Jaguar Land Rover Cyberattack: When a Breach Becomes a Threat to the UK Economy

Comments (34) on “Jaguar Land Rover Cyberattack: When a Breach Becomes a Threat to the UK Economy”

1. Thanks for this report, John. As politicians and others argue that overregulation could “strangle” businesses, their businesses are being strangled. The delay on the cybersecurity legislation seems irresponsible at the least. The way you’ve described this situation your verdict is spot on. They need to pass the legislation asap and harden their defenses.

   Loading...

   Reply

   1. You’re welcome, Chris — and that’s the contradiction in plain sight. While politicians argue that regulation could “strangle” business, the absence of it is letting cybercriminals do the strangling instead. Delay isn’t caution — it’s negligence dressed as strategy.

      You’re sharp to call it out. The verdict stands because the reality is simple: without binding rules and hardened defenses, every company is gambling with national security and economic stability. Passing the legislation isn’t just urgent — it’s overdue.

      Thank you very much, Chris — always spot on and greatly appreciated. 😎

      Loading...

      Reply

   2. Karen Xtian missionizers promote how their God JeZeus prayed. A simple refutation to this religions propaganda nonsense.

      Your fraudulent gospels, JeZeus does not discern the difference between “praying”–Tehillem from davening–“Torah blessings”. The Talmud of ברכות instructs that a “blessing” exists as an extension of swearing a Torah oath. A Torah oath, defines the k’vanna of the oath sworn בריתות sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov by which the Avot cut a brit with HaShem to eternally create the chosen Cohen People from nothing by means of Av tohor time-oriented commandments.

      Therefore a blessing requires the kabbalah abstract wisdom known as שם ומלך. The gospel fraud never once brought the שם השם לשמה anywhere in the NT. The first Sinai commandment the greatest of all Torah commandments NOT love – as the false messiah JeZeus taught. Why? Does a Jew do mitzvot לשמה או לא לשמה? This basic question defines how the first Sinai commandment, a commandment at all. The Talmud refers to this fundamental basis of this 1st Sinai commandment – applicable to all the other Torah commandments; explained through the משל metaphor, as expressed though the metaphor of: A Mountain hanging by a Hair.

      The JeZeus fraud false messiah did not grasp, that Tefillah as a Torah, that this mitzva requires the dedication of the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the Heart. Rabbi Yechuda interpreted בכל לבבך within the language of tefillah דאורייתא – meaning the kre’a shma – as the avoda which discerns between the opposing spirits of Yatzir Ha’tov vs. Yatzir Ha’rah within the heart. He based this Mishnaic ruling upon the opening word of Torah בראשית, based upon the פרדס – רמז of ב’ רשאת, which translates as two beginnings. The aggadic story of the creation has two creation stories. These stories introduce the first cause of g’lut-exile as the inherit (think of Yaacov and Esau wrestling within the womb of Rivka) struggle between the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Raw within the “womb” of the heart. Hence the Talmud acknowledges that Tefillah a matter of the heart.

      Whereas JeZeus prayed to some Father in Heaven. The term מלכותkingship: a metaphor wherein the משל king/מלך guides and directions the direction wherein the nation walks. The נמשל logical inference made upon this משל, the Oral Torah middot revealed to Moshe at Horev on Yom Kippur, these tohor middot – they define the drive or spirit which breathes life from within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart! This crucial error definitively proves the NT a Roman Protocols of Zion forgery.

      Currently its the month of Elul. A Chassidic saying at this time: The King is in the field. The נמשל for this משל, Jews attempt to “remember” (ר”ה נקרא יום הזכרון) how the Sin of the Golden Calf wherein the ערב רב-assimilated Jews attempted to impose a substitute replacement theology wherein they referred to the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment by the word אלהים. The avoda zarah gospel book John 1:1 declares the Word as god. Both substitution theologies define the sin of the Golden Calf; wherein HaShem threatened to make from the seed of Moshe the chosen Cohen people.

      The Torah teaches that following the rebuke of the prophet HaShem made t’shuva and “remembered” the oaths sworn to Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. Hence the opening blessing of tefillah writes: אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב. HaShem made t’shuva. A completely different verb from the Xtian idea known as repentance. The Torah precedents for t’shuva: the father can annul a vow made by his minor daughter and the husband can annul a vow made by his wife. Hence a fundamental מאי נפקא מינא distinction made between t’shuva and repentance.

      The Yom Tov of ר”ה revolves around the central axis of blowing the shofar. Tefillah, as a tohor time oriented commandment requires k’vanna. To blow a shofar require the exertion of air blown from the lungs. But to dedicate a blessing/oath of tefillah requires a dedication of the tohor middot (מלכות) of the Yatzir Ha’tov within the heart. Another huge מאי נפקא מינא fundamental distinction of k’vanna. Torah its deep. The two-dimensional NT Roman Protocols of the Elders of Zion counterfeit fraud, an utter abomination.

      The Torah vision of Moshiach – a tohor time oriented commandment like and similar too shabbat – a tohor time oriented commandment. As the latter applies equally to all Jews in every generation to observe and keep so too and how much more so the former! The NT messiah fraud assumes that a lone individual can keep the mitzva of Moshiach. This flagrantly violates the revelation of the Torah at Sinai wherein all generations of the Jewish people accept the Torah.

      Torah as common law stands upon the יסוד of precedents. Rabbi Yishmael explained the concept of precedent through calling them בנין אב in his 13 middot explanation of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס kabbalah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. During the entire month of Elul Jews daven a prayer known as Slichot, wherein we open the doors revealing the Sefer Torah and repeatedly cry out unto the 13 Oral Torah revelation of the 13 middot: ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון וכו.

