Author: moshe kerr

Jonah Goldberg: While the world is on fire, the media are still obsessed with Israel. Contrast TYT – that lady moos like Mad Cow Maddow during Trump 1.0


https://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/columns/jonah-goldberg-while-the-world-is-on-fire-the-media-are-still-obsessed-with-israel

No one likes to think they’re being hysterical. And nothing makes hysterical people angrier than being described as such. So, let me offer my apologies in advance for what follows.

Jeremy Musighi, an independent researcher, recently released a study analyzing 14.7 million news articles published across 65 languages over the last decade. He found that, in 2024, news outlets published “ more than twice as many stories about Israel as about all 48 countries of sub-Saharan Africa combined .” Given that many countries focus on Israel to distract from their own problems, that’s not that shocking. But Musighi also found that, “On American cable news, Israel was the most-mentioned country — ahead of Iran, Russia, Ukraine, China. On the BBC’s news channel, 1 in every 17 broadcast minutes mentioned Israel.”

One might argue that given Israel’s recent actions, it earned such coverage. But Israel gets wildly disproportionate coverage in peacetime too. In 2019, long before the war in Gaza, “ 1 of every 112 news articles on Earth — from all the world’s outlets minus Israel’s — was primarily about Israel. 1.8 million international articles mentioned it.” Now, I have reservations about Musighi’s methodology, given how media outlets recycle and syndicate content. But rather than wade into the statistics, for argument’s sake let’s just cut all of his findings in half. That would still be hard to defend rationally.

Also, this says nothing of the quality of the reporting . If it was objective, the quantity wouldn’t matter much. But a sizable portion is objectively anti-Israel, often taking Hamas’ claims at face value. When Hamas shrieked that Gaza was on the brink of famine, the Western press breathlessly repeated the claim, which was utterly false . In a recent interview on Taqarrab , an Arab-language podcast, acclaimed photo “journalist” Motaz Azaiza admitted that he refused to publish images of Hamas abuses — to protect the abusers . The New York Times’ Nick Kristoff launched weeks of coverage with the claim that Israelis train dogs to rape Palestinians. American media covered the controversy over Macklemore’s criticisms of Israel like a free speech martyr.

In fairness, a lot of coverage is driven by news, like when the United Nations condemns Israel, which it has done 187 times since 2015 — nearly six times more often than it has condemned Russia, and 17 times more often than Iran or North Korea. Founded in 1948, modern Israel is middle-aged as countries go.

Look at a list of 195 countries in order of their founding date and Israel ranks somewhere between the 85th- and 90th-oldest (if we acknowledge biblical Israel, then it’s the fourth-oldest nation in the world). And yet many talk about Israel as if it’s a sort of recent mistake, easily remedied, like outgoing mail that hasn’t been picked up yet. Israel is only slightly older than modern Tibet, which was, according to the Chinese government, “liberated” in 1951. Many Tibetans use the term “occupied.”

We don’t hear much about “occupied Tibet” from people fixated on the evils of occupation. Nor do we hear about China’s system of apartheid — another charge casually hurled at Israel. Nor do we hear about China’s genocidal policies toward the Muslim minority Uyghur population in Xinjiang. The charge of cultural genocide is irrefutable, but there’s also strong evidence of more literal genocide thanks to the regime’s violent and coercive reproduction policies, slashing birthrates in half.

Nor do we hear much about China’s policy of settler-colonialism in Tibet and Xinjiang, where Han Chinese are incentivized to migrate as part of the regime’s policy of “ sinicization .” I think China’s pretty powerful, but criticizing Israel, according to the popular online streamer Hasan Piker (who will not condemn China), is “ speaking truth to power .”

To that end, we hear a lot about Israel’s occupation, settler-colonization and genocide. We don’t have the space to contend with all of these charges, so for the sake of brevity and reasonableness let’s concede, for now, the first two. Besides, it’s the false genocide charge that fuels anti-Israel obsessions more than any other. The claim is more than 40 years old. And yet, since the founding of Israel, the Palestinian population has grown more than fivefold.

When you hear that Israeli genocide proves Israelis are the “new Nazis” keep in mind that the Holocaust killed 2 out of every 3 European Jews . A new documentary, “Naza,” that purports to prove that Israel is committing genocide bases its claim on the fact that Israel goes to great lengths to track collateral damage. Never mind that there’s no such thing as collateral damage when you intend genocide. It should take the average reader five minutes to read this column. When “Naza” debuted at the Venice Film Festival this month, the audience’s standing ovation lasted five times as long. That, I’m sorry to tell you, is a sign of hysteria.

