Oppose the 13 principles of faith. Torah faith centers upon Justice Justice Pursue. This creed theology exists as assimilation to Xtian avodah zarah. A hard fast rule that shuts down missionaries on the spot: The question – ‘Which Torah commandment did the prophet Shemuel learn as the יסוד of the commandment to anoint the Houses of Shaul and David’? Talk of Moshiach without the Torah … just reactionary non sense\narishkeit/ in Yiddish.
The unique quality of Torah commandments – their universal applicability. For example: Tefillah in the place of korbanot; the Sages learn Torah commandments to apply to Klall Israel, and not to some hoped for-future born Man. Difficulty: the laws of niddah do not apply to men. But the laws of tumah and modesty – which the mussar commandment of niddah instructs as the most essential נמשל of niddah – DOES equally apply to Men. Torah commandments command mussar. The Ramban’s introduction to the Chumash refers to ‘Black Fire on White Fire’. It seems a valid interpretation of this kaballistic metaphor: משל\\נמשל. Rabbi Waldman, one of my Yeshiva instructors at D’var Yerushalim, taught me that students of the Talmud had to develop the skill, to continually make דיוקים when they learn any page of Gemarah.
This skill of bi-polar inference making, it efficiently separates learning a page of Gemarah from reading a page of Gemarah. This same יסוד equally applies to learning the T’NaCH — “How much more so”. The mitzvah of Moshiach learns from Moshe anointing the House of Aaron. As the Talmud affixes the mitzva of tefillah to korbanot, so too the prophet Shmuel affixed the mitzva of Moshiach to the concept of “king”. Blessings, according to the halachah require שם ומלכות. The משל ‘king’, has the נמשל of dedicated tohor middot, to sally forth and fight the wars between the two opposing Yatzirot within the heart.
What mussar does kingship instruct which elevates a blessing from that of a praise – as found in say — Tehillem? Learning requires בינה. This key term, the Gemarah defines as discerning between like from like; ‘learning a subject in the midst of another subject’. Do you see the דיוק made upon the language of the Talmud? משל\\נמשל a defining technique of instruction which Talmudic literature continually relies upon and employs.
Learning how to learn Torah and Talmudic Primary sources requires students to acquire these most basic & necessary skills. Learning a page of T’NaCH or Gemarah, simply does not compare to reading a page of T’NaCH or Gemarah. Both T’NaCH and Talmud base the Order of any page upon their יסוד of sugiot. Oral Torah, whether learned from a T’NaCH or Talmudic sources learns by way of precedents. The Mishnah bases its Common Law Case\\Rule style upon the common law comparison of sugiot discipline which a חכם learns from T’NaCH literature.
What caused the curse of ירידת הדורות? Compare what the Xtian church abomination did to their corrupt Bible translations, to how assimilated Rambam organized his code of law. בינה requires the discipline and critical eye that can separate and discern between like from like. Both the corrupt Biblical Xtian translators, and the Rambam’s code of halachah, bear striking resemblances. The foreign Xtians, who translated their bibles into their own image, they up-rooted the Order of Sugiot and replaced that Order with their foreign, alien, arbitrarily imposed, Chapters and verses. How a person organizes thoughts in the mind, radically changes what that same person thereafter perceives or believes. O, D, G … G0D or DOG.
After the Rambam, Jews became addicted to learning our Primary Sources of faith by means of commentaries. Contrast the Baali Tosafot commentary to the Talmud. The Baali Tosafot quoted the Rambam all of twice. Both times, in their commentary to the Talmud, they argued against his opinion. Why does the style of Baali Tosafot learning continually jump from off the page and bring some other Talmudic source from different Gemarah sources? Answer: the Baali Tosafot strived to duplicate how the Gemarah learns a specific Case\Rule Mishna.
The Rambam code closely resembles the errors made by the bible translators. (1) He cherry picked halachot comparable to how the New Testament authors cherry picked T’NaCH p’sukim\\verses. (2) He up-rooted the sugiot within the Order of the Talmud and replaced it with chapters and topic headlines. (3) Most damning — He confused Oral Torah logic with Law. Contrast how the B’hag, the Rif and the Rosh organized their codifications with that of the absurd & obtuse Rambam code. These opposite\\tohor codes of law, they did not cherry pick halachot as did the Rambam code. The Order of the Rambam halachot strikingly separates and distinguishes itself from the opposing tohor codes. Gone – the ability to compare a precedent halachah to its specific Case\\Rule Mishna.
Logic compares cases. The Mishna employs a Case\\Rule common law style. The Gemarah brings halachot pulled from throughout the 6 Orders of the Mishna to compare that precent halachah to this Case\\Rule Mishna. The style of the Gemarah: Difficulty\\Answer. Why this style? The Gemarah brings precedents to compare (Oral Torah logic) them to the Case\\Rule of a specific Mishna. All post Rambam scholarship made upon his code, they universally validate the error of the Rambam’s failure to include exactly from where he culled his specific halachic rulings from the Talmud. Alas the ירידת הדורות curse, they could quote a theoretical Gemarah source, which contained a similar halachic ruling as the Rambam included within his tumah code of law, but they failed, all commentaries made upon the Yad ha-Chazaka, to compare that halachic precedent, which that tumah code originally cherry picked, to make a depth analysis of that specific Case\\Rule Mishna! Worlds separate logic from law, just as do Torah commandments of mussar – heaven and earth apart – from Courtroom legal rulings of halachic law.
