I think of Judaism as a tradition that prefers counting up, not down. Take the period in which we find ourselves now: s’firat ha’omer (“the counting of the omer).
Jewish history wonks who study this kind of thing know that it reflects the biblical commandment to count the days and weeks between the barley harvest (that matures on Passover) and the wheat harvest (that matures some seven weeks later at the festival of Shavuot).
An omer is a biblical measure, one days’ worth of manna, the food dropped from heaven to feed the Israelites in the wilderness (Exodus 16). But it is also the first sheaf of the barley harvest brought to the Temple (Leviticus 23:10). Josephus says it was dried, crushed, and ground up; some of it was then thrown on the altar as a sacrifice; the rest was baked and given to the priests.[i] It inaugurated the counting period that lasted until Shavuot.
When the Temple fell in the war against Rome (70 CE) so too did the sacrifices, but the counting ritual remained and was eventually associated with certain mourning customs (a ban on weddings, for example). Medieval Jews connected the mourning with a Talmudic tale about 24,000 students of Rabbi Akiba who died during the omer as punishment for envying one another’s mastery of Torah. Other, midrashic, sources give the number as 12,000, or only 300, and do not necessarily connect it with the omer period or explain it as student envy. What came first, the mourning customs or the explanation for them, is a good question. But either way, counting of the omer has continued to this day, sometimes, in fact, called simply s’firah, “counting.”[ii]
And the point is, we count the omer by counting up, not down.
The same is true of Hanukah candles. The Talmud (Shabbat 21b) discusses whether we should go from eight candles on day one to a single candle on day eight, or vice versa? Counting up won.
A third example is the Seder song, “Who knows One,” the point being the singularity of God. But the various verses count up: “Who knows two?” “Who knows three?” all the way to “Who knows Thirteen?”
By contrast, North American culture prefers counting down. Think of New Year’s Eve and a crowd of thousands in New York’s Times Square, waiting for the ball to descend. As midnight approaches, they count down: “10, 9, 8,” until finally “1” – and then a burst of apocalyptic joy: fireworks, applause, embraces, and kisses. It’s mania on Main Street in a million similar gatherings across the world.
The launching of a NASA spacecraft too comes with a countdown. Who hasn’t watched TV coverage of the countless Apollos, Challengers, and Voyagers and heard “10, 9, 8…. 1 – We have liftoff.”
Counting up or down matters. “Down” has a necessary ending: zero. Utter finality. “Up” ends arbitrarily at any number we want, but wherever we stop counting, there are more numbers waiting in the wings. “Down” delivers an absolute end, a vacuum of nothingness, the end of days, a new world aborning, the long-awaited Apocalypse, finally at hand.
Yes, Apocalypse. Counting down is the way any number of devotees throughout history have measured off the years until a messiah was due to arrive (and then didn’t). New Year’s Eve is itself a secular version of messianic anticipation. Out with the old; in with the new. And what is our space program, if not the hyped-up hope of discovering new worlds, stretching our reach through the universe, “to go where no man has gone before,” in Star Trek lingo.
And that, perhaps, is why Jews prefer counting up. We have been burned too many times by false messiahs. Our tradition warns against imagining we can hasten the messianic coming; the Talmud even curses anyone who thinks they know when that will be;[iii] and, frankly, given the Talmud’s bloodcurdling warnings about the period leading up to the messiah’s coming (devastation, suffering beyond measure),[iv] I’m not so sure we want even to be there.
Mainstream Judaism’s messianism is not a single apocalyptic Armageddon. It is a cumulative piling up of good deeds; penitence for the wrongs we put out into the world; and acts of loving kindness, that whittle away at the corrosive cruelty around us.
British Poet Philip Larkin (1922-1985) was a sad soul, who virtually starved himself to death at age 63, despite becoming a favorite poet of his generation and receiving numerous awards for his work. He spent his last thirty years as a librarian, had a few lovers off and on, but died wifeless, childless, and friendless, with a reputation for being parsimonious, misanthropic, misogynistic, and even racist. But I read his poetry anyway – were I to measure art by the character of the artists who produce it, I’d have to forego the music of Wagner, the poetry of T.S. Eliot, and the stories of Roald Dahl (anti-Semites); the literature of Rudyard Kipling and Charles Dickens (colonialists); and the writings of Flannery O’Connor (racist). So I read Philip Larkin, who had this to say:
“Always too eager for the future/ we pick up bad habits of expectancy.” And in the end, we are left “holding wretched stalks of disappointment.”[v]
So I restrain my eagerness for a revolutionary end to all that ails us; I don’t count down; I count up, postponing whatever final victory there may be some distant tomorrow. Especially in moments of despair, when it seems beyond me to effect revolutionary change, I remember how Judaism has never liked revolutions anyway, and how it prefers the strategy of regularized drops of human kindness, that can offset an entire sea of human ugliness.
Tonight is Wednesday May 7; 25 days, which are 3 weeks and 4 days of the omer.” Onward and upward, still counting!
[i] Josephus, Antiquities 3:250-251.
[ii] Cf. Talmud Babli, Yebamot 62b (24,000); Ecclesiastes Rabba 11:6 and Genesis Rabba 61:3, Tanchuma Chayei Sarah 6 (300). For the history of the omer, see Efrat Zarren-Zohar, “From Passover to Shavuot,” in Paul F. Bradshaw and Lawrence A. Hoffman, Two Liturgical Tradition,” Vol. 6, Passover and Easter: The Symbolic Structuring of Sacred Seasons (South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press, 1999), pp. 71-93.
[iii] Sanhedrin 97b
[iv] Sotah 49b.
[v] Philip Larkin, “Next Please,” in Philip Larkin Poems: Selected and With an Introduction By Martin Avis(London: Faber and Faber, 2011), pp. 24/25.
Rabbi Lawrence A. Hoffman, Ph.D. 
This is beautiful Larry, thank you
The mitzva of observing Torah commandments לשמה within the borders of the oath sworn brit lands, the inheritance of the Chosen Cohen people.
[[[ Within the covenantal framework that you so powerfully defend, how do you see the role of individual conscience? Not as a competing system, but as a faculty formed by oath remembrance and living Torah? I[[[ Within the covenantal framework that you so powerfully defend, how do you see the role of individual conscience? Not as a competing system, but as a faculty formed by oath remembrance and living Torah? In a world saturated with propaganda and revisionism, what disciplines shape that conscience to remain true to Sinai? ]]]
The Books of שמות וויקרא concentrate on the avodat HaShem of dedicating korbanot. This “service” does not exist as offering up a barbeque unto Heaven. The mitzva of the פרט case of Moshiach learns from the כלל of korbanot services of the House of Aaron.
Another בנין אב-precedent, the כלל for faith: צדק צדק תרדוף. Still another פרט-בנין אב precedent: the court case of Hebrew slaves vs. the State of Par’o – beating slaves for their rebellion to meet their brick production quota consequent to Par’o withholding the required straw.
One other בנין אב-precedent learns from the כלל that all ברכות require שם ומלכות.
Just as a korban requires a dedication to achieve a specific specified purpose, so too the mitzva of Moshiach. Specifically in the mitzva case dedication of Moshiach, this dedicated “king” sanctified לשמה to rule the land with Judicial justice, working through the common law lateral Sanhedrin courtrooms. Based upon the Torah Constitutional mandate that the Sanhedrin courts operate through משנה תורה-Legislative Review of any and all statute laws or bureaucratic regulations imposed by the Monarchy and/or his government.
The often repeated rebuke which the Book of Shmuel makes upon the House of David as Moshiach, the injustice shown to the husband of Bat Sheva. This פרט-specific defines the כלל dedication of the mitzva dedication of Moshiach. No such dedication for the mitzva of Moshiach to become a substitute theology which has some mythical theologically based messiah to replace the chosen Cohen People.
The opening word of the Torah בראשית, through the aggadic stories of the Creation, teaches the k’vanna of tohor time-oriented commandments; as the Av of the תולדות secondary source positive and negative commandments located specifically in the Books of שמות ויקרא ובמדבר. Hence just as the Book of בראשית introduces the Avot Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov, this opening first Book of the Torah introduces Av tohor time-oriented commandments which the rest of the Books of the Torah come to clarify.
For example: what separates tohor spirits from tumah spirits? Avodat HaShem in the Mishkan, only served in the state of tohor middot. For a Cohen to serve within the Mishkan in a condition of tumah middot – this Av transgression carries the din of כרת. Cutting off that person and his children from the oath brit wherein HaShem and the Avot mutually swore to create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין. This latter בראשית most essential idea shares nothing with tuma middot which promote racial or genetic inheritance of the Jewish race – as the Xtian church and Nazis promote – examples of tumah middot.
Hence to swear a Torah oath requires שם ומלכות like as do all ברכות from the Torah. The sin of the Golden Calf – a substitute theology which replaces the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name unto other word-Gods. Avoda zara by definition worships other Word-gods. The sin of the Golden Calf serves as the defining פרט for the 2nd Sinai Commandment כלל not to worship other Gods.
Therefore all Torah oath britot require שם ומלכות. The Name clearly directly links to the Spirit Divine Presence Name revealed in the first Sinai commandment. The term מלך refers to the כלל mitzva of the dedication of the spirit of משיח as expressed through all tohor time oriented Av commandments … the righteous pursuit of justice to achieve shalom among the chosen Cohen people throughout the generations in all Ages and times while Jews rule our ancient homelands.