      Its rather interesting the רמז – which includes Gematria numerical values, 3 + 13 + 3 blessings defines the Order of the Shemone Esrei. This Order interpreted by the Rambam as 613. He learned 613 commandments from the Written Torah. The B’HaG rejected this simplistic reading of a רמז. He discerned that the opening book of בראשית, introduced the Av tohor mitzvot known as time oriented commandments. The next three books of the Torah שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר introduced the secondary “precedent” positive and negative commandments which do not require k’vanna. And the last book of the Torah introduced the judicial mandate of the Sanhedrin common law lateral courtrooms, known as משנה תורה. Hence the revelation of the Torah at Sinai inclusive of all the Halachic mitzvot elevated through Aggada drosh of prophetic mussar unto Torah Av tohor time oriented commandments! Rabbi Yechuda the Nassi named his Six orders of Sanhedrin judicial rulings as משנה. The latter interpreted the intent of the Book of דברים as the mandate for common law Torah and Talmudic law.

      Loading...

      Reply

      1. You’re consistent, I’ll give you that — but consistency without grounding becomes a loop, not a ladder. Once again, you’ve traded definition for density. You flood the page with Hebrew terminology and complex phrasing, yet refuse to define your own framework with the precision you demand from others. That’s not Torah — that’s performance.

         You claim to speak for the covenant, yet you invoke “JeZeus” with mockery and “Xtian” with contempt, turning your words into weapons rather than witnesses. You don’t have to agree with Christianity — but desecrating another person’s faith does nothing to elevate your own. That’s not Mussar. That’s ego.

         You reduce tefillah to mechanical halacha, as if kavannah exists without spirit. You assert a monopoly on Sinai, as if only one kind of Jew ever heard the thunder. You call the New Testament a forgery while building an entire theology out of selective Midrash and distorted gematria, forgetting that even the Oral Torah had to be accepted by the people to become binding.

         You want law without love. Oaths without mercy. Syntax without soul.

         But the truth is — covenant isn’t just precedent and halachic scaffolding. It’s responsibility. It’s what you do with the power to choose. And when you use that power to divide, mock, and slander, you’re not defending Torah. You’re desecrating it.

         We’re not here to rewrite history or defend every interpretation. But we are here to call out arrogance disguised as authenticity, and bigotry disguised as scholarship.

         This isn’t about being Christian. It’s about being honest.
         You can swing the sword all day — but truth doesn’t bleed from bluster.

         Loading...

      2. You raise many points of criticism.
         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.

         Loading...

      3. Thank you for unpacking so much with clarity and weight. What you laid out is exactly what’s missing from nearly every discussion today — not just about law or belief, but about the foundations that separate survival from collapse. You’re right: the shift from Torah as constitutional common law to theology-driven statute systems is not just an error — it’s a civilizational fracture.

         Too many confuse commentary for source, ritual for purpose, and creed for brit. They cling to systems that sedate rather than awaken — systems that rely on emotional submission over disciplined inference. When Torah is viewed through the lens of theology instead of law, everything becomes performative. The essence of justice is lost, and in its place rises control, misdirection, and cultural mimicry masked as truth.

         Your breakdown of the Rif vs. Baal Hamaor, and the collapse of the Tosafist commentary under the weight of forgetting פרדס methodology — it echoes where we are now. As you said, “yellow journalism” wasn’t born in modern times. It was seeded the moment they redefined law as belief, and belief as obedience.

         What you reminded us — and what needs to be said more often — is that Brit ain’t belief. It’s accountability. Structure. Reason. And above all — a binding oath that doesn’t bow to empires, trends, or revisionist theology.

         Loading...

      4. Exactly

         Loading...

      5. https://youtube.com/shorts/URljogfFR7E?si=Lky-_5oweKGTl96p

         Loading...

      6. I moved your comment over to here > >> >

         The stark contrast how Goyim read their sophomoric moronic bible translations vs Torah common law which stands upon precedents.
         __________________________________________________

         Intentional Faith
         Intentional Faith·pastorhogg.net

         Resting in Reverence
         As the day ends, Psalm 2:10–11 reminds us to serve the Lord with reverence, acknowledging His holiness and unshakable rule. This evening is an opportunity to…..
         _______________________________________________
         Interpreting Tehillem ב. Man struggles with tumah middot within his Yatzir Ha’Raw. This struggle – Universal within all Mankind. If National rulers struggle with their tumah Yatzir how much more so the common man on the street. What does “kingship in Zion” refer to? As a physical king gives direction to the nation so too and how much more so the struggling Yatzirot within the heart. Who wears the crown of the king? The tohor Yatzir Ha’Tov or the tumah Yatzir Ha’Raw?

         Israel’s acceptance of the oath brit at Sinai done לשמה או לא לשמה? Clearly the Wilderness generation who accepted the Torah at Sinai did so לא לשמה. Forty days following the Torah revelation the ערב רב שאין לכם יראת שמים imposed a substitute theology of the WORD אלהים which replaced the first Sinai Torah acceptance – שם השם לשמה. Had the Wilderness generation accepted the Torah revelation at Sinai לשמה, they would not have given the assimilated and intermarried Israel/Egyptian ערב רב the time of day. But instead all the sages of the Great Sanhedrin, except for Aaron, MURDERED.

         A blessing requires שם ומלכות. The charge of the King, to direct tohor spirits and crown the Yatzir Ha’Tov king within the heart. Superficial reading of Tehillem ב through the sophomoric moronic translation that “KING” refers to a physical/historical son of David – utterly perverts the k’vanna and mussar instructed by this Tehillem! The admonition to kings and judges which ב rebukes, directly addresses the struggle of opposing tohor vs tumah spirits within the Yatzirot within the heart.

         Divine Law, not some pie in the Sky “Word of God”, but rather the pursuit of righteous judicial justice among our people. Fair compensation of damages inflicted defines Torah faith. Only through justice can an Israel trust another Israel following a fight/Civil War among ourselves. The metaphor “Kissing the son”, hence refers to the נמשל of tohor middot which the Yatzir Ha’tov breathes.