Jonah Goldberg is a national columnist. ©2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

What are the implications of Israel getting wildly disproportionate coverage in peacetime? How does the quality of reporting on Israel compare to its quantity? What are some other countries that have been accused of apartheid or genocide, similar to Israel?

https://jewishonliner.org/p/data-analysis-of-147-million-news-articles-finds-outsized-global-focus-on-israel

“The UN says so” is not a sufficient legal analysis. This example serves the false logic of “Appeal to Authority”. Attempts to pigeon hole, post the illegal Jordanian nationalization “West Bank”, as a “geographic term” used “internationally” fails to weight the bias of UN SC Resolution 2334 on par with UN GA Resolution 3379.

The UN has a long history of anti-Israel activities. Hence the language “West Bank” hardly qualifies as an accurate “geographic term”. Wars and Treaties trump UN chatter-box revisionist history. The ICC and ICJ. Their decisions may assert jurisdiction under their own constitutive instruments, but that does not automatically prove that they can override Oslo’s allocation of authority, treat Gaza as under unified Palestinian control, or transform a diplomatic designation into uncontested sovereignty. Those conclusions require a separate and explicit legal argument—and remain open to substantial criticism.

Germany’s 1941 invasion destroyed the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact as a functioning nonaggression arrangement, regardless of the formal language used to describe its termination. SALT ceased to function as a respected arms-control framework once the parties no longer treated its restraints as politically operative. Trump’s withdrawal reflected a rejection of Obama’s Iran policy, regardless of whether the JCPOA was technically classified as a treaty.

The parties’ conduct, interests, and subsequent events determine whether Oslo remains a functioning political framework. An international court cannot preserve, revive, or transform Oslo by treating it as though it were an abstract instrument detached from the parties’ actual consent and conduct. Hamas did not sign Oslo, took control of Gaza from the PA, and does not accept Oslo’s framework. Treating “Palestine” as a unified actor with uninterrupted authority over Gaza risks confusing a diplomatic label with an actual governing and treaty relationship.

An agreement loses authority when the parties’ strategic interests and conduct show that they no longer accept it as controlling. Arafat launched the 2nd Intifada in 2000, this decision fundamentally breached the Oslo Accords as did his failure to amend the PA Charter as he formally agreed to do when signing the Oslo Accords. UN Resolutions Chapter VI or Chapter VII do not have more authority than treaties signed between allies. The UN compares to the recent terrorist attempt to slaughter Israelis during the recent 2026 Sukkot Chag, which had it succeeded might have shattered the Abraham Accords and made the UN 2 State Solution dictate to Israel – the only game in town.

The UN can use only the powers actually given to it by the UN Charter. Those powers do not, merely because they come from the UN, automatically cancel, rewrite, or override the Oslo agreements. Anyone making that argument must show exactly which Charter power is being used, why the relevant UN body has authority over the issue, and how that power legally interacts with the parties’ existing treaty obligations. Saying “the UN has authority” – a bogus argument. The claim must identify the particular organ—such as the Security Council, General Assembly, or another body—and the specific Charter provision that allegedly grants the power.

Propaganda rhetoric of the UN – Occupied West Bank Territories – presumes Judea and Samaria as false based upon the language of UN SC 2334. The revisionist history pretends akin to Arafat’s rhetoric that the Palestinian people trace their roots back to the Boat-People Philistines from the Greek Islands! Never in all recorded Human history an Arab Palestinian State. Refusal by UN bodies to call a spade a spade – Yechuda and Samaria prove a bias conclusion rather than an objective recommendation.

General Assembly recognition of Palestine and British most recent boycott of Israeli private industry in Judea & Samaria prove political bias. That Israel has only responded to London and not EU countries who likewise seek to dictate a two State “Final Solution” compares to the vision of Jewish refugees treatment during the Middle Ages. The latter ‘low hanging fruit’, so too Britain after Brexit.