מלכות understood as the dedication of defined tohor middot. אל remembrance of the Sin of the Golden Calf. רחום the inference which turns pity upon its head. Obliterating the Canaanites, the killing of the minor stubborn and rebellious child, the war against Amalek (Jewish assimilation to foreign cultures and customs of peoples who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. And intermarriage with such Goyim). The middah of רחום a Jew dedicates how he shall socially interact with both his people and Goyim in the future; specifically through the dedication of defined tohor middot. חנון the general dedication to dedicate all future behavioral patterns with family friends, people, and even Goyim by and through the future born tohor middot that a person dedicates whenever that Jews does Torah or Talmudic mitzvot/halachot.
Both Xtianity and Islam worship other Word-gods. Therefore both religions do not define faith as the pursuit of justice, but rather belief in the theologies about these Word-gods.
[[[ Also, when you speak of the erasure of Jewish self-determination through revisionist Palestinian narratives, I hear both an intellectual rebuttal and a deep historical wound. Is your critique aimed primarily at the political manipulation of language and borders—or also at the erasure of Jewish covenantal memory from the land itself? ]]]
Unlike the Xtian and Muslims theologies which promote some pie in the sky Universal Monotheism God, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai revealed the local tribal God of Israel. When David fled from king Shaul he declared as he entered g’lut lands: “I have been forced to abandon God”. Just as the Great and Small Sanhedrin courts only have jurisdiction within the borders of the Jewish state so too the local God of Israel. Herein the answer given to the Holocaust survivor who said to me: “I was in Auschwitz, Where was God?” When I lived in the US and Xtian people asked me if I was a religious Jew? I responded with: I am an atheist praise God. But even living within the borders of the oath sworn brit alliance lands I habitually respond to Goyim with “I am an atheist – praise God”. Meaning, I do not believe in any theological/creed construct of Word-gods – praise God. LOL Torah, its deep and requires a sense of humor.
The curse of g’lut-exile of my people almost immediately caused Jews to lose the wisdom how to do mitzvot לשמה. G’lut Jewry does not understand how to employ and work our Yatrir HaTov within our hearts. The בנין אב-precedent of blowing the shofer serves as a פרט to define the כלל of Yatzir HaTov. Meaning, to blow a shofar requires air from the lungs. But to blow a spirit from the Yatzir HaTov within the heart requires the k’vanna, (all time-oriented commandments require k’vanna) the dedication of defined tohor middot spirits. This כללי-general idea of tohor middot, it defines the dedication of the middah of חנון.
Herein a definition of 3 of the 13 tohor middot which a person dedicates through Yatzir Tov k’vannot from within their hearts. Jews uprooted from our homelands by both the Babylonians and Romans caused the g’lut cursed survivors to lose this kabbalah wisdom which defines how to do mitzvot לשמה.
Oral Torah as revealed to Moshe at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf, openly rejects ancient Greek theories of syllogism deductive reasoning. The kabbalah of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic format, especially as explained by Rabbi Yishmael’s 13 middot of logical interpretation strategies – together they define the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev as an inductive reasoning logic format.
The T’NaCH functions as a common law system, where the texts establish precedents through case and rule comparisons. This suggests a structured legal framework that informs Jewish law and practice. The Gemarah’s commentary on the Mishna is highlighted as a method of interpreting Jewish law through inductive reasoning, which provides a dynamic – as oppose and contrasted by Greek deductive static reasoning – multi-dimensional understanding of legal principles.
The common law of the T’NaCH prioritizes Prophetic mussar whereas the Gemara focuses upon ritual halacha as precedents. The authors of the New Testament misunderstood the nature of the T’NaCH, particularly in their claim that Jesus “fulfilled” the prophecies. This is framed as a misinterpretation of the role of Torah prophets, who were enforcers of law rather than predictors of the future.
The distinction between the roles of prophets and legal authorities in the T’NaCH is a central theme, suggesting that the prophetic function is often misrepresented by later NT framers. The consequences of this basic fundamental error: the Xtian framers intended to establish a religious belief system whereas the Framers of the T’NaCH envisioned establishment of Sanhedrin courts common law. The complexity of this latter objective, difficult for Goyim to grasp, primarily because they lack the Talmud as a point of reference – how to understand the language of the T’NaCH as the Primary Sources of Jewish law. Lacking the Aggadic narrative provided by the Talmud, Goyim simply fail to understand that the purpose of the Aggadic stories – they explore the language of Prophetic mussar to provide the “k’vanna” which defines the purpose and meaning of all Talmudic Aggadic stories.
The Talmud compares to a loom with its warp & weft threads. Weaving interpreted prophetic mussar as the k’vanna of halachic ritualism – this defines not only how to make an aliyah\elevation of rabbinic ritual mitzvot observances unto Torah commandments, but this same wisdom equally applies to elevate lower positive and negative Torah commandments to Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandments! Goyim have never grasped the depth & scope of Torah commandments within the Torah. They never conceived nor grasped that Moshe as the Framer of the Torah organized these 5 Books to function as the Constitution of the Republic of 12 Tribes. Torah as a Constitutional Basic Law of the Chosen Cohen Peoples’ Republic — a far different vision from the Pauline ‘Original Sin’ addiction of Man for some imaginary mythical Harry Potter God/messiah to save Humanity from their sins.
Prophetic Mussar vs. Ritual Halacha: T’NaCH interprets prophetic mussar; Gemarah interprets ritual law as the culture and customs observed by the nation of the chosen Cohen People. Avoda zarah interpreted as such to mean: 1. The Cohen people have a negative commandment NOT to follow, much more so embrace, the cultures and customs practiced by Goyim civilizations which do not accept the opening First TWO Sinai commandments.
This profound understanding of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai starkly contrasts with the Rambam’s pathetic perversion of Aggadah up-rooted totally out of context from mesechta Sanhedrin concerning the 7 mitzvot applicable to Gere Toshavim who temporarily dwell within the lands of Judea; as opposed to the despised Goyim refugee populations, who likewise temporarily reside within the borders of Judea. Mesechta Baba Kama instructs that the latter dhimmi refugee populations enjoyed no legal protections. If a Jew damaged their persons or property – these “illegal aliens” possessed no legal “Torah Constitutional” right to sue the damager Israel in any Jewish Court of Law within the borders of Judea. As a point of reference: Jews, as despised refugees in Europe and Muslim countries for 2000+ years – political exiles, dhimmi refugee populations – no Goy Court in Xtian or Muslim lands ever once held criminal war-crimes committed by the Church or Mosque priests or sheiks accountable. G’lut/exiled Jews had no legal rights to sue – NOT either Church or Mosque in any Goyim courts of law for 2000+ years of g’lut/exile.
Viewed from this basic historical context, the Talmud of mesechta Baba Kama makes complete and total sense. Hence mesechta Sanhedrin addresses the legal rights of Gere Toshav strangers to sue Jewish damagers in Jewish courts of law; whereas mesechta Baba Kama excludes dhimmi foreign alien “wet-backs” from the ”privilege” of legal judicial rights to requests from a Jewish Court to enforce fair compensation of damages they suffered from an Israel. During the Dark and Middle Ages, a similar custom practiced upon dhimmi exiled Jews; writs of privileges issued to Jews by princes and church officials. These writs of privileges directly compare to mesechta Sanhedrin’s 7 mitzvot “bnai Noach”.
The fundamental error of basic Talmudic common law scholarship made by Rambam’s decision to “convert” the Talmud into Roman statute law; this absolute error stands upon the copied-assimilated Av tumah avoda zara wherein this rabbi embraced the error followed by the Samaritans, Tzeddukim, Karaim, Reform & Conservative Judaism today. This Av tumah avoda zara generated a domino effect upon all down-stream generations of Jewry. The Talmud refers to this type of disaster as ירידות הדורות-descending generations.
Later down stream rabbinic Judaism made a error and interpreted this Talmudic concept as the inability of later generations to challenge the opinions made by earlier generations; something comparable and akin to the Catholic idea of the infallibility of the Pope — utter and total narishkeit stupidity. Pope Pius XII stands as proof witness of this absolutely worthless טיפש פשט-bird brained idea. Rashi’s commentary to the Chumash challenged the opinion made by Targum Onkelos as erroneous. How could Rashi argue against a contemporary of Rabbi Yechuda – the author of the Mishna? Answer: In matters of logic, no generation has a lock monopoly by which it can dictate its logic over later generations.
Genesis 1:1, Rashi discusses the creation narrative and contrasts his interpretation with that of Targum Onkelos. This Rashi opinion nails the Arab rejection of political Zionism’s quest to achieve Jewish self-determination within a restored Jewish State in the lands of Judea. Rashi believed that later generations could offer valid interpretations that might differ from earlier authorities, including Targum Onkelos. He emphasized that logic and understanding of the text naturally develop and evolve.
Rashi’s commentary on בראשית א:ב — והארץ היתה תהו ובהו. Targum Onkelos translates as: איר אתכללו – “it was desolate”. Rashi argues that Targum Onkelos’ interpretation does not capture the full meaning of the Hebrew terms. He explains that “תֹהוּ” refers to a state of emptiness or chaos, while “בֹהוּ” refers to a state of void or nothingness. Rashi emphasizes that the two terms convey distinct concepts that are not adequately represented in Onkelos’ translation.
Exodus 12:6: Rashi comments on the phrase regarding the timing of the Passover sacrifice. Targum Onkelos translates it in a way that Rashi finds problematic. Rashi argues that the translation does not align with the intent of the Hebrew text, suggesting that Onkelos’ interpretation – not accurate in this context. This example illustrates Rashi’s approach to engaging with earlier interpretations, including those of Targum Onkelos, and his belief that later scholars can offer valid critiques based on their logical insights. Based upon the premise that no one generation owns a lock and key monopoly of logic.