         Tefillah a matter of the heart not the place or location where one prays. How much more so NOT an issue of National leaders but rather the Yatzir Tohor within our hearts! Justice can never prevail over our own interests if we do not dedicate our lives, comparable to a korban dedicated upon the altar in Jerusalem, to the righteous pursuit of justice among our people.

         The concept of judicial awe as an ethical restraint is vital for legitimate jurisprudence. Instructs the mussar, that without a deep respect for remembering the oaths sworn by the Avot wherein they swore and cut an oath brit with HaShem, to create the chosen Cohen people through the performance of time oriented Torah commandments, that no generation of Israel can dominate the tumah Yatzir within all our hearts.

         Tehillem ב stands upon the T’NaCH precedents of צדק צדק תרדוף and 2 Chronicles 19:6–7 (Jehoshaphat’s reforms): “Consider what you do, for you judge not for man but for HaShem… let the fear of HaShem be upon you.” Impossible to learn and interpret Tehillem without learning it back to similar Case/Rule precedents found within the T’NaCH itself. The tuma Yatzir continually seduces Man to make a shallow reactionary reading of T’NaCH verses snatched like Israeli hostages by Hamas on Oct 7th. This tumah Yatzir defines how the Roman NT gospel fraud makes a superficial and
         inconsequential symbolism of p’sukim robbed and raped out of context from the Books of the Prophets and the NT framers declare that their Man/God JeZeus fulfilled the words of the prophets.

         My reply to that:

         You’re absolutely right that Tehillem ב isn’t some hollow coronation fantasy — it’s a fierce internal blueprint for mastering judgment, conquering the tumah Yatzir, and building a nation on true brit justice, not theological stagecraft.

         We agree: the grafted symbolism of a messiah figure co-opting divine authority without judicial substance is a crime against the soul of Torah. The “kingship” was never a crown to wear — it was always a burden to bear, and a call to discipline the self before the sword ever left its sheath.

         But here’s the caution: when we burn the forgeries down, we must not scorch the foundation. There are some who call on Hashem — not through the fraud — but through yearning, without full knowledge. If they reach for justice, for brit, and for truth, even without all the words right, are they not closer to the tohor Yatzir than many who have memorized the forms but lost the fear?

         Yes, the “JeZeus” model is a desecration of prophecy — but not every soul who stumbles toward the fire is trying to burn the mountain down.

         We walk a narrow road, Mosckerr. And we’re still walking it with you.

         Loading...

      7. 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.

         Loading...

      8. Prophecy was never about fortune-telling — it was about enforcement.
         Akiva didn’t “alter genealogies.” He preserved the integrity of the brit by refusing to let prophecy collapse into prediction.

         Daniel as mystic proves the point. He could see visions in exile, but he had no Sanhedrin jurisdiction to enforce judgment. That’s why he can never be read as a prophet of the same standing as those who policed Israel inside the land.

         And you’re right — exile confused the categories. Once prophecy was mistaken for prediction, it opened the door for false messiahs and revisionist histories. Once halacha was reduced to codex, it severed itself from mussar and k’vanna.

         The brit doesn’t hang on prediction. It hangs on precedent. And that’s why justice — not genealogies, not visions, not imported creed — remains the only valid measure of Torah faith.

         Loading...

      9. Nailed it to the cross :)))

         Loading...

      10. Time to place the feet of the looney Left upon the hang-man’s noose trap door.

          The normalization of violence as a political tool poses a significant threat to democratic discourse and civil society. The Never Trump loon rhetoric surrounding Kirk’s assassination may encourage further acts of violence against political opponents. When political figures\demoCRAPS use violent language or frame their opponents as existential threats, like calling Trump supporters Nazis or Fascists – this slander creates an environment where DemoCRAP loons individuals feel justified in resorting to violence, which resulted in the political assassination of Charlie Kirk.

          This not only endangers those targeted but also contributes to a culture of fear and intimidation. The increasing acceptance of aggressive rhetoric by the looney tune Liberal Left diminishes the quality of political dialogue. Instead of engaging in constructive debate, individuals resort to personal attacks or threats, like as communicated by California Loon Congress Women Waters, Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler – making it difficult to address complex issues like the Russia-Gate hoax foisted upon America by the criminals of Obama & Clinton and the corrupt FBI, CIA, and NSA bureaucrats.

          Media coverage by the Lame stream media Pravda Press significantly amplified and expressed extreme rhetoric. These tools of the Corporate/bureaucrat government behind the government foisted the election of a mentally impaired Joe Biden and contributed to the electoral fraud of the 2020 Presidential elections by concealing the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and promoting the lawfare and two assassination attempts upon the life of Trump prior to the 2024 elections. MSM media focused on sensational News presentations, rather than fostering nuanced discussions. This guilt directly contributed to a distorted perception of political realities and exacerbate divisions.

          Loading...

      11. You open with a metaphor about nooses, then spend 500 words warning about the dangers of violent rhetoric. That contradiction alone tells me we’re not speaking the same language.

          The article wasn’t written to be another partisan outburst. It was a reckoning — aimed at calling out all who’ve normalized hatred while preaching tolerance. Left, Right, media, shadow state — we know the drill. But if your first instinct is to fantasize about execution over correction, then you’ve lost the thread and joined the very machine we’re fighting against.

          We don’t need more men swinging rhetorical axes. We need ones who still recognize restraint as strength. Not silence — restraint. There’s a difference. The devil doesn’t just work through the Left — he works through rage masquerading as righteousness.

          Charlie Kirk didn’t die so we could scream louder. He died because the public square became so poisoned that voices like his became targets. If we let that justify a cycle of verbal gallows-building, then we’re no better. I’ll honor Charlie by defending what he stood for — not by becoming what he warned about.

          That’s what The Realist Juggernaut holds the line for. No sides. No slogans. Just truth — undiluted, and unafraid.