Even if a UN organ has some Charter-based authority, the claimant must explain why that authority applies to the parties and how it legally affects their treaty obligations. Employment of UN Charter-based authority arguments almost 100 years after the fact compares to Xtian gospel claims of Messiah man/God over 1000 years after the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The latter example throughout history defined through hate arousing Christ killer rhetoric. Never once did the Goyim NT ever raise the issue: How does the Torah itself define the mitzva of Moshiach? As such both the earlier NT propaganda and the UN Charter propaganda used to promote anti-Israel hatred. Appeals to UN authority do not, by themselves, establish that the Oslo agreements have been changed or overridden. That conclusion requires a specific Charter power, proper jurisdiction, and a legally reasoned explanation of how the power affects the parties’ treaty obligations.

On the 5th Day of the Chag moed — a clarification resultant of Gamma Hans excellent questions

As explained previously, the codification of the Mishna in 200, some say 210 CE roughly 75 years after the absolute disastrous defeat of Bar Kochba, where Rome renamed the conquered province Syria-Palestine. The Gemara sealed by Rav Ashi & Ravina in about 450 in Iraq; further editions made by the Sovariim scholars till about 600 CE! As such both the Mishna and Bavli Gemara more resemble Herzl’s “Jewish State”. No Yovel liberty for the 12 Tribe ever existed “historically”. Both king Shaul slaughtered the Kohonim of Nov as did king David ordered the death of Uriah – WITHOUT a Sanhedrin Capital Crimes trial. Hence neither king ever established Federal Sanhedrin common law legislative review of any and all statute law passed by Tribal authorities and/or the king of Jerusalem over a united 12 Tribe Republic.

Torah common law in essence interpretive rather than historical! When Herzl wrote his definitive work of political Zionism, Jews had endured almost 2000 years of g’lut! Hence the same equally applies to the authorship of both the Mishna and Bavli Gemara! From beginning to end – post Shoah Israeli National Independence – both the Bavli Talmud and Herzl’s ‘The Jewish State’ do NOT refer to history but rather encompass an interpretive vision of the Jewish state in the future.

As the T’NaCH engages in the history of kings, its foolish to assume that the T’NaCH primarily concerns historiography. T’NaCH prophets command mussar applicable to all generations of Bnai Brit Cohonim nationals ie the 12 Tribal yichus directly referenced in both the Torah and Book of Yehoshua. Confusing a secondary “detail” for the primary “k’vanna” amounts to confusion. Foreign invasions proved conclusively that prior to the people asking for a king in the Book of Shmuel, that the 12 tribes collectively as a whole ever enjoyed Yovel liberty based upon Moshe taking all Israel out of Egyptian slavery precedent.

History serves as contexts to make a depth analysis interpretation. The Mongols destroyed the Abbasid Caliphate in Iraq in 1258, the king of France and Pope ordered the public burning of all Talmudic manuscripts within France in 1242 under Louis IX. The interpretation of history: both the Muslims and Jews, so to speak ‘Circled their Wagons’. Prior to the disaster to both separate societies: Muslim wisdom and knowledge served as the light and model to the rest of the primitive & barbaric European countries – stuck in the Dark Ages.

After Rabbeinu Yonah realized that he had duplicated the exact same error as did the brothers dynastic dispute wherein the Romans occupied Jerusalem and appointed Herod ‘their’ king on that throne; Rabbeinu Yonah requested permission to burn Maimonidean works. Rabbinic g’lut Orthodoxy – unlike the P’rushim לשמה legalism – they thereafter embraced Greek schools of logic as kosher and therein blew out the Hanukkah lights. Despite assimilation to Greek culture, philosophy and logic – being a pig. Akin to Muhammad’s koran declared camels – clean! Furthermore, Rabbeinu Yonah profaned his public vow to visit the grave of Rambam.

Almost all later Talmudic commentaries written AFTER Rabbeinu Yonah invalidated his נידוי, [[[the most notable exceptions being the Rosh common law codification of the Talmud and such as Hasdai Crescas Or Hashem]]], the public burning of all Talmud manuscripts from France and the later expulsion of all Jews from France in 1306, virtually ceased all opposition to Jews learning and copying Greek philosophical schools of logic – a direct Torah negative commandment which interprets Egypt and Canaan as לאו דוקא.