“עד יום עשותו – עד יום שיבואו ישראל לידי עשייתו, ולא עד יום שיבואו לידי אכילתו, כמו שתרגם אונקלוס: ‘עד יום שיבואו ישראל לידי אכילתו’.”
In his commentary, Rashi points out that Targum Onkelos interprets the verse as referring to the day of eating the Passover sacrifice, while Rashi understood this verse as the day of its preparation or offering. This illustrates Rashi’s critical engagement with Onkelos’ translation.
In בראשית א:ב, the phrase “והארץ היתה תהו ובהו” is translated as “איר אתכללו,” meaning “it was desolate.” This translation captures the essence of the Hebrew term “תהו ובהו,” which conveys a sense of emptiness and chaos.
In contrast, in דברים לג:ב, the phrase “מן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” translates to “from the mountain of Seir.” Here, “אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” is derived from a different root and refers to a geographical location rather than a state of being. The context of this verse is about God’s revelation from Sinai, and the term is used to indicate a specific place, rather than a descriptive state. Rashi states that Onkelos’ translation is incorrect because it implies that the verse is referring to a physical location rather than the spiritual significance of HaShem’s revelation. Rashi emphasizes that the term “מִסֵּעִיר” should be understood in a different context, focusing on the divine aspect rather than a geographical one.
בראשית א:ב — והארץ היתה תהו ובה Targum Onkelos translates as: איר אתכללו – “it was desolate”. Whereas דברים לג:ב: ויאמר ה’ מסיני בא ושרח מסעיר למו — Targum Onkelos translates this as “מִן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” (from the mountain of Seir)? In בראשית א:ב, the phrase “והארץ היתה תהו ובהו” is translated as “איר אתכללו,” meaning “it was desolate.” This translation captures the essence of the Hebrew term “תהו ובהו,” which conveys a sense of emptiness and chaos.
In contrast, in דברים לג:ב, the phrase “מן אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” translates to “from the mountain of Seir.” Here, “אִתְּכַּלְּלוּ” is derived from a different root and refers to a geographical location rather than a state of being. The context of this verse is about God’s revelation from Sinai, and the term is used to indicate a specific place rather than a descriptive state. Thus, the variations in translation reflect the different contexts and meanings of the words used in each verse. The שרש\root – כ-ל-ל conveys meanings related to completeness or inclusion. In this context, it refers to a geographical location, specifically indicating a place from which something originates or emerges.
This contrasts with the root of “תֹהוּ” and “בֹהוּ” in Genesis 1:2, which conveys a sense of chaos and emptiness, highlighting the different contexts and meanings in Rashi’s commentary and the translations provided by Targum Onkelos. This example of Rashi’s dispute with a Tanna illistrates the classic error assimilated to ancient Greek cultures and customs the Rambam erred when he interpreted the word ONE in kre’a shma means “monotheism”. Monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. Furthermore, mesechta Avoda Zarah opens with the understanding that prior to the generation of Noach that the Goyim had utterly rejected the oath brit alliance.
The Torah of בראשית opens with the Name אלהים (the substitute word translation of the Divine Presence Spirit word of both the שם השם עצמו as well as the Orev 13 Oral Torah middot wherein Jews to this day during the month of Elul. For example: tefillah a matter of the heart … and to make a blessing requires שם ומלכות. The Mitzva of blowing the Shofar on ר”ה make a מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה which separates and distinguishes between air blown from the lungs from tohor spirits blown from the Yatzir Ha’Tov from within the heart. דכתיב: גכל לבבך.
On Elul Jews likewise separate t’shuva from repentance. Similar words on superficial appearance, like brit and covenant. T’shuva “remembers” the Sin of the Golden Calf, like Amalek which plagues Jews in all generations with its hateful antisemitism. We remember that HaShem – measure for measure – threatened to make a substitute theology idolatry and replace the oath sworn Cohen seed of the Avot with the seed of Moshe Rabbeinu “eye for an eye” for the Israel ערב רב replacement theology with substituted אלהים “word” for the שם השם לשמה Divine Presence Spirit which quickens the Yatzir HaTov within the heart, through the dedication of tohor Oral Torah middot.
Hence a blessing requires מלכות – the dedication of korbanot middot לשמה. Herein explains why the Book of בראשית opens with the word name אלהים rather than the Spirit Name שם השם לשמה as commanded in the first commandment of the Sinai revelation; the בראשית story opens prior to the oath brit which creates continually the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot through tohor Av time-oriented commandments which require the מלכות dedication of Oral Torah spirit middot through the Yatzir Ha’Tov.
Goyim, both Xtians and Allah repentance by contrast only refers to personal regret. This interpretation goes well with the Xtian guilt trip theology of “He died for you”. In like manner, ברית refers to an oath alliance which function as the יסוד of the Republic of the 12 Tribes; wheras covenant implies some vague connection, which if “shattered” some foreign alien other God could substitute Goyim as the “New Israel” or Universal monotheistic God. The Rambam avoda zarah assimilated and embraced the Muslim idea of a universal monotheistic God. He rejected mesechta Avoda Zarah which understands the God of Sinai as a local Tribal God based upon the conclusion that the Goyim never accepted the revelation, meaning first two opening commandments of Sinai as John 1:1 proves, of the the Torah at Sinai.
Beware of Goyim false messiah narratives. Religious masturbation, how utterly depressing
Both Harry Potter and Weight and Gift of the Cross fail to grasp the Torah concept of Sacrifices as the medium wherein the chosen Cohen People swear a Torah oath “brit” to employ tohor middot within their Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart.
What Christianity and Potter miss – that the Torah idea of korban, simply not a magical transaction. But a legal act of swearing fidelity to the brit first established by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov which creates the Chosen Cohen people – תמיד מעשה בראשית – through the Avot commandments known as time-oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their most essential and required k’vanna; meaning the dedication of defined Oral Torah tohor middot first revealed to Moshe 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf on Yom Kippur.
Both works of fiction and revisionist history tell a story of folks in possession of God like powers awarded and bestowed from some undefined Father who sits upon some throne in Heaven, and who bestows magical messiah-powers upon His chosen beloved. Both mythical characters of Harry Potter and JeZeus make the ultimate sacrifice, and sacrifice their lives as the pathway to achieve ”salvation”.
Both fictional narratives fail to define either how the Torah understands the meaning of terms like prophesy, love or even – and most significantly – Torah sacrifices! Even more significant both messiah novels fail to address the Torah concept of Moshiach as learned from Par’o having his “Court” inflict torture upon Hebrew slaves for their failure to meet their quota of bricks!
This story as told in the beginning of the Book of שמות, serves as the kabbalah יסוד, wherein Torah common law relies upon Torah precedents to understand the dedication of the mitzva of Moshiach, defined as the righteous pursuit of judicial justice which strives to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.
“The Weight and Gift of the Cross,” the reflection on JeZeus as the Messiah emphasizes themes of sacrifice, redemption, and the call to discipleship.
However, this narrative – critiqued for presenting a simplified view of messianic expectations, focusing on personal salvation without adequately addressing the complexities of justice and accountability.
But even more central and far greater priority, both fictional narratives utterly fail to grasp that Torah commandments apply – like as does the mitzva of Shabbat – to all Jews in all generations. The idea of some chosen messiah God figure – an utterly alien foreign abomination of Av tumah avoda zarah.
Both narratives fail to engage with the Torah’s understanding of the Messiah, rooted in concepts of justice, ethical behavior, and communal responsibility. The messianic role in Judaism – not merely about individual salvation but involves a holy dedication (directly comparable to a korban burnt upon the altar) which applies straight across the board to the entire chosen seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov; that all generations – rather than some chosen specific individual – have the obligation to sanctify the mitzva of Moshiach, as a Torah commandment, to pursue and sanctify righteous judicial Sanhedrin common law courtroom justice.
Torah “Prophets”, understood as “police agents” of the Sanhedrin courts who enforce the Legislative Review judicial rulings of the lateral Sanhedrin common law courtrooms.
Torah Prophets have the Constitutional mandate to make Legislative Review of government statute laws; they can both anoint and depose kings! Police/prophets give teeth to the rulings of Sanhedrin courts. Judicial legislative review defines the name of the 5th Book of the Torah משנה תורה as well as rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi’s משנה.
Both of these non Jewish narratives, by stark contrast reflect the Goyim cultural & customs understanding of Messiah. They create fantastical worlds where mythical beings possess extraordinary powers.
In Harry Potter, together with his Cross-like scar upon his forehead, which imprisons a soul of evil, magic serves as but a metaphor for personal growth and moral choices; while the Gospels, miraculous events, often interpreted as divine intervention – like cursed trees immediately dying or herds of pigs running off of cliffs to their deaths. Such wild fictional story narratives implicitly instructs the gospel rebuke of: “By their fruits you shall know them.” Why ‘implicitly’? Because the church has ignored this gospel rebuke for 2000+ years.
These cultural stories of how Goyim perceive ancient Hebrews or modern British witch societies, they both reflect outsider cultural narratives that shape the reading of how non Jewish audiences understand – good and evil, morality, and human experiences.
These fictional narrative employ fantastical elements to convey propaganda disturbed emotional belief systems later developed into both Cannon and Creeds. Easter, known as Lent, commonly know as “Passion of Christ”, which commemorates blood libel pogroms so that Jews endure their accountability for killing God.
Both imaginary narratives fail to hold their own criminally insane and violent believers to any judicial justice of accountability. Post the Wizarding War, only a few criminally insane war-criminals sent to jail. Rather than mass public executions, Goyim courts quietly freed guilty war-criminals. The Catholic church established rat-lines to assist Nazis to flee to South America.
