the Avot introduce the נמשל dedication – pursuit of justice within the oath sworn lands of Canaan. G’lut Jews who remain in exile cannot accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai – the first commandment – לשמה, because they live their lives permanently in g’lut with no real or honest intention to make aliya. No different than the Shoah Wilderness Generation which has no portion in the World to Come.
The Book of בראשית introduces אב טהור זימן גרמא מצוות, like the Aggada of the Sha’s makes a דרוש\פשט to the prophetic mussar taught through the Books of the T’NaCH! Wisdom requires “shepherds” to weave the wool and linen threads of Halacha and Aggadah unto “garments” that the House of Aaron can wear in the “Beit HaMikdosh”. Obviously mixing wool & linen requires k’vaana as a time-oriented mitzva!
Only Jews who live in the oath sworn lands, who dedicate their Zionism as the eternal pursuit of self-determination to rule these lands with Sanhedrin lateral common law courts of Federal justice; as the basis of law of the Republic over the secondary Government rule of law by statute government Knesset decrees. Herein defines the meaning of Zionism post ’48 and ’67 Independence Wars victories! Common law judicial law the נמשל priority over Statute Law Knesset משל תולדות law. Do the Toldoth follow the Avot Yes or No? The defining question asked by Mesechtot Shabbat and Baba Kama.
The pursuit of judicial justice shares no common ground with personal belief systems/Creeds of faith about Gods in Heaven. Torah justice in this Earth, not in the Heaven skies above. Theological belief systems Av tuma avoda zarah. G’lut Jews cannot, by definition of the first Sinai commandment, possess genuine intention or moral integrity to accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, they remain in g’lut. Only within the borders of the oath sworn lands of alliance can Jews establish self determination of ruling the lands of Canaan with righteous Judicial common law justice. Sanhedrin common Law, UNLIKE the Rambam, Tur, Beit Yosef & Shulkan Aruch statute religious codes of ritual halacha,, centers upon judicial rulings which achieve fair restitution of damages inflicted by Jews upon other Jews.
Ritual religious observances do not weave the woolen & linen garments as time-oriented commandments. Av tohor time-oriented commandments they weave the culture and customs practiced by the Chosen Cohen Nation within the borders of the Jewish State of Israel.
G’lut Jews their Beit Din – a joke. The three Justices of their Torts court, do not divide their duties as Prosecuting כנגד Defense justices – who argue their opposing cases before one another through bringing halachic precedents, like as the Gemara does to each and every Mishna which it comments upon!
Religious ritual observances share no common ground with righteous common law courts of law; any more than do the Yad, Tur, Aruch assist students to study Talmudic common law. Torah does not “compare” to a Constitution any more than does a דיוק נמשל actually compares to its משל metaphor.
Employment of משל\נמשל a method of Hebrew speech. Children only understand the simple stories. Adults who cling to the understanding of children – what an utter disgrace. The challenge of maintaining a strong Jewish identity in g’lut … antisemitism-the curse of Amalek.
Jewish assimilation and intermarriage with Goyim invokes the curse of the 2nd Sinai commandment from generation to generation. Herein explains why the B’HaG ruled that the mitzva of reading the M’gillah qualifies as a time oriented commandment from the Torah.
The ever repeated conclusions made by generation after generation of g’lut Jews, that they can live in peace in g’lut – utterly false. Herzl understood that the curse of European antisemitism has no cure. Its a cancer of the Goyim minds which no doctor can heal. Only Jews who commit to leaving g’lut Egypt, a לאו דוקא משל, and making aliya to Israel — possess the potential to acquire Zionism – Jewish self determination to pursue justice among and between our own people.
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba
Dzięki. Telewizja oczywiście zrobiła unik i nie pokazała, co było przyczyną przerwania meczu. Nie wiedziałem, że kibice tak ostro z nim pojechali.
PolubieniePolubione przez 1 osoba