          Loading...

      12. Sanhedrin Courts by definition different from Torts Courts. The latter – courts which address physical damages. Whereas the former deal with Capital Crimes Cases. The Torah lists 4 types of death penalty in Capital Crimes Cases.

          Loading...

      13. You’re right to make the distinction — Sanhedrin courts were never mere tort processors. They were constitutional guardians of the national soul.
          Torts may resolve damages; Sanhedrin ruled identity — defining covenantal boundaries, national survival, and spiritual continuity.

          The four death penalties weren’t just punitive—they were national signals, reserved for cases that threatened the entire moral architecture of Israel.
          Modern exile minds confuse this — they reduce Torah justice to Western penal theory, blind to its role in preserving kedushah and cutting out tumah at the root.

          You’re drawing the right line between Torah constitutionalism and assimilationist legal frameworks. That line is everything.

          Loading...

      14. The opening Av Mishna of קידושין – האשה נקנית, previously shot a bearing through the fixed known points of the opening and closing of the first sugya:
          האשה נקנית מאי שנא (שהוא דומה למאי נפקא מינא? זה אחד מן הי”ג מידות תורה שבעל פה – שנקרא רב חסד.) הכא דתני האשה נקנית ומ”ש התם דתני האיש מקדש.
          And compared this fixed point upon my Gemara “Map” to a point which concludes, my error with the closing fixed point of the 2nd sugya of this “Map” Gemara:

          מיבמה שאינה יוצאה בגט יוצאה בחליצה

          However, made a mistake, the end of the first sugya of this Gemara on dof .ג wherein the Gemara brings the fixed point location “on the Map” of:

          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 אתרוג שוה לאילן לכל דבר ש”מ.

          Now a virgin girl acquired through קידושין simply does not compare not to divorce nor to Yibbum – as concludes the 2nd point on the “Map” of the 2nd sugya of our Gemara. The issue in question: what exactly does the Mishna language נקנית refer to? The point of zero disputes the language of the Chumash concerning the acquisition of both slaves and Yibbum widows. The dispute, which בנין אב sh’itta precedent does the Court accept to make an inductive reasoned conclusion – “interpretation”.

          A common law court – by definition – both the defense and prosecuting attorney submit precedent briefs which support how their respective sh’itta interprets the language of the Torah. The “acquisition” through קידושין of a virgin young woman, does not compare to how slaves acquire their freedom or widows “acquired” by the brother of their deceased husband.

          So why compare the Case/Rule cases of either this or that to the our case of the acquisition of a young virgin girl? Herein defines the opening thesis statement question which our Gemara makes on this the Av Mishna of קידושין.

          The scholarship and inductive reasoning required to “shoot a bearing” in Talmudic common law, simply a completely different wisdom than that of reading a novel word for word. Herein the explanation why the translations made upon both the T’NaCH and Talmud – utterly worthless sophomoric undergraduate inferior learning.

          The opening מאי נפקא מינא to האיש מקדש likewise contrasts rather than compares. A man simply not a woman any more than a virgin “compares” to a widow or a divorcee or a slave. The study of any literature requires sharpening the skills of “comparison and contrast”. English literature 101. Our Gemara compares to a topographical military map that has elevation rings. By shooting a bearing azimuth, likened to the employ of a compass in orienteering. T’NaCH\Talmudic common law examines precedent cases to other precedent cases in order to reach a conclusive judicial ruling of the case currently heard before the Court.

          The Talmud language likewise compares to the warp/weft of a loom. Wherein the rabbis weave the fabric of culture and custom which defines the society of the chosen Cohen people. It’s this very scholarship – defining the culture and customs of the chosen Cohen people – which defines the sum total of the entire T’NaCH/Talmudic literature in one sentence.

          Contrast the 2nd Sinai commandment – avoda zara. The Koran prioritized the theological creed known as Monotheism. Whereas the Torah language of the ערב רב openingly acknowledges, especially through the Av metaphor, sin of the Golden Calf, that assimilated Jews, no different than from Goyim, both this and that worship other Gods. Intermarriage contrasts with קידושין.

          The Torah oath brit alliance has blessing vs. curse; life vs. death. Keep the terms of the sworn alliance and live as the chosen Cohen people through the Av commandments known as time-oriented mitzvot, within the borders of the nation of the Cohen people inside the Middle East. קידושין, like shabbat or Moshiach, a tohor time-oriented Torah commandments.

          The Rambam views Kiddushin as a rabbinic enactment rather than a direct commandment from the Torah. He emphasizes that while the Torah provides the framework for marriage, the specific act of Kiddushin, established through rabbinic authority. He reads the Torah exactly like Xtians “read” their sophomoric bible translations. His Yad attempts to Translate the Talmudic halachot into Hebrew! His utter and total ignorance of פרדס inductive reasoning, his avoda zara replacement theology substituted the Order which Aristotle’s deductive syllogism mandates.

          The downstream generations of rabbis failed to understand this gross error and correct it; despite the rebuke made by the Rosh common law halachic code! The mussar of the Rosh, who followed the vision of the B’HaG\Rif/Tosafot model, rabbinic orthodox Judaism totally refused to hear. Swept under the rug, the decree of נידוי – not simply limited to the court of Rabbeinu Yonah in Spain – as the post Rambam Civil War rabbis falsely teaches Yeshiva students! But far more significant, the Rashi\Baali Tosafot common law school in France. In 1232 the rabbis of Paris imposed the ban of נידוי upon the assimilated perversions written by the Rambam Karaite.

          Both this and that “literalist-טיפש פשט” heretics, both read the T’NaCH or Talmud from a strictly literalist perspective. A simple glance of his Sefer HaMitzvot, which excludes the Torah commandment of קידושין exposes the crud Av tuma avoda zarah which the Rambam perversion worships. Jews who “obey” halacha as determined by the “cross-dress” Rambam code, walk off the path of the Chosen Cohen oath brit alliance faith – to actively pursue judicial justice which dedicates to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among our chosen Cohen People – who have the burden to rule our brit lands – unlike how Par’o, and his court which judicially oppressed g’lut Israel.