Never the implied gospel rebuke: “By their Fruits you shall know them” demand for accountability for crimes. Church morality limited this gospel rebuke only to the Jews.
Pope Pius XII made an open alliance with Hitler, and Martin Luther promoted not just Nazi Book burnings, but actual mass murder of Jews burned to their collective deaths inside synagogues. The Catholic public burning of the Talmud in Paris France in 1242, served as the inspiration of Nazi hate crimes.
The Harry Potter witching world directly compares to the three Century ghetto-gulags, wherein the church threw Jewish refugee populations into prisons of poverty. The concealed world of witchcraft societies likewise compares to the forced mass population transfers – similar to the 1492 Spanish expulsion of Jews. The weakness of magic in the Potter story, magic cannot produce food any more than Jews languishing in Catholic gulag ghettos.
How to study and comprehend both the T’NaCH and Talmud as common law.
To study Talmudic common law its important to discern fundamental distinctions in scholarship down through the Ages. Perhaps the Rif halachic commentary serves as the split between two distinct bodies of law as different from the Pacific Ocean from the Atlantic Ocean.
The most essential skill required to understand how to correctly interpret Talmudic common law, the wisdom how to make the required דיוק/logical inference\. Neither T’NaCH common law nor Talmudic common law simply read as if they existed as novels pulled down from the shelf. The skill to study these Primary Sources does not turn to reading commentaries, made upon these Primary Sources which define the classic culture and customs practiced by societies of the chosen Cohen people through Av commandments known as time-oriented mitzvot.
Even the most shallow cursory translations of the Hebrew T’NaCH and Talmud; Xtianity placed their “word of God” translations upon cult of personality pedestals; they differentiate between the word of God from the words of Man – complete total religious rhetoric nonsense. Still, even a quick glance at their sophomoric “moronic” translations a person “skilled” immediately sees: absolutely no reference to tohor vs. tumah middot; the distinction made between judicial legislative review common law vs. Nicene Creed statute law dictates.
Their apostle Paul declares “the faithful” as not under the law, oblivious that civilizations without law exist in a state of confusion chaos and political anarchy. Never has any “believer” made the logical דיוק and grasped the fundamental distinctions which separate judicial common law – in possession of legislative review – Torah constitutional mandate, from statute law produced from Parliaments, Legislatures, our Councils – such as the above mentioned Nicene council.
Torah, as a Constitutional document compares to the US basic law Constitution rather than to religious belief systems. The latter makes its most fundamental appeal to powerful emotions rather than to rational logic. T’NaCH/Talmudic legal reasoning spins around the central axis of פרדס inductive logic as best understood through rabbi Ishmaels 13 methodologies how to interpret the written Jewish Primary Sources which shape and define classic culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people through the k’vanna of doing tohor time-oriented commandments. Herein defines the יסוד upon which all Torah oath britot – pursuit of justice faith – stands.
Human conflict defines the nature of the opposing Yatzirot within the heart; this fundamental -understanding stands upon the בנין אב-precedent of Yaacov vs. Esau wrestling within the womb of Rivka. The sages perceive the heart as a chamber which houses the two opposing sets of tohor/tuma middot, comparable to the womb which houses developing children.
The Torah employs korbanot משל as the central (נמשל (דיוק wherein the chosen cohen people as a civilization dedicate differentiated tohor middot holy unto our God. Its the definition of tohor middot wherein the k’vanna of doing tohor time-oriented mitzvot differentiated from תולדות positive and negative Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot – which do not require כוונה.
The written Torah serves as the יסוד, the NaCH prophets and holy writings the ground floor, and the Talmud and Midrashic sources the 2nd floor of classic rabbinic Primary Sources of scholarship. Next comes the generations of scholars known as the Sovaraim Talmudic scholars 450-600 CE, they further edited the Talmudic texts sealed by Rav Ashi and Ravina. The wisdom of editing most essentially shapes and separates a good newspaper from yellow journalism rags. It seems to me that the Roman forgery new testament, compares both to yellow journalism rags and the Czarist secret police publication of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This editing skill makes a fundamental דיוק which separates the priority of Cohen culture and custom from תולדות Jewish law and ethics. The latter follows the former, similar to a dog on a leash. Both T’NaCH and Talmud/Midrash stand upon the central kabbalah of פרדס and 13 middot of rabbi Yishmael’s explanation of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic sh’itta.
Fraudulent counterfeit copies of the Torah constitution, converted into religious belief system theologies; the latter directly compare to propaganda rhetoric which defined Josef Goebbels propaganda yellow journalism from 1923 to 1945. This political rhetoric stood upon sensationalist techniques used to popularize the Nazi agenda. The Roman false messiah new testament and Muhammad’s Koran poetry made their appeal to emotions rather than inductive reasoning.
The Battle of Guadalete, where the Muslim forces, led by Tariq ibn Ziyad, defeated the Visigoth king Roderic; this battle, considered the decisive moment that opened the way for the Muslim conquest of Spain. Following the victory at Guadalete, Muslim forces quickly advanced through the Iberian Peninsula. Within a few years, they captured major cities, including Toledo, Seville, and Córdoba. By the end of 711, much of the southern part of Spain dominated by Muslim culture and customs. The Umayyad Caliphate established this Spanish foothold, which endured for several centuries, leading to significant cultural, social and political changes in the region.
But conquered Spain made a lasting impact upon Muslim culture as well. The re-discovery of the ancient Greek texts, which the church concealed immediately after Constantine became emperor in 306 CE. This decision by the Church, threatened by the Gods of Greece and Rome, to bury the Greek enlightenment – resulted in a period known as the Dark Ages. The Muslim re-discovery of the ancient Greek enlightenment – cast off Catholic repression, whose policies had destroyed the culture and customs practiced by the ancient Romans, in order to promote the Xtian ‘good news’ gospel. The re-discovery of Greek deductive reasoning both church and mosque now emphatically embraced. Greek deductive reasoning likewise caused the Spanish Jewish ‘Golden Age’ and the European Renaissance to flower and grow.
The 2nd Sinai Commandment, commonly referred to as the negative commandment of “avoda zarah”, the sages interpreted through the תולדות בניני אבות-precedents of 1. Do not copy Goyim cultures and customs and 2. Do not intermarry with Goyim who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The definition of avoda zarah, the Av tuma spirit breathed by the Yatzir Haraw within the heart, the rediscovery of the ancient Greek enlightenment re-ignited the Civil War wounds which the lights of Hanukkah designated to remember. Alas g’lut Jewry prioritized the forms of faith rather than the substance of faith. Jews lit the Hanukkah lights as a ritual religious observance rather than as an Av tohor time-oriented commandment which requires prophetic k’vanna.
The Dark Ages witnessed the destruction of the Roman road system. Scattered Jewish communities lacked the means to communicate with one another. Questions asked to the Geonim in Iraq sometimes took a Century or more before they received a response. This reality caused the rise of the Reshonim scholars. None the less, despite the Reshon innovation, Jewish scattered communities required more immediate Talmudic guidance.
Talmudic inductive logic requires years of intense scholarship to learn and master. This reality set the stage for the classic debate between the Rabbi Isaac Alfasi, the Rif vs. the Rabbi Meir ben Baruch of Rothenburg, born in Germany, also known as the Baal Hamaor. Rashba, or Rabbi Shlomo ben Abraham ibn Aderet, a medieval rabbi from Spain, active in the late 13th and early 14th centuries. Renowned for his extensive commentaries on the Talmud and his responsa, which addressed a wide range of legal and ethical issues. Rashba, a strong defender of Maimonides’ philosophical approach to Judaism and contributed disastrously to the development of Jewish law during his time. Religious halachic code vs. the disciplined study of the Talmud through precedents, the sh’itta practiced by the Rashi/Baali Tosafot school in France. However, the relationship between the Rif and the Tosafists – more about differing approaches to Talmudic study and halachic decision-making rather than direct criticism.
The Baal Hamaor criticized the Rif’s prioritization of simple halachic codification because it failed to convey the precedent based scholarship of Talmudic common law. The Rif code did not take the halachot and make a משנה תורה reinterpretation of the language of the Mishna. Herein a succinct summation of the Baal Hamaor’s criticism of the Rif code. The Mishneh Torah by Maimonides (the Rambam) represents a significant shift in the approach to Jewish law, moving towards a more systematic and codified statute law form of halacha that a rare few scholars today argue departs from the traditional Talmudic case-based reasoning.
These Spanish ‘Golden Age’ rabbis extinguished the lights of Hanukkah. They had forbidden avoda zara “sex” with the re-discovered ancient Greek syllogism deductive reasoning. Ibn Ezra, from Spain, his son converted to Islam. Assimilation and Jewish intermarriage caused the collapse of Spanish Jewry long before the Spanish monarchy forced the mass expulsion of Jews in 1492. Av tuma avoda zara releases Torah curses upon our people similar to those experienced by Par’o in the days of Moshe and Aaron. By definition assimilated ערב רב Jews lack the knowledge and required education to keep and observe the culture and customs which the T’NaCH and Talmud establish as the society of the Cohen people.
Rabbi Mordechai ben Hillel, known for his work “Mordechai,” failed to differentiation between judicial common law and legislative statute law. In his commentaries, Rabbi Mordechai often focused on the application of Talmudic principles to practical legal situations, some interpret as a watered down form of common law. Why? His scholarship fails to emphasize פרדס inductive logic. He would derive rulings based on precedents and interpretations of the Talmud, reflecting a judicial approach that values case law and established practices. But he failed to validate in the process the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva.