The study of Talmud compares to weaving two separate fabrics together. The Difficulty\\Answer style of Gemarah which learned the Case\\Rule style of the Mishna. The Gemarah learns through the logic of making comparisons or contrasts through the medium of halachic precedents – with the explicit purpose of achieving a depth analysis of the intent\\k’vanna// of the language of Rabbi Yechuda’s Case\\Rule Mishna. This learning by way of bringing precedents — it defines how to learn both T’NaCH and Talmudic literature. The much later Talmud follows the sh’itta of learning originally established by the far earlier חכמים who authored the T’NaCH.
The Rambam code destroyed this discipline of learning. Instead of instructing students to learn how to understand\\discern// between like and like, this tumah code rebelled against the kabbalah of פרדס taught by Rabbi Akiva and all the talmudim of Rabbi Akiva – the rabbis whose opinions the Sha’s Yerushalmi\\Bavli brings. The Rambam compares to the princes whom Moshe the prophet sent to spy out the land; to the Great Man Korach who challenged the commandments which Moshe learned by means of the Oral Torah revelation of logic @ Horev. His code changed the intent\\k’vanna// of learning, which compares a Case to an earlier precedent … unto a focus upon the end product: what is the halachah? His code ripped the Aggadic\\Halachic fabric which ironically shapes and determines “משנה תורה”, the Xtian name by which he baptized his silly code! This key term, משנה תורה, another name for the Book of דברים, has the interpretation meaning of “Legislative Review”. The wisdom of prioritizing the mussar commandments as the k’vanna of the forms of law — halachot, most essentially defines the meaning of משנה תורה\\דברים//.
The New Testament writers would confuse Torah commandments with law. Law, from both the Mishna and Gemarah, comes from Court judicial rulings. Torah commandments command mussar. Mussar simply not the same as law. Confusing Torah commandments with law for ever witnesses, testifies, and denounces, the creation of the false religion known as Xtianity.
The apostle Paul, by way of precedent, he perverted the Torah mussar of g’lut, as told in the stories of the expulsion of Adam from the Garden, Noach exiled in his Ark, and Avram at the brit cut between the pieces,,, with ‘Original Sin’. This theology uprooted the mussar of g’lut\exile – the Torah blessing\curse responsibility of faith – it set the New Testament upon a perverted tangential course of faith,,, that corrupt man required the death and resurrection of some phoney messiah in order to save Man from sin and death. An unheard of faith that never caused the hairs of our forefathers to stand on end in dread and fear.
After the Rambam code – came the ירידת הדורות. Students of the T’NaCH and Talmud stopped learning by comparing precedents! They relied solely upon later commentaries rather than searching the Primary sources for precedents – like as did the Baali Tosafot – the grand children of Rashi. Post Rambam, especially among Achronim pilpul “scholars” – whose published works but slightly compare to the common law way of learning by means of precedents, their fuzzy learning confused comparing two competitive Reshon commentaries made on the Talmud with Primary source precedents. Their perverse logic split hairs to a degree, that when Yeshiva students return home for shabbot, that they discuss any and everything other than their learning that week in Yeshiva.
Students stopped learning the B’hag, Rif, Rosh, commentaries of halachah as a definitive set of Gemarah halachot which require a study of the logic that compares these halachic precedents, set aside as קודש, to learn a depth analysis of the specific Case\\Rule Mishna. Rather, the focus of Yeshiva learning shifts to debates over what qualifies as the halachah, and all that that entails. A subtle but distinct shift to a tangential different subject all together. The ירידת הדורות scholarship of the Tur and Shulkan Aruch codifications of Halachah. These ירידת הדורות commentaries upon commentaries upon commentaries on the halachah…. Gone from Jewish consciousness, the revelation of Oral Torah logic first revealed @ Horev. Comparable to the post apostle Paul theology of ‘Original Sin’ which uprooted the Torah concept of g’lut from both the New Testament and all later generations of Xtian church folk; GONE: their mental awareness of g’lut from the story of the expulsion of Adam from the garden of Eden.
Assimilation learns from the negative commandment: the ways of Egypt and Canaan – do not follow. The folk of Egypt and Canaan no more accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai than have the believers of JeZeus and Mohammad. Following the publication of the Rambam code began the ירידת הדורות experienced by g’lut Jewry. The opening Mishna of גיטין teaches that g’lut Jewry had already lost the knowledge how to do mitzvot לשמה. Jews cannot keep and observe Torah commandments in g’lut – a Torah curse of g’lut itself. That the Rambam code duplicates the errors of the Xtian church biblical translators repeated abominations — testifies that Jews in g’lut worship other Gods.