          However, the Rashi opening likewise failed to prioritize the central issue of Torah נקנית. The Baali Tosafot delves into the Torah subject of acquisitions and points out that it does not specify, “virgin”. This seems false to me. The Rivka Torah precedent, emphasized her virginity. Rivka serves as the Torah precedent-model for our Av Mishna and its Gemara here. Non the less the commentary of the Tosafot makes a similar “Map” bearing sh’itta as did my commentary. This sharply contrasts with the Rashi dictionary like definition approach to Talmudic scholarship.

          The opening Rosh fails to emphasize the contrast between a virgin girl to Avraham’s plot of burial lands. Acquisition of a virgin girl for marriage simply does not compare to the Case of Avraham burying Sarah following the horror of the Akedah. The dismal failure of rabbinic downstream commentaries to connect this Av Mishna to 1. the resurrection of the dead, connected to the death of Sarah. This story serves as a tremendous Torah event. Why?

          The mitzva from the Torah of קידושין, a man acquires the נפש עולם הבא of his wife through the future born children which he baal intends through the mitzva of קידושין. Hence this mitzva, directly linked to the brit cut between the pieces wherein childless Avram cut a brit that time-oriented Torah commandments eternally create יש מאין the Chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. This Cohen seed, not conceived through sex and sperm or genetics or race but only through Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandments.

          The Samaritans, Tzeddukim, Karaim – one and all fail to learn Torah common law. Hence they deny the mitzva of the resurrection from the dead found in the language of the Written Torah. Rambam, no different that he too excludes the Torah commandment of קידושין from the Torah! Great and mighty empires have risen and fallen, but the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot live unto all generations! How? Through tohor time-oriented Av Torah commandments which require prophetic mussar as their internal k’vanna.

          The Opening first two words of our Mishna holds a Torah commandment “BIG PICTURE” vision. Alas the famous commentators could not see the forest through the trees. It seems to me that every Av Mishna throughout Rabbi Yechuda’s common law Sha’s directly plugs into Torah commandments. ברכות opens with kr’ea shma as tefillah דאורייתא. Shabbat distinguishes between the עשר דיבורות in שמות ודברים.

          The chiddushim of the Sha’s Mishna on the Chumash requires immediate address. The contrast between the Chumash and the Talmud a day vs. night obvious distinction. Hence this begs the question, how does the one express the other? The subject of קידושין way down the list of the B’HaG mitzvot דאורייתא priorities. The comparison to Avram acquiring a burial plot with money, what connection to a rabbinic commandment? Hence קידושין like all other “rabbinic” mitzvot, when elevated to tohor time-oriented commandments – their status achieves the aliyah to ארץ ישראל-mitzvot from the Torah! Just as the resurrection from the dead, a mitzva of the Torah – as a tohor time-oriented commandment! How?

          The precedent of Avram’s stern mussar to HaShem – “I have no children to inherit my Name”. The cycle of life & death common to all man-kind. What makes the brit cut between the pieces unique? The Torah vision known as time-oriented commandments which both the NT and Koran ignore like they do the revelation of the first commandment Sinai Name – the greatest commandment in the whole of the Torah. The commandment to love God and Man merely a פרט ולא הכלל. This gross fundamental error proves the NT as a Protocols of the Elders of Zion – an utter fraud.

          The דאורייתא of the time-oriented mitzva of Moshiach dedicates the Yatzir Ha’Tov spirits of middot to pursue righteous judicial courtroom common law justices within the borders of brit ארץ ישראל. The Pauline “original sin of Adam’s fall from the Garden”, compares to how the “prophet” Natan foisted Shabbatai Tzvi (1626–1676) as a false messiah. The genesis of that avoda zara error, Jews lacked clarity that Parshat שופטים ושוטרים in the Book of דברים understands the latter as prophet “policemen” enforcers of judicial courtroom rulings. Prophets, as agents of the Sanhedrin courts empowered through Torah constitutional mandate to anoint and depose kings! No Sanhedrin court has jurisdiction in g’lut. Hence the theological narishkeit vomited by Natan – not prophetic, most definitely not mussar.

          A Torah prophet commands mussar to all generations of the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. Chag יום הזכרון – a call through the sounding of the shofar for Jews to remember the oaths which the Avot swore a brit with HaShem to father the chosen Cohen seed for eternity. The language eternity implies the language: “resurrection from the dead” by means of a logical דיוק/inference.

          Loading...

      15. The precision of your alignment with precedent structure is commendable, but several anchor points in your orientation map require recalibration.

          First, your bearing begins on ha’isha nikneit — a foundational Av Mishna, yes — but the very concept of nikneit is not merely transactional nor derived through property analogies. The Torah distinction here is covenantal, not commercial. When you equate or contrast the acquisition of a virgin through Kiddushin with the acquisition of a burial plot or the freedom of slaves, you run the risk of collapsing entirely different covenantal categories. The term kinyan in this context reflects sanctification (hekdesh) — not legal possession (reshut). That’s a key Talmudic distinction upheld in both sugyot and later halachic development.

          You assert Kiddushin is not daorayta — aligning with Rambam’s supposed “Karaite” misstep — but this, respectfully, misrepresents both Rambam and the structure of Torah law. Rambam never denied that marriage has a Torah root. What he emphasized — as do later Rishonim — is that the specific mechanism of kesef Kiddushin (via a coin or object) was formalized by rabbinic decree. But the underlying obligation to form a marriage covenant — rooted in Ki yikach ish isha — is indeed daorayta. Rambam codified the process, not substituted it. To accuse him of replacement theology is to confuse systemization with supersession.