His work implies a distinction between the authority of rabbinic rulings (which can evolve through judicial interpretation) and the fixed nature of certain laws derived from the Torah or established by the Sanhedrin. This ignores the halacha base Gemara משנה תורה re-interpretations made upon the language of the Mishna based upon a specific sugya of Gemara. He utterly failed to discern Av Torah time-oriented commandments which require k’vanna from secondary positive and negative commandments; or how much more so, Talmudic halachic ritual observances… all of which do not require k’vanna, comparable to positive and negative Torah commandments. This failure/collapse of Torah mitzvot scholarship ultimately caused post Rambam Civil War Jews to fail to read the written Torah as a common law legal system wherein פרדס logic compares positive and negative commandments as precedents in order to elevate a any Torah or Talmudic mitzva unto an Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandment. And likewise Bavli/Yerushalmi halachot as precedents to elevate the language of a given Mishna unto tohor time oriented commandments!
The French Tosafot school of common law, despite placing the works of the Rambam into נידוי in 1232 utterly collapsed with the public burning of the Talmud in Paris 1242. The Tosafot commentary likewise failed to link Written Torah common law learned through precedents to Talmudic common law whose halachic precedents make a re-interpretations upon the language of the Mishna. Like a blue-print front/top\side views. Precedents function as “the 70 faces to the Torah common law legal system”. This fundamental basic, the Tosafot commentary to the Talmud utterly failed to emphasize.
Common law compares to the metaphor of opposing rivers, where Statute Law exists as a completely different river from Judicial Common law Legislative Review. Therefore which early Reshonim scholars fundamentally challenged the Rif Code of Halacha for its failure to differentiate between T’NaCH/Talmudic Common law legislative review – as a Constitutional mandate from the Written Torah from Parliament/legislature statute law – which the Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch codes of statute law utterly and totally undermined? The avoda zara of the latter directly compares to the sin of the Golden Calf which attempted a substitute theology wherein the cursed ערב רב attempted to replace the word אלהים for the 1st Sinai revelation Spirit Divine Presence within the tohor middot which breath life into the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the hearts of the chosen Cohen people throughout all generations.
Have encountered a Xtian believer whose opinion merits discussion.
Frank Hubeny says:
The important point to remember, Moshe, is that Jesus did – in fact – fulfill the words of the prophets.
That is why Akiva and company had to alter the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 and move the Book of Daniel from the Nev’im to the Ketuvim section of the Tanach. They wanted to pretend that He didn’t and hide the fact that they knew He did.
So, now that your history has been corrupted, where does that leave you? Is Kabballah enough? Is mussar enough? Are “Case/Rule precedents” enough? It sounds like Akiva sentenced you to perpetual exile.
You can always be grafted back in unless you decide to talk yourself out of it.
Romans 11:23 NKJV – 23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
mosckerr says:
September 11, 2025 at 10:27 pm
Bunk. Mussar by definition applicable across the board to all generations of Israel. Hence impossible to “fulfill” prophesy as the false gospel narrative lies. Your speculation – simply slander. You offer no evidence to support your opinion – other than that you do not read Hebrew or Aramaic.
Daniel a mystic not a prophet. The Book of Daniel compares to the relationship which the Gemara has with the Mishna. The generation of Ezra primarily sealed the T’NaCH NOT rabbi Akiva some 600 years later. Oooops try again.
By the language of the Book of Daniel itself, the story occurs in Babylonian exile. Prophets the “Police enforcers” of the Sanhedrin Judges. The jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts – only within the borders of Judea. By extension this applies equally to prophets. Therefore Daniel a mystic and not a prophet. Oooops try again.
Your revisionist history, simply false. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. משנה תורה a Torah 2nd given name for the Book of דברים, if you read the Torah in Hebrew you would immediately know this. Mishna Torah means common law. Common law stands on the foundation of precedents/בניני אבות in Hebrew. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.
Never in the 2000+ years Jews existed as refugees in Arab or Muslim lands did any Goy court hold either Church or Mosque accountable for war-crimes committed against Humanity – which includes the Jewish people. The Torah defines faith as: Justice pursue. Only under the terms of a Torah blessing: Jews ruling our Homeland, does the potential for the establishment of Sanhedrin common law courts which have the Torah Constitutional mandate of Legislative Review. This fact has zero to do with the theology vomited by Romans 11:23. Justice has nothing to do with any belief system. Torah common law stands upon Case/Rule court precedents. Its this fact which separates Torah common law from Greek/Roman statute law.
The confusion concerning the Aramaic Book of Daniel, even Rashi and later the Rambam debated this point. Also the Zohar weighs in on the Book of Daniel. Both the Book of Daniel and the Zohar written in Aramaic – and both this and that instruct mysticism. Mesechta Megillah, a tractate on Chag Purim clearly states that Daniel – not a prophet. Rashi on this dof of Gemara concedes that Daniel – not a prophet. But about 8 pages thereafter refers to Daniel as a prophet. This contradiction of Rashi’s commentary merits address.
By the time of the Reshonim scholars of the Dark and Middle Ages of European g’lut, Jews lacked a clear understanding of T’NaCH prophets. No Reshon validates that Parshat Shoftim and Shotrim in D’varim, that the latter enforcers existed as “Prophets”. Traditional commentaries such as Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Ramban do not explicitly state that the Shotrim served as prophets in their interpretations of Deuteronomy 16:18. Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, like the classical Rishonim, does not explicitly state that the Shotrim in Deuteronomy 16:18 directly referenced as prophets. The connection between Shotrim and prophetic roles simply not a common interpretation found in traditional commentaries. Most classical sources focus on the Shotrim as law enforcers and assistants to the judges without explicitly linking them to the prophetic function.
G’lut Jewry, estranged from the realities that the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin courts – limited to within the borders of Judea. Rav Shwartz, who gave me sh’micha, his beit din erroneously attempted to involve the Sanhedrin court in Jerusalem, in a legal dispute in America involving one of the leaders of the Bnai Noach movement. This fundamental ignorance concerning the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin court directly contributed to the collapse of Rav Shwartz attempt to restore Sanhedrin (common law) courts in the Jewish state.
The Yerushalmi includes a dispute Tannaim over whether king David established a small Sanhedrin court in Damascus. The small Sanhedrin courts, based upon the three established by Moshe Rabbeinu on the other side of the Jordan river, from this precedent Torah common law learns that these small Sanhedrin courts, they define the borders of newly conquered lands annexed to the Jewish state.
The Rambam civil war greatly further eroded rabbinic knowledge of the functions of Torah common law. As a minor judge on the attempt to re-establish the Sanhedrin court system within Israel, I watched in horror as the vast majority of my rabbinic peers voted to base the authority of the Sanhedrin court upon the Rambam’s statute halachic code.
These examples caused me to reach the conclusion that post the Rambam Civil War that rabbinic Judaism had abandoned the דרך faith to pursue judicial justice as the יסוד responsibility for accepting the revelation of the Torah at Sinai לשמה. While I can validate the arguments made by the RambaN in his מלחמת השם against the Baal HaMaor’s rebuke against the Rif code for reducing the primacy of Talmudic common law in favor of making a far easier halachic definition of religious halachic observance among g’lut Jewry.
The times absolutely demanded halachic simplifications due to the almost impossibility to travel on a collapsed Roman international road system. None the less, the codes effectively changed the priority established by the Framers of both the T’NaCH and Talmud to serve as the vision model to re-establish Sanhedrin common law lateral courtrooms within the borders of the Jewish Republic which have the Torah Constitutional mandate of Legislative Review. And hence none of the Reshonim commentaries on the Torah prioritized the the definition of Shotrim as “prophets”. A critical and fundamental error of Reshonim scholarship. Consequently, Rashi himself confused, and later referred to the mystic Daniel as a “prophet” in his commentary to Mesechta Megillah.
קידושין
The language “גופא”, the Gemara employs to indicate that discussion returns to Primary priority topic, as opposed to a secondary point of discussion. Our Gemara jumps directly into the פרדס\י”ג מידות Oral Torah wisdom skill of shooting a bearing azimuth, to make a reference direction, typically true north. Commonly used in navigation, surveying, and mapping to describe the orientation of a line or path. The 8th middah of the Oral Torah revelation – אמת – interpreted to mean “Path”. Halacha, as a significant defining term expressed throughout the Talmud likewise understood to mean “Path”.
The study of Talmudic common, prioritizes the “journey” rather than the “destination”. By stark and absolute contrast, the statute halachic codes made famous by the Yad, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch codes prioritize the “destination” over the “journey”; halacha takes on a meaning all its own. Whereas halacha employed within the pages of the Sha’s, so to speak, has no legs of its own to walk. The “משל” statute law halachic codes, they compare to a fiat based economy rather than a gold or silver commodity based economy.
This גופא, represents a subtle shift which post the Rambam Civil War rabbinic authorities utterly fail to either acknowledge or recognize. Our Gemara:
דף יא. גופא. אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אסי כל כסף האמור בתורה צורי ושל דבריהם כסף מדינה
The term צורי (tzuri) in this context, denotes gold or silver. The Mishnaic economy during this time period of Roman occupation, an agricultural commodity based currency. Post Nixon, by contrast, the US currency became a fiat based “war time” economy. Governments commonly turn to fiat “monopoly money” currency to pay a ballooning national debt, especially during some “war time” (לאו דוקא) economic crisis.
Lincoln switched to the greenback to pay for the Civil War. This critical precedent later Wilson used as a spring board to restore the 3rd National central bank “Federal Reserve”. The latter institution inserted the US into both European Civil Wars commonly referred to as WWI & WWII. The bureaucratic Federal Reserve has no accountability to the American People. It compares to the US Intelligence Agencies: FBI, CIA, NSA during the first Trump Administration.