The T’NaCH historical narratives serve as instruments of mussar, the oath brit sworn to and by the Avot defines t’shuva memory! Torah as a Constitutional document – NOT – a g’lut religious faith in some theologically constructed theology, such as Islam’s Tawhid Monotheism narishkeit. תורה לא בשמים היא the essential responsibility to rule the conquered land of Canaan through Sanhedrin common law legislative review of Tribal statute laws and some undefined Torah rhetoric “king” inclusive under the Torah Constitutional mandate which establishes משנה תורה courtroom authority has never yet occurred in any generation of the Jewish people to date.

To the shame of London and Paris farts of the UN Security Council who love to condemn Israel because both countries addicted to throw Jews under the bus whenever they need a convenient scapegoat to conceal the moral cowardice of their Chamberlain appeasement. Actions have consequences, may the Trump’s Presidential leadership pull the US out of NATO – tits on a boar hog. This airline highjacking attempt on the fourth day of Chol HaMoed Sukkot, before three year yahrzeit of Oct 7th 2023 Shemini Atzeret massacre. Neither the coward leadership of London or Paris has issued a public response to the Flydubai terrorist attempt to duplicate the October 7, 2023 massacre.

Inductive Case Law (Common Law/Pardes/Middot) vs. Deductive Statute Law (Greek Logic/Shulchan Aruch/Rambam/Qur’anic Literalism); the Hellenization of Jewish Law via the Rambam. Mapping the structural anatomy of Sola Scriptura across three Abrahamic traditions. Munkir al-Hadith (Qur’anism), Karaism, and Protestantism function not merely as “reforms” but as substitute theologies of Av tuma avoda zarah – attempts to collapse the prophetic mussar rebukes which defines the Yatzir Ha-Tov within the hearts of all bnai brit Cohen peoples in all generations.

Qur’anism/Munkir al-Hadith rejects the Hadith/Sunnah as a binding independent source of law, leaving only the Qur’an. Like Karaites, they face the crisis of ambiguity. The Qur’an commands prayer but doesn’t detail the rakat (( a unit of Islamic prayer (Salah) that consists of a sequence of movements and recitations, including standing, bowing, prostration, and sitting)); it commands charity but doesn’t set the nisab ((the minimum amount of wealth a Muslim must possess for one lunar year before being obligated to pay zakat, which is typically set at 87.48 grams of gold or 612.36 grams of silver)). Without Hadith, they must reconstruct these details using either pure linguistic deduction or modernist reasoning—effectively creating a new “oral law” without admitting it.

Modern Qur’anists divorce Islamic practice from the Hadith’s contextual nuance. Both prioritize a “clean,” accessible code over the messy, living tradition of judicial precedent. The spiritual “addiction” to the heroin of frozen deductive Greek logic has dramatically shaped all communities following the Islamic invasion of Spain. The consequence of defining “law” through Greek and Roman cultural perspectives of Senate Statute law decrees rather than dynamic courtroom legislative review has produced a ירידות הדורות curse upon g’lut Jewry, Islam and Xtianity; perhaps best understood through Universal Monotheism (like Islam’s Tawhid) as the priority of faith over the righteous pursuit of justice as the prime theme of remembering the salvation from Egyptian slavery.

Historically, Karaites developed a robust system of Ijtihad (independent reasoning) and even adopted some rabbinic customs when logic dictated it. They were not “fundamentalists” in the modern sense; many were rationalists influenced by Islamic Mu’tazila theology. Their rejection of the Oral Law was often driven by the desire to align Judaism with Greco-Islamic rationalism. Sunni Islam, once the four Madhabs closed the “gate of Ijtihad”, Sunni law became statutory.

Consequently, the Munkir al-Hadith qualify (so to speak) as the “Protestants” of Islam, trying to reopen the gate by removing the intermediary (Hadith), but they often end up relying on secular academic linguistics or Sufi mysticism to fill the gaps—creating a new “Magisterium” of intellectuals. Most classical Karaites and early Qur’anists contrast with the Xtian religious literalism, for a spell their hyper-intellectualism dominated the World. They valued grammar, philosophy, and science more than the traditionalists, whom they saw as superstitious. Then came the horrors of Nakba Allah, the collapse of the Abbasid Caliphate. Which fell to the Mongol hordes under Hulagu Khan. Baghdad was captured and sacked in 1258, ending the Abbasid Caliphate’s political rule. The consequence of this Nakba Allah disaster – witnessed the rise of modern Salafi-Jihadi literalism which inevitably flattens judicial common law courts unto belief-system religions which prioritize text-bound, universal, religious/philosophical codifications.