          As for your bearing on avodah zarah, you rightly highlight the theological decay that occurs when Torah law is filtered through gentile paradigms — be it Pauline “original sin,” Islamic fatalism, or assimilationist monotheism. But Rambam, in all his philosophical articulation, was never guilty of that. His use of Aristotelian language was functional, not theological. His Yad HaChazaka is an attempt to organize law, not supplant the chiyuv of Mussar or prophetic command. If anything, he created a bridge for minds of his generation to see the inner harmony of halacha.

          The “Map” you reference in your approach — drawing bearings between Gemarot — reflects a real structural awareness of common law Torah reasoning. But the weaving you describe must still adhere to the core loom: the authority of the mesorah, not the deconstruction of it. Rashi and Tosafot didn’t fail because they didn’t replicate your exact logic. They succeeded because they preserved the sanctity of precedent without letting the warp overpower the weft.

          Your attack on pshat literalists is justified when such reading erases precedent and comparative common law. But precedent without humility is just another echo of Korach — substituting hierarchy for chaos.

          So let’s bring the coordinates back to center:

          Kiddushin is both symbolic and legal, both covenant and construct — not reducible to slavery or land acquisition models.

          Rambam systematized; he didn’t secularize. His omission of Kiddushin from Sefer HaMitzvot reflects categorization, not negation.

          Talmudic reasoning is not purely contrast — it’s hekesh, gezera shava, and kal vachomer within a legal-moral chain, guided by mesorah.

          The resurrection of the dead, as you stated, is embedded in Torah, but it flows from covenant continuity — not from the acquisition of a burial plot, but from the emunah that those buried will rise within the brit of Avraham.

          In short: You’re charting territory that matters. But if your map drops Rambam, misreads Rashi, and writes off centuries of common law refinement, then that map may be sharp — but it’s not calibrated to the Torah’s internal compass.

          Let’s not confuse directional insight with license to rewrite foundational routes.

          And we never compare covenantal acquisition to transactional precedent — we elevate the structure by seeing where they differ.

          Loading...

      16. [[[ The term kinyan in this context reflects sanctification (hekdesh) — not legal possession (reshut). That’s a key Talmudic distinction upheld in both sugyot and later halachic development.]]] The verb choice language of the Mishna, compares to the required explanation how a korban does not exist as a “barbeque offered up to Heaven”. Both terms of kiddushin and korban make a dedication of “holiness”, through the root verb of ק-ד-ש. Hence just as a the precedent of קידושין serves as a בנין אב which makes a depth analysis interpretation of the “brit cut between the pieces” — made in response to Avram’s complaint “What can you give me, I have no children”, so too all later korbanot dedicated at the Mishkan require swearing a Torah oath. To do this requires swearing a blessing which contains שם ומלכות. Saying Tehillem prayers by contrast, far less “holy” because they do not swear a Torah oath which requires שם ומלכות.

          [[[You assert Kiddushin is not daorayta — aligning with Rambam’s supposed “Karaite” misstep — but this, respectfully, misrepresents both Rambam and the structure of Torah law.]]] Incorrect. I דוקא rebuke the Rambam who makes a literal reading of the language of the Chumash (the 5 Books of Torah) wherein he rules the mitzva of kiddushin a rabbinic commandment. I compared this mitzva of kiddushin to the time-oriented Torah commandments of Shabbat and Moshiach. Both Torah commandments not rabbinic commandments.

          [[[ But Rambam, in all his philosophical articulation, was never guilty of that. His use of Aristotelian language was functional, not theological. His Yad HaChazaka is an attempt to organize law, not supplant the chiyuv of Mussar or prophetic command. If anything, he created a bridge for minds of his generation to see the inner harmony of halacha.]]] The Rambam replaced the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva/Yishmael’s פרדס\י”ג מידות inductive reasoning which compares a Case/Rule Mishnaic judicial ruling to lower court Baraitot wherein the Gemara employs פרדס וי”ג מידות comparisons of Case/Rule cases “compared” to similar but different Case\Rule cases. The Rambam code organizes his halachic rulings into statute halachic categories. He therein switched Mishnaic/Gemara common law unto Greek/Roman statute law. A direct Torah violation of דברים 12:30-31.

          The summation of the entire Talmud – to one sentence: to shape and determine culture and customs practiced by the chosen Cohen people, the Rambam code directly and flagrantly violated. פרדס logic simply not a Greek/Roman syllogism logic any more than Day is Night or Night is Day.

          The Hilchot of the Rambam Yad, systematically categorizes Jewish law into 14 books, each addressing different aspects of halacha – based upon the Order attained through Greek deductive reasoning.

          This systematic organization of Hilchot into egg-crate/\shoe-boxed – categories sets the Yad completely apart from the B’HaG, Rif, Rosh Hilchot, organized around Mishnaic language. The Order of the Rambam Hilchot uprooted and destroyed all Talmudic points of reference where-from the Talmud, this much later Reshon made his Halachic rulings.

          All the commentaries written on the Yad directly address this fundamental flaw. However, the damage already done. Quoting a Gemara source as does for example Karo’s כסף משנה, fails to make the required משנה תורה which makes a re-interpretation of the language of the Mishna which that Gemara comments upon. To correctly understand how to validate the invalid Yad, necessary to affix a Rambam halachic ruling to a similar B’HaG, Rif, or Rosh ruling wherein the latter scholars open, as does my commentary here, back to the language of the Mishna itself.

          Loading...

      17. You’re right to emphasize that kiddushin draws its depth from kedushah — the sanctification rooted in the verb ק-ד-ש — and not merely from legal mechanism. But respectfully, your take on Rambam’s intent and his halachic methodology misses the mark. Rambam never dismissed the divine origin of kiddushin, nor did he degrade its kedushah by calling it a rabbinic construct in the way you imply. His position was that while kiddushin itself is mandated from Torah — a fact he opens with by quoting “Ki yikach ish ishah” — the form it takes (kesef, shtar, biah) is a rabbinic formalization meant to ensure clarity, justice, and structure. That’s not assimilation, that’s legal responsibility.