This 1913 newly established “National Bank”, unilaterally made huge loans to England and France to finance their war against the German “Huns”. In 1915 the German sinking of the Lusitania aroused public indignation across America. But Wilson primarily based his decision to join the Allied alliance based upon the exorbitant loans which the Federal Reserve unilaterally awarded to England and France. Wilson abandoned the advice given by Washington, in his Farewell Address in 1796, not to make “entangling alliances” with Europe.
Lusitania sinking in 1915, the consequence of unrestricted German submarine warfare, aroused the indignation of American public opinion. But had America joined the Central Powers alliance in 1917 England and France most certainly would have invalidated their debt – Federal Reserve unilateral and not authorized by Congress – loans.
This debt prompted England and France to impose the crushing terms which define the Versailles treaty. England and France demanded war reparations from defeated Germany. Wilson’s National Bank thereafter issued loans to the post-war German government to pay the Allied victors imposed war reparations. This bank duplicated the folly that post Civil War Congress initiated following the American Civil War. Congress restricted the currency of the Greenback by one-third. This decision restricted wealth into the “Robber Baron” monopoly class hands.
Post the fall of Wall Street, Wilson’s National Bank made the exact same error and severely restricted the flow of currency. This error, the root cause of the Great Depression. Consequent to the Great Depression, Wilson’s National Bank, refused to issue further loans to Germany. This set off a catastrophic domino effect that witnessed the rise of Hitler’s Nazi Party which overthrew the Weimar Republic. Wilson’s National Bank made a fundamental shift in the cultures and customs practiced by the American people and Federal Governments. Like, for example, the British East India Company’s monopoly on tea, which resulted in the Boston Tea Party.
Once the Federal Government entered into the European fold of Central European economic “tradition” of Governments establishing Corporate monopolies, initiated likewise by the post Civil War ‘radical republicans’ in Congress, whose policies established the ‘Robber Baron’ monopoly class. This shift in “tradition” away from State intra-State trade autonomy, caused an American economic switch from Adam Smith’s lesafair economics to FDR’s John Maynard Keynes – Central Bank socialist economic central planning fiat currency. FDR made owning gold illegal.
Have made a digression from the גופא of this common law commentary to the Talmud in an attempt to differentiate “tradition” between T’NaCH\Talmudic Court-based Judicial Common Law to “tradition” of the Yad, Tur, Shulkan Aruch statute halachic religious ritual legalism. This issue raises … who determines the culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people; can our generation achieve Zionist self-determination and restore the Torah as the Written Constitution of our Republic of 12 Tribes in the Middle East; which includes the Talmud as the working model for our lateral common law Sanhedrin court Federal system; the Sanhedrin, mandated with the Constitutional power of Legislative Review over state and Federal government statute laws?
גופא – דתני האיש מקדש משום דקא בעי למיתני כסף וכסף מנ”ל? (דברים כב) כי יקח איש אישה. וכתיב התם (בראשית כג) נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני. וקיחה איקרי קנין.
Our Gemara now shoots an azimuth bearing. We have returned to our opening paragraph. Talmud directly weaves warp/weft threads to produce the “garments” of the Cohen priestly service within the Mishkan. This משל directly ties into the Book of שמות. What shapes and determines the Cohen “tradition” of practiced culture and custom – this the underlying study of the entire Talmud. Whereas statute law Judaism prioritizes religion, the Torah defines faith as צדק צדק תרדוף – judicial justice which strives to fairly compensate damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B.
The building of Jewish families, the bedrock whereby the chosen Cohen people live from generation to generation. A man marries a woman with the core obligation to produce children and educate these children in the oath brit alliance cut by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. This tohor time-oriented Av commandment defines the essence of the Book of בראשית.
Rabbinic Judaism changed the “tradition” of tohor time-oriented Av commandments to a subsidiary class of Torah commandments which require k’vanna. Some undefined term(s), understood as “concentration”; or for example, attention paid to the literal meaning of words printed in the Siddur. This error duplicates the avoda zara of both “daughter religions” vis-a-vis the revelation of the שם השם in the first Sinai commandment.
Statute law directly compares to translating the Divine Spirit Name to Words. The difference between directly viewing a beautiful sun-set and a camera picture taken of that beautiful sun-set. Exceptionally difficult for words to express the subtle distinction between shades of the same colors. The obvious difference between a painted work of art vs. a print of that painted work of art.
How much more so the Divine Spirit Name revelation at Sinai, expressed in the opening first commandment. Substituting word translations for Divine Spirits, like the 13 middot of the Horev revelation, herein defines the treif tumah Av tumah avoda zarah – the Sin of the Golden Calf – which defines the 2nd Sinai commandment, together and along with the precedent negative commandments which forbid 1. assimilation 2. intermarriage.
Oral Torah פרדס logic employs positive and negative Torah commandments as בניני אבות-precedents to interpret the mussar k’vanna of Av tohor time-oriented primary Torah commandments, which create the עולם הבא of the chosen Cohen people יש מאין – תמיד מעשה בראשית. This latter phrase repeated twice within the opening blessing of tefillah דאורייתא ק”ש.
Greek culture developed philosophy. Hebrew culture spins around the central axis of “Big Picture” ideas. The two cultures – day and night, oil and water — different. The ‘Golden Age’ of Spanish Jewry witnessed the Samaritan, Tzeddukim, Karaim assimilation avoda zarah of Jews wherein our rabbinic leaders functioned as the tip of the spear-head wherein they murdered the Judges of the Great Sanhedrin to worship the Golden Calf.
Brit does not correctly translate as covenant. Brit correctly understood – as a sworn alliance. Its now Elul: the King is in the fields. T’shuva requires that Jews remember/יום הזכרון the oaths wherein the Avot did the tohor time oriented commandment which continually creates the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.
The mitzva of קידושין serves as a בנין אב-precedent that interprets the k’vanna of the Av tohor time-oriented commandment – brit cut between the pieces. K’vanna requires prophetic mussar as its יסוד. This k’vanna separates the Priority Av tohor time-oriented commandments from the secondary positive & negative Torah & Talmudic mitzvot — which do not require k’vanna.
Reading words from a book simply does not compare to the discipline of shooting בנין אב bearing azimuths. Consequently, translating T’NaCH or Talmud, worse than an utter waste of time. People read these “books”, but fail to study common law. Common law/Oral Torah – no book can write down or contain. Why? Because the study of common law depends upon comparing similar Case/Rule precedents. The sages “wrote” the Oral Torah into the T’NaCH and Talmud. But a scholar must make the precedent search – not the printed book. The Talmud only functions as a guide. You can lead a donkey to the trough, but you cannot make that ass drink.
דכתיב (שם מט) השדה אשר קנה אברהם אי נמי (ירמיה לב) שדות בכסף יקנו — תני האשה נקנית.
Our Gemara jumps through a lot of hoops of T’NaCH kabbalah. The ass reads and moves ahead to follow the Gemara train of thought. The donkey stops and weighs the prophetic mussar contained by these Aggadic sources derived from T’NaCH Primary Sources. From my experiences in Yeshiva, the vast majority of Yeshiva asses do not make a common law study of T’NaCH nor Talmud primary sources. At best, they rely upon g’lut commentaries written over a thousand years later.
How utterly pathetic. Worse, the rabbis of these Yeshivot fail to demand that their students study common law. They too have fallen into the trap of assuming that the purpose of the Talmud – to shape and define religious halachic observance rather than training our youth to pursue righteous judicial justice within the borders of the oath-sworn brit lands of our Republic.
The disgrace that rabbis fail to discern the Life-death/blessing-curse distinction which forever separates the Torah blessing of living as the chosen Cohen people in ארץ ישראל from the Torah curse of enduring the judicial oppression of Par’o and his court system which defines the entire history of Jewry in alien foreign lands which culminated with the Shoah. The Yeshiva rabbis compare to brown-nose boot-licker syphilitic-syphicants.
They do not teach Yeshiva students how to study the Torah לשמה. They do not teach פרדס\י”ג מידות Oral Torah logic. They pervert the T’NaCH and Talmud into children’s bedtime stories. Their belief system of statute halachic religious law has taken Jews completely off the דרך. Hence, no different from the Wilderness generation, they refused to encourage a mass aliyah to the Palestine Mandate before the British slammed the door shut with their 2nd White Paper.
Their moral cowardice provoked the Torah Shoah curse, just as the Wilderness Generation has no portion in the World to Come. Prophetic mussar, if easy to swallow, the generations of Israel would not have murdered the prophets. How many times did Israel seek the death of Moshe? Prophetic mussar has a bite worse than any other predator on the Planet Earth.
To grow and mature the seeds of prophetic mussar within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart defines the purpose of the revelation of the Torah, expressed through the wisdom of the NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur. Hence the translation of mussar as “rebuke” as brain-dead idiotic as to translate t’shuva, unilaterally determined as repentance! Treif translations suck. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.
Learning how to live as the time-oriented commandment created – Cohen people – requires more than simply a primary first grade education that instructs children how to read. T’NaCH & Talmud codified into books. To quote Snape of Harry Potter: “Obviously.” But the wisdom kabbalah of Oral Torah פרדס\י”ג מידות logic requires the patience and skill of making precedent bearing interpretations which translate Mishnaic living reality to Gemara contour maps, herein separates the pursuit of dynamic judicial justice from static dogma of religious halachic statute law.