A Munkir al-Hadith/Qur’anist resembles to a biblical primitivist, fundamentalist, or certain forms of Protestant scripturalism: the aim or objective: a simplified trust in “the Word” literalism. منكر الحديث compares to the Protestant revolt which rejected Orthodox and/or Catholic church Papel autocracy…Sunni tradition. The Shiite revolt consequent to the murder of Ali inclusive with Sunni because it too, akin to the Karaism revolt against the religification of the Talmud which manifested by Orthodox Judaism’s religious codifications of Talmudic judicial common law Mishnaic and Gemara texts into statute law halachic codifications which culminated in the Shulkan Aruch.

For example: the Karaism houses rejected not the mezuzah but rather the parchments placed inside the mezuzah; they rejected the Talmudic mussar which teaches that Israel only accepted the first two Sinai commandments before demanding from Moshe that he go up Sinai and receive the rest of the Torah. That the repetition of the so-called Ten Commandments represents a משל which requires its נמשל; they reject that prophets command only mussar; that for example the 6th Oral Torah middah ערך אפים remembers Torah precedents as mussar rather than literal historical accounts such as the 10 generations which separate Adam from Noach from Avram etc or the literal Creation of the Universe as depicted in בראשית; they reject t’shuva as remembering the oaths which the Avot swore לשמה that only they would father the chosen Cohen nation. Hence, never actually 10 commandments but rather 10 times Israel tested faith as recorded in the mussar touching the Wilderness generation … that this reference of 10 mussar defines the repetition of the so-called 10 commandments.

Hadith compares to the Karaim requirement of Jewish “literalism” in how this belief system understands Jewish internal jurisprudence – based upon the premise that the Torah represents Divine Law – akin to the Protestant “Sola Scriptura” movement. Therefore the Munkir al-Hadith, primarily a theological doctrinal description closer to “Qur’an-only” or Islamic sola scriptura; Muhammad’s role as messenger who delivers the Qur’an from later reports attributed to him inclusive of Hadith “additions” more akin to the Toseftot to the Mishna.

According to JSTOR digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources – modern Qur’anism associates with the cultural assimilation or democratization of religious interpretation; with educated laypeople claiming direct access to the Qur’an rather than submitting to inherited scholarly authority. Both
Karaites and Qur’anists rely more than simply exclaim public declaration for the words of the Bible – akin to the famous Monkey Trial in the 20th Century.

Both perverse sects rejected one interpretive tradition such as פרדס-middot of inductive logical reason with some “other” interpretive tradition. Such as grammarians, or assimilated Jews of Spain whose “Orthodox” rabbis embraced as did the Tzeddukim some 1000 years earlier ancient Greek deductive logical reasoning. The most famous Spanish rabbi of this Reshonim Era, clearly the Rambam whose statute religious code directly shaped and influenced Karo’s Shulkan Aruch. Qur’anists likewise differ among themselves over Arabic vocabulary, ritual practice, inheritance, criminal law, and the status of inherited Muslim practice; therefore a more accurate description of Munkir al-Ḥadīth/rejecters of hadith – scriptural primacy or scripturalist reconstruction, and not טיפש פשט pure literalism.

Sunni authority, distributed among jurists, schools of law, hadith scholars, seminaries, judges, and local communities. Shiʿi Islam developed more concentrated forms of scholarly authority, especially around the imamate and later the marjaʿiyya; a high-ranking cleric – such as murdered Ali – recognized as a source of emulation and guidance for followers in matters of religious law and ethics. This institution plays a significant role in the socio-cultural and political landscape of Shia communities, particularly in Iran and Iraq.

Karaism, this interfaith comparison validates their need to not simply reject Talmudic Oral-law logic, they like the Tzeddukim and Shomronim before them had to developed their own legal tradition. Wherein that sect had to develop some forms of communal custom, and interpreted the Hebrew T’NaCH (as opposed to the Shomronim who limited their sect to their version of the Torah text). Karaite readings of passages traditionally connected with tefillin and mezuzah reject the Torah concept of swearing a Torah oath or remembering the specifics of the oath sworn by the Avot wherein they alone father the Chosen Cohen people. Rather they treat them only as metaphors rather than accepting the Talmudic “theme” taught by means of precedent common law.