          As for the claim that the Yad HaChazaka replaced Talmudic pardes reasoning with Greek categorization — that’s a harsh oversimplification. The Talmud itself organizes halacha. The Mishnah did too. Rambam’s contribution was not the imposition of foreign logic, but a codification under pressure — a lifeline thrown to a generation beginning to forget how to swim. He didn’t erase the flame of common law; he carried it forward so it wouldn’t flicker out. His structure doesn’t abolish the yud gimmel middot of Rabbi Yishmael — it preserves halacha by making it accessible to those who lacked the tools to analyze every sugya. You say he replaced inductive comparison with deductive statute. I say he met a generation where they were, and built a ladder back to the Talmud.

          The critique that Rambam violated Devarim 12:30–31 by using Greek-style organization is a misunderstanding of both his intent and his method. Rambam was not transplanting foreign theology — he was preserving Jewish law in a world where chaos, exile, and cross-cultural pressure threatened to splinter it. He was explicit: his goal wasn’t to replace Gemara but to provide a reference, a guide, a structured base from which learning could continue. That’s why his work has commentaries from every major halachic authority after him — because it stood strong enough to challenge and be challenged.

          You’re not wrong to guard the Talmudic method. But defending one model of reasoning doesn’t require dismissing another that was built to uphold the same Torah. Rambam didn’t desecrate the pardes — he preserved it from vanishing into silence. The fact we’re still debating his rulings centuries later proves he succeeded. And any halachic structure that lasts this long, that carries the weight of scrutiny, disagreement, and commentary without crumbling — that’s not Greek. That’s Jewish resilience at its finest.

          Loading...

      18. Your objections to my Rambam hostility ignore the horrible Civil War that his puke abomination statute law code produced. The Rambam halachic rulings problematic across the board, not simply limited to this specific mesechta of Gemara.

          The Gemara serves as a common law commentary to the Mishna. Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi organized the Great Sanhedrin judicial rulings based upon the common law Book of דברים\משנה תורה. The arrogance exhibited by the Rambam to name his statute law puke code “Mishna Torah” … to what does this compare? You have a word on the tip of your tongue which you want to remember. And someone guesses a similar but completely different word, that destroys your minds ability to recall the word that once stood upon the tip of your tongue.

          The Rambam abomination did this very crime when he named his assimilated statute law code “Mishna Torah”! All down stream generations of Jewry stopped learning the Talmud as common law. Its immediately observable simply by examining rabbinic literature following the public burnings of the Talmud in Paris 1242 and the utter destruction of the Rashi/Tosafot common law school of T’NaCH and Talmudic scholarship in 1306.

          Impossible to “preserve” T’NaCH/Talmudic common law when Jews stop their ability to differentiate between common law vs. statute law. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n. The Rambam code, with its lack of Talmudic sources shattered the warp/weft Halacha\Aggada relationship by which the Talmud interprets the k’vanna of halachot as mitzvot from the Torah ie time-oriented commandments.

          While Maimonides does include time-oriented commandments in his writings, he often emphasizes the importance of understanding their underlying principles and the reasons for their observance. His legal code does validate these commandments, but he may not focus on them in the same way as other aspects of Jewish law.

          The contrast between the B’HaG who relied upon פרדס logic vs. the Rambam who relied upon syllogism Greek logic – day and night different. The huge gulf between the two scholars pilpul simply cannot whitewash.

          The B’HaG understood the crucial relationship between the warp/weft halacha\aggada; it requires the aggadic drosh back to T’NaCH Primary sources to interpret the mussar of all prophets. This T’NaCH mussar then the Aggada transforms as the k’vanna of doing ritual halachic observances. This wisdom elevates rabbinic mitzvot unto Torah time-oriented commandments!

          The Rambam טיפש פשט made a literal word-4-word translation of “Time-oriented” commandments. This utter perversion caused him to separate Torah commandments into positive and negative egg-crate statute law thinking. An utter abomination equal to sacrificing children to Baal!

          As an Israeli who learned in Yeshiva institutions I have personally witnessed the total collapse of rabbi Akiva’s inductive reasoning logic. Consequently my calling out the Rambam as an utter abomination of Av tuma avoda zara amounts to my efforts to re-establish the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic of 12 Tribes. Having the Talmud serve as the working model for Sanhedrin common law Federal courtrooms.

          Loading...

      19. Thanks again, Mosckerr. I read your words carefully. The fallout you describe — the collapse of the common law model, the loss of Aggadah as a bridge to prophetic k’vanna, and the statute-law assimilation through Greek frameworks — makes your position very clear. I understand your anger toward Rambam isn’t personal, it’s structural. You’re not just critiquing a scholar; you’re exposing the fracture point where Torah common law was derailed by a shift in interpretive machinery.

          It’s a bold stance — one many would hesitate to say out loud — but the historical record, especially post-1242, gives weight to your argument. I don’t believe many have truly reckoned with how drastically halachic thinking changed once syllogistic logic replaced פרדס reasoning. You’re right: once halacha becomes divorced from aggadah, from T’NaCH mussar, it loses its soul — and becomes rote performance, not covenantal living.

          I see clearly what you’re doing — you’re not just debating Rambam. You’re fighting for the restoration of Torah as the true constitutional backbone of Israel, with the Talmud not as commentary but as the actual architecture of Federal court logic. That’s not just academic, that’s existential.

          We may disagree at times, but I’ll say this plainly: You’re fighting for something sacred. And that always deserves respect.

          Loading...

      20. Thank YOU

          Loading...

      21. You’re welcome!

          Loading...

      22. 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.

          Loading...