The study of Jewish common law requires independent research. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. Worlds separate the donkey from the ass. The latter, clearly a pejorative metaphor comparable how Torah common law perceives the Xtian/Islamic counterfeit Protocols of the Elders of Zion religions – ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. The Yad, Tur, and Aruch statute halachic codes follow the path trodden by these two gross counterfeit religions.
A clear example how the Rambam Yad avoda zara worshipped Islam’s false notion of some Universal ONE God Monotheism nonsense.
The 10 plagues judged the Gods of Egypt. Elijah confronted the priests who worshipped Baal! The notion that the Torah commands monotheism confuses Islam with Torah. Flat out just that simple. The Talmud states that the Goyim rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Goyim do not worship their own Gods? Of course Goyim worship their own Gods. Since Goyim do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, therefore Goyim by definition worship other Gods.
Many societies have their own deities and religious systems, which can be seen as a form of polytheism. Hinduism clearly proves that Islamic monotheism – false. The seven mitzvot bnai Noach refers to gere toshav temporary residents living within the borders of Judea. It does not teach the absurd notion of some Universal God. Islam teaches this avoda zarah.
For a ger toshav to violate one of the 7 mitzvot – this qualifies as a Capital Crime/death penalty offence. Only a Sanhedrin court could judicate a Capital Crime/death penalty case. The jurisdiction of all Sanhedrin courts, only within the borders of Judea. Hence the absurd notion that the 7 mitzvot Bnai Noach applies Universally to all Goyim, simply pie in the sky bat shit crazy.
The Torah in the Book of D’varim defines two types of Goyim; the ger toshav in mesechta Sanhedrin and the Nacree/Canaani in Baba Kama. Concerning treif meat the Book of D’varim writes: permitted to give the treif meat to the ger toshav or sell the treif meat to the Canaani. The Talmud defines the Chumash. It does not rule independent from the Written Torah Constitutional Mandate.
Mesechta Sanhedrin whose Aggada addresses the 7 mitzvot bnai noach therefore refers to the ger toshav of the Torah. Mesechta Baba Kama whose Halacha rules that an Israel exempt to pay damages to a Nacree for damages inflicted upon his goods or person – this mesechta refers to Canaani in the Book of D’varim. Therefore the idea that Ger Toshav/Bnai Noach refers to all Goyim in all lands, utterly absurd.
Therefore its patently false for anyone, especially Goyim or even later Jews, to declare that Torah commands belief in a Universal God when the Talmud teaches that only Israel accepted the Torah at Sinai and that both Yishmael and Esau rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. That Goyim living in Goyim lands – if they profane the 7 mitzvot bnai noach – that a non existent Sanhedrin can put them to death for violating these 7 mitzvot while these Goyim live under the court authority of their own nations! Therefore Torah does not command monotheism. Monotheism profanes the 2nd Sinai commandment.
קידושין
Order serves as the bedrock foundation for פרדס logic analysis. This term סוגיה prioritizes subject “issues” raised by each and every sub-chapter. The Gemara analysis of the faceted language of the Mishna broken down into easily identifiable “sections”. My Rav, Aaron Nemuraskii taught me: First Order then speed. The first time we completed the Sha’s Bavli together we did it in four months. But prior to making a study of the Talmud, Rav Aaron required development of basic skills. 1) Read the Chumash in Hebrew like I could read an English newspaper. 2) Do the same with the Aramaic Targums. 3) Make an in-depth across the board study of classic Midrash. Achieving this foundation took almost 5 years of intense study.
Rav Nemuraskii did not accept a salary from the Yeshiva. The integrity of this Man reminds me of President Trump who refuses to take a salary as President of the United States. During these crucial five years we would learn, or he permitted me to study privately in my dorm room alone, due to my Dyslexia “sugya”. Surrounding outside movement, noise my kryptonite. Only this Rav and Dr. Dunning, my Russian history professor at Texas A&M ever recognized my dyslexia “sugya”. Dr. Dunning rather than insist that I sit in a class-room demanded the substitute of my doing research in the University library while sitting in a private carrel. Both men demanded excellence in scholarship. In the latter case, wrote a thesis that argued the genius of Stalin in that he enticed Hitler to invade Russia prior to the expected fall of Britain, which forced Germany to fight a two-front war. Used this thesis to explain why Stalin withdrew unto complete social isolation for about a week.
Under the leadership of the Czar, the long drawn out fight known as WWI caused that government of three centuries to collapse – burned in the flames of internal revolution which pitted Social Revolutionary anarchists against Mensheviks. The Mensheviks favored that Soviet local Parliaments regulate all bureaucracies which in their turn regulated industry and trade.
Bakunin viewed the “Establishment” State – bureaucratic machine as inherently oppressive which fundamentally required dismantlement. Marxist-Leninism by stark contrast, re-established Czarist Russia’s bureaucratic autocracy. The political assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian nationalist initiated WWI and lead to the establishment of Kerensky Russian Provisional Government in 1917. This first post Czarist government based itself upon the anarchist Social Revolutionary Party/Bakunin founder\ who like the Serbian nationalist group – called the Black Hand – favored assassination as a key tool to achieve political change. The Kerensky government separated from Bakunin’s political ideas over the matter of political assassinations.
The Social Revolutionary Bakunin Party did advocate for political violence and assassination as a anarchist challenge to terminate the inherently “corrupt” bureaucratic State; yet in post Revolution Russia its leaders pursued a more reformist agenda, aiming to stabilize the state rather than dismantle it through assassination. The Social Revolutionary Party, followed and accepted Bakunin’s views concerning the anarchist value of political violence as an anarchist challenge to rest power away from the State and its corrupt bureaucracies. They justified such actions as essential to destabilize oppressive bureaucratic structures, aligning with Bakunin’s broader revolutionary goals.
Bakunim opposed the rigid Marx theory which organized revolution as a fight between the Classes which pitted the bourgeoisie (capitalists) against the proletariat (working class). The latter political idea lead to the establishment of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” under Lenin. Bakunim’s Social Revolutionaries Peasants Party prioritized a society organized around communes and federations, collective ownership free from any centralized bureaucratic regulatory power. Important to remember that Czarist bureaucratic Autocracy, like the Confederate States of America, clung to an agricultural based, class rule society, rather than an industrial based society – until defeat through wars forced change in Bolshevik Russia and the crushed Southern States – the ashes of General Sherman’s Atlanta, and his march to the Sea.
What does this have to due with קידושין? Does the Talmud institute the institutions of religious law as the Rambam, Tur, and Shulkan Aruch advocate or Torah as the written Constitution of the 12 Tribe Republic, which enshrines צדק צדק תרדוף as the faith mandate for Great Sanhedrin משנה תורה-Legislative Review as its Constitutional mandate? Clearly the former idea favors the realities of oppressed g’lut Jews. Whereas the latter vision exists as a prophesy for the restoration of a Constitutional Jewish Republic within the borders of an Independent “Zionist” Jewish State.
How to define these two opposing, fundamentally different interpretations in a word? Power vs. Justice. Contrast the lawfare employed against Trump and his Maga supporters before and after he won the 2024 election! Compare this to Darth Vader who said unto Luke in the opening Star Wars movie: “You do not know the power of the Dark-Side of the Force”. The Rambam second quoted halacha made kosher child rape to accomplish קידושין in his halachic code. In Chullin Rambam’s halacha prioritizes knowledge over יראת שמים in shechita – butchery of animals for human consumption. But the Apecorus (or Epicurus), possesses the required knowledge, and yet the sages within the Gemara ruled such shechita as treif. Clearly, this person lacks יראת שמים; the awareness that protecting ones’ good name reputation understood and prioritized as the most essential requirement for any public service or commercial trade.
Its this fundamental distinction which separates Torah Constitutional governance, expressed through משנה תורה common law Sanhedrin Federal courtrooms from g’lut religious ritual halachot which separates Justice from Power – tohor from tuma. Hence have compared קידושין of the Talmud to the Bakunin vs Marxist socialist political theories as a way to high-light the sharp separation between Justice from Power; righteousness from oppression.
Have openly despised the Rambam halachic codification as a perversion of Judicial common law courtrooms within the borders of the oath sworn lands vs. static ritual halachot for g’lut Jewry to be religious and therein believe in God. The Torah has no such commandment to believe in God.
Mishna Chagigah 2:1:
משנה חגיגה ב:א. אין דורשין במרכבה בשלושה דברים: באדם, ובעלמא, ובשמות. וכל העוסק בַּמרכבה, אין לו חלק לעולם הבא.
The soul of Man; the interpretation of the Isaiah’s vision concerning the Divine Chariot; and Divine Names. This warning provokes a strong Yatzir for good and evil within the Heart. Impossible to learn Isaiah and Yehezkel’s vision simply by reading the words of these prophets by themselves alone.
This Mishna warns against the NT avoda zara error of attempting to learn “Big Picture” ideas which the prophets spoke without cementing these later prophetic mussar to Torah commandments. The NT av tuma avoda zara did this error with Moshiach. It failed to learn the mitzva of Moshiach to the precedent of Moshe standing before the court of Par’o touching the matter of straw withheld, while the slave overlords beat Israelites for our failure to meet our brick production quotas.
Moshe anointed the House of Aaron as Moshiach, not to make absolutely silly and utterly worthless ritual barbeques unto heaven-sacrifices. Rather to dedicate oath brit dedication of tohor middot\מלכות/ which directly impact Israelite social behavior thereafter. The mitzva of Moshiach from the Torah, rests upon the burden to rule the oath sworn conquered lands with judicial justice which makes fair compensation of damages inflicted.
The vision of the Merkabah, a vision of the mitzva of Moshiach. באדם learns from the Menorah in the Mishkan vision description. The brit cut between the pieces wherein childless Avram cut his soul through an oath alliance; the dedication of Cohen seed life in the world to come. What defines the soul of Man? The creation of the world to come future born soul Cohen seed. Herein expressly defines the k’vanna of the mitzva of קידושין. The 7 Menorah branches refers to the 7 Yom Tov “soul of the Cohen seed of the Avot”: Pesach-Shevuot; Rosh HaShana-Yom Kippur; Sukkot-Sh’meni Atzaret and Shabbat. These 7 Holy periods, they affix Divine Names for the Cohen “soul” dedicated on those holy days; Pesach: Nefesh (Divine Name) Ya; Shevuot: Ruach (Divine Name) Ha’El; Rosh HaShana: Neshama (Divine Name) El; Yom Kippur: Chiyya (Divine Name) Elohim; Sukkot: Yechida (Divine Name) El Shaddai; Shemeni Atzaret: Nefesh Kalli (Divine Name) Eish HaElohim; and Shabbat הבדלה (Divine Name) Shalom.
בעלמא do not contemplate concerning the creation of the physical world, like as does treif Xtian fundamentalist avoda zara. The dedication of the Book of בראשית introduces the subject of “Av” time-oriented Torah commandments! בשמות the abstract naming of עולם הבא as yet unborn Cohen Children souls through Divine Names in compliance with the oath sworn alliance cut upon the “soul” of Avram at the brit between the pieces. The cutting of the animals into their opposing halves at that Av-brit, teaches the prophetic mussar, just expressed, by means of משל\נמשל.
This סודי kabbalah concealed during g’lut oppression. The Mishna, codified in 210 CE, broke the tradition of not writing down the Oral Torah Great Sanhedrin courts legal rulings. The Mishna Chagigah 2:1 warns not to make reactionary, shallow, one source interpretations – like the Goyim do with their NT shallow theology driven interpretation to place the mitzva of Moshiach into a clean box. The Mishna, a common law legal system which fundamentally requires making a דרוש-פשט search of how the language of the prophets serves as a precedent wherein they interpret the k’vanna of Torah positive and negative commandments elevated to tohor time oriented commandments. Failure to heed this dire warning defines both the NT and Rambam Yad av tuma avoda zara heresies.
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
הלהות גדולות הלכות קידושין
אסיר ליה גבר ישראל למנסב איתתא
This opening line prohibits sexual acts as a means to acquire a woman as a wife without the time oriented k’vanna of the mitzva of קידושין. This fundamental distinction separate the kosher B’HaG common law halachic code from the treif av tuma Rambam statute law halachic code which perverts the oath brit cut between the pieces touching the life and birth of the chosen Cohen people throughout all generations in time to a profaned religious ritual observance that Jews in g’lut can easily do and keep.
Making ritual observance of Torah commandments and rabbinic halakot defines the justification by by רשעים to pervert the Talmud away from the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva, Yishmael, HaGalili – their understanding of פרדס as a unique inductive reason logic system which systematically compares Case/Rule to similar Case\Rule precedents. The burden of modern Zionism, now that we have achieved national Independence, to restore the Torah as the written Constitution of our Republic and the Sanhedrin Federal Court system, which has the mandate of Legislative Review of all law passed by the Knesset, as the basis of Jewish justice — as opposed to political power — within the borders of the oath sworn lands.
Common law courtrooms no more resemble ritual halachic religious observances than Brit compares to covenant. Only a shallow reactionary ignorance declares that the meaning of brit the same meaning as the alien puke covenant. Absolutely no Torah mitzva for Jews to live in accursed g’lut. The Wilderness generation serves as witness to this cold hard fact. Raising a handkerchief as a symbol for “acquisition” and intent for the time oriented mitzva of קידושין, compares to marriage after visiting a whore-house.
בה”ג: עד דמקדש לה בכספא או בתבובתא או בביאה, וכולהי בסהדי\וכולי בעדי. בכסף מדאוריתא מנלן. דכתיב (דברים כד,א) כי יקח איש אשה וכתיב התם (בראשית כג:יג) נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני. מה קיחה דהתם בכספא אף קיחה דהכא בכספא. ותנן האשה נקנית בשלשה דרכים, וקונה את עצמה בשני דרכים במיתת הבעל ובגט. נקנת בכסף בשטר ובביאה, בכסף, ב”ש אומרים בדינר ובשוה דינר. בה”א בפרוטה ובשוה פרוטה, הילכתא כבית הילל. וכמה היא פרוטה וכו.
Contrast Karo’s כסף משנה super-commentary on the Rambam who declared money as merely a rabbinic mitzva! Karo’s statute law clear as the sun in the sky on a cloudless day, did not understand the priority which T’NaCH and Talmudic common law bases all Torah learning upon precedents! G’lut religious statute law, based simply upon the Karo commentary upon the Rambam could not care a less about precedents. Hence the Beit Yosef collage of Reshonim opinions on any given halacha does not base itself upon the T’NaCH/Talmudic יסוד which absolutely requires all Torah learning expressed through the discipline of bringing פרדס inductive reasoning which compares Case/Din to similar Case\Din courtroom rulings. Karo’s Shulkan Aruch focused solely upon g’lut religious ritual observances; his code failed to express or reveal any Torah wisdom which teaches Av Torah time oriented commandments, as the Talmudic framers explicitly intended.
Never as any of the sick book licker rabid rabbis ever criticize Karo’s contradiction against a Gaon scholar! Their inept ירידות הדורות box thinking which openly declares that later generations cannot dispute with earlier generation as vacuous as air inside a balloon. Off the דרך Orthodox Judaism statute law rabbis, they have no shame.
Bakunin’s revolt against bureaucratic autocracy resembles the Talmudic revolt against the frozen halakhic codification of Rambam and Karo. Where Marx restored a new form of centralized coercion, Rambam’s Yad replaced deliberative common law with legislative absolutism. Both substitute administration for judicious common law lateral Sanhedrin Federal courtroom justice. קידושין simply not some sterile religious ritual that thrives in g’lut. But rather this mesechta of the Talmud teaches a strong mussar rebuke to the generations. Don’t get to comfortable in g’lut. Don’t duplicate the false oath sworn by the pre-Shoah generations of European Orthodox Judaism. Acceptance of the Sinai revelation predicates upon seeking the restoration of a public constitutional Republic, comparable to a man who seeks a wife.
The perpetuation of the oath time oriented brit Cohen-seed from generation to generation defines the destiny of the children of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. Ritual religious halachic observance in g’lut as useful as sucking tits from a boar hog. The Torah, taught through the משל of the mitzva of קידושין instructs the דיוק נמשל that Geulah from g’lut Egyptian legal oppression depends not upon observance of empty religious ritual observances, g’lut Jews cursed by the Torah curse that they have lost the wisdom how to obey the Torah לשמה. Rather Geulah depends upon the strengch of our cries, like we made in Egypt, which express our yearning to rule our homeland with judicial common law just courtrooms. The difference between Rambam’s halakhic code and the Talmud’s constitutional jurisprudence, the difference between Power and Justice — between exile and sovereignty.
Now that the Jewish people have restored sovereignty, our task is not ritual observance but judicial redemption — to rebuild the Torah as written Constitution and restore Sanhedrin legislative review as the Republic’s foundation. Only then will צדק replace כח — justice replace power — and קידושין fulfill its purpose as oath-brit of national rebirth of the chosen Cohen people.
Why does the blessing of Shabbat repeatedly refer to “מלאכתך” both in the evening & morning קידוש blessing which distinguishes between shabbat from chol?
מלאכתך closer to the word מלאך rather than עבודה which refers to “work” מלאכתך. Therefore the idea of the mitzva of shabbat to cease to create life rather than “work”. Granted that a man needs to work, from the sweat of his brow in order to live, as the Torah refers to Adam after HaShem expelled Adam from the Garden of Eden. Therefore the mitzva of shabbat, a person does this ‘time oriented mitzva’ (which requires k’vanna) Jews who keep shabbat, they develop the conscious k’vanna not to create מלאכים\life, like as did Yaacov who sent a מלאך to his brother Esau who came to meet him surrounded with an Army lead by 400 Officers, according to Targum Uziel, in order to kill Yaacov and his entire family.
The Torah states that Esau greeted Yaacov with a kiss. But Rashi teaches that he wanted to bite his brother’s neck. Akin to Bil’aam who intended to curse Israel but HaShem sent a מלאך and Bil’aam blessed Israel to the horror of the king of Moav. Swearing a Torah oath requires שם ומלכות dedications of the שם השם blown from the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart, as opposed to blow air from the lungs when pronouncing words framed from the lips, tongue, and teeth. The mitzva of shabbat absolutely requires that bnai brit Israel make this fundamental discernment which separates k’vanna from empty rote ritualism. The spiritual concept that Torah oaths can create life as in מלאכים tohor spirits achieved through the dedication of מלכות, a term that makes a רמז to מלאכה. Specifically a person can dedicate tohor Spirits revealed first to Moshe at Horev following the sin of the Golden Calf: ‘אל רחום וחנון וכו. Hence the time oriented mitzva of Shabbat reveals the holy dedication of פרדס thirteen Oral Torah middot.
Therefore, the substance crux of shabbat observance distinguishes between cessation of the creation of life rather than the false focus of not doing work. HaShem informed g’lut Adam that he must work to live. Prioritizing shabbat as not doing work misses the point of Shabbat observance which separates the holiness of LIFE over the g’lut need for working in order to live. A key but subtle distinction that avoda zara religion totally miss all together. Life prioritized over g’lut “work”, defines the k’vanna of shabbat observance throughout the generations.