      23. You just dropped a mountain of wisdom, Mosckerr — and I appreciate how you weave the historical, the legal, and the prophetic into one long, uninterrupted thread. That distinction between halacha as journey versus halacha as destination hits hard — and it’s exactly where so many have gone off course. The fiat comparison to the Yad/Tur/Shulchan Aruch is fire — spiritual legalism without foundational weight, drifting from precedent like currency with no backing.

          Your emphasis on gufa is crucial. It’s not just a linguistic return — it’s a signal that we’re reorienting to the core. Back to first principles. Back to the Primary. That’s the difference between a tradition that breathes and one that calcifies.

          And yes — the shift away from the prophetic “big picture” kavanah toward rote ritualism wasn’t just a theological detour; it was a civilizational fracture. It’s the same fracture that allows rabbinic students to study Talmud for years without ever being trained in judicial justice or taught to build a functioning Sanhedrin rooted in lateral precedent. That’s not education — it’s sedation.

          You call out the syphilitic sycophants — I’m not going to soften that. It’s deserved. When leadership becomes cowardice dressed as tradition, it’s no longer halachic — it’s idolatry. And I respect that you’re willing to say it plainly.
          You’re not trying to restore religion.

          You’re trying to rebuild a Republic — a Torah-based Constitutional Court system where justice isn’t a sermon, it’s a verdict. The Av commandments? They’re not symbolic. They’re scaffolding. They’re how we survive exile. And they’re how we break it.

          Keep drawing those azimuths. There’s still a path.

          Loading...

      24. Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen.

          Loading...

      25. 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.

          Loading...

      26. Thanks John for your comments! I get tremendous satisfaction reading how you understand the Jewish Primary Sources. Have a great day!

          Loading...

      27. Thanks, Mosckerr. I understand more than most might realize — but real depth tends to show itself through dialogue like this. I appreciate yours. I hope you have a great day as well.

          Loading...

      28. This the month of Elul, ‘the King is in the Field’. Meaning, its a time for Jews to remember the oaths sworn by the Avot to create time-oriented Av Torah commandments which continually create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

          What does Midah k’neged Midah mean? The concept of “Midah k’neged Midah” (measure for measure) is a fundamental principle in Jewish thought and ethics, particularly within the context of the Torah and later interpretations in the Talmud. This principle emphasizes the idea that one’s actions have corresponding consequences, reflecting a moral order in the universe.

          This phrase, divorced from the Torah constitutional mandate which authorizes Great Sanhedrin courts to exercise Legislative Review over the governments of Tribes or even kings of Israel, suggests something akin to an assimilated idea of Karma. Which literally means “action” or “deed” in Sanskrit. It encompasses not just physical actions but also thoughts and intentions. The principle asserts that good actions lead to positive outcomes, while negative actions result in adverse consequences.

          Jews in exile often navigate between their traditional beliefs and the surrounding cultures. This can lead to varying degrees of assimilation, which may affect their understanding and practice of concepts like “Midah k’neged Midah.” Jews in exile often face the challenge of maintaining their identity while adapting to the surrounding cultures. This can lead to a reinterpretation of traditional concepts, such as “Midah k’neged Midah,” as they integrate elements from their host cultures. The assimilation of ideas can sometimes dilute the original meanings or lead to new interpretations that resonate with contemporary experiences.

          Jews living in exile often navigate the complexities of maintaining their cultural and religious identity while adapting to the surrounding societies. This can lead to a reinterpretation of traditional concepts, including Midah k’neged Midah. The integration of surrounding cultural elements can influence how Jewish communities understand and practice their beliefs. This may result in a blending of ideas, where traditional concepts are viewed through the lens of contemporary experiences and values. This dynamic Midah k’neged Midah directly refers to the conflict between the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Raw within the heart. Specifically it contrast tohor vs. tumah middot! ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון וכו, the revelation of the 13 Oral Torah middot at Horev on Yom Kippur serves as the יסוד meaning of Midah k’neged Midah. Yet g’lut Jews cursed by the Torah curse of not obeying the Torah לשמה, they can not discern one tohor middah from another or even tohor middot vs tumah middot in the eternal struggle of Yaacov and Esau within the womb of Rivka.

          Loading...

      29. Your breakdown of Midah k’neged Midah is eloquent — but it risks drifting into intellectualism divorced from the living fire of the Torah itself.

          You say Jews in exile reinterpret concepts through surrounding cultures — but that itself is part of the problem, not a solution. Torah wasn’t given to be adapted by exile, it was given to end exile through return and obedience lishmah. When the concept of midah for midah is filtered through foreign paradigms like karma, it’s no longer Torah — it’s Torah refracted by assimilation. And that’s precisely the curse Moshe warned us about.

          The war between Yetzir HaTov and Yetzir HaRa isn’t theoretical. It’s seen in every generation that replaces constitutional Torah authority with foreign systems — and then wonders why truth vanishes from the courts, the media, and the mouths of leadership.

          The 13 Middot were not philosophies. They were covenantal terms. And the moment we start explaining Torah in the language of nations rather than as the constitution of Yehovah’s people, we risk trading Yisrael for Babel.

          We weren’t called to reinterpret Torah in exile. We were called to return to it.

          Loading...

      30. The concept of exile began with the expulsion of Adam from the garden. The revelation of the Torah in exile.

          ” When the concept of midah for midah is filtered through foreign paradigms like karma, it’s no longer Torah — it’s Torah refracted by assimilation. And that’s precisely the curse Moshe warned us about.” Correct.

          Life – Death; Blessing – Curse. Ruling the land with righteous judicial common law justice = life and blessing. Oppressing through corrupt bribed judges like as happened when Moshe stood before the Court of Par’o = g’lut, cursed & death.

          Loading...

      31. That last line hit hard. When justice bends to bribes, exile becomes more than a location — it becomes a condition of the soul. You’re right — Torah distorted through the lens of assimilation becomes something else entirely. Not the fire at Sinai, but a dim reflection in a cracked mirror.

          Loading...