The idea that Israel directly heard only the first two commandments is a rabbinic tradition used in an argument about the number 613; such as the Order of the Shemone Esrei 3 + 13 + 3 blessings – a רמז to 613 משל which teaches the שבת נמשל which interprets shabbat as week rather than a day of the week, based upon the kiddush sanctification of shabbat which 3 times emphasizes the איסר של מלאכה – a דיוק logical reasoning which contrasts עבודה. During the 6 days of Shabbat a bnai brit sanctifies מלאכה through wisdom-time oriented Av commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna.

The Shulkan Aruch like the Rambam statute law code failed to affix Gemarah halachic precedents to interpret the language of a specific Mishna. Both statute law codes prioritized simplification of religious observance over remembering the distinction between ארץ ישראל from g’lut. Moshe Rabbeinu took the 12 Tribes out of Egypt, his last mitzva while alive – he established the Capital Crimes small Sanhedrin Courts in three of the Cities of Refuge on the other side of the Jordan river. Contrast the 1648 false messiah narishkeit, where hoards of desperate Jewish communities believed that the Mitzva of Moshiach applicable to g’lut Jewry. The mitzva of Moshiach – the dedication of Yoval liberty for the 12 Tribal Republic through righteous Sanhedrin courtroom common law, dedicated to make fair compensation of damages as the tiqqun for ‘hatred without cause’ Av tuma avoda zarah.

The common law Gemara routinely brings Tosefta as precedents to interpret the k’vanna of the language of a specific Mishna based upon a unique perspective; akin to different witness testimony to the New Moon. Hadith reports about Muhammad’s sayings, actions, approvals, biography, and sometimes legal judgments. They function similar but differently from the Tosefta common law בניני אבות precedents. Rather they function, at least to Sunni Muslims, as the principal means of knowing the Prophet’s Sunnah. Muhammad prioritizes faith in tawhid Allah whereas post Sinai/Horev the Book of דברים limits faith to the obligation to achieve judicial justice among the 12 Tribes within the borders/jurisdiction of Sanhedrin courtroom authority; hence תורה לא בשמים היא.

Karaism like the Qur’anists sharply limit the Talmudic masoret as authoritive much akin to the Reform and still later Historical Conservative Judaism which view the Talmud as history rather than a vision of the future when a Sanhedrin court designates the Yichus of the 12 tribes within the borders of post ’67 and Oct 7th conquered Gaza – a definition of k’vanna of the mitzva of brit-melah, based upon the mussar as introduced in the NaCH Book of Yehoshua. Prophetic mussar shares no common ground with history. All generations to eternity obligated to grow prophetic mussar within their Yatzir Ha’Tov hearts. History by definition speculative and therefore irrelevant.

Munkir al-Ḥadīth/Qur’anism, Karaism, and Protestant scripturalism – structurally analogous movements of scriptural primacy – each challenges the binding authority of the Oral Torah\פרדס interpretive judicial common law court Sanhedrin legal system as the establishment of faith, replaced by some substitute authority such as JeZeus as the 1st Sinai commandment God, or later Allah. Despite their cultural, historical institutions, doctrines, and political circumstances – substantially different – all embrace a Universal Monotheism which rejected the revelation of the 2nd Sinai commandment; both Moshe and Yehoshua sent as מלאכים to Egypt and Canaan to judge the Gods. This struggle defines the entire literature of the T’NaCH; do not worship other Gods understood as the Av tumah Yatzir Ha’Ra within the heart – akin to Esav and Yaacov wrestling within the womb of Rivka metaphor.

Munkir al-Ḥadīth simply not a unified denomination equivalent to Protestantism or Karaism. In common cultural contexts it functions as a polemical designation for people who reject, or sharply restrict, the authority of hadith. Modern Qur’anists differ considerably over ritual, law, inherited Muslim practice, and the use of hadith as historical evidence, much like modern Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism treatment of the Talmud.

Sunni Islam, compares to the Chassidus of Brezlev, only Muhammad lives as their “Pope”. The analogy to the Protestant challenge to Catholic hierarchy works only at the level of resistance to inherited interpretive authority, not at the level of institutional structure. Shiʿism developed through disputes over succession, the authority of ʿAlī and his descendants, and later doctrines of the imamate. Karaism’s rejection of the Oral Torah revelation places them within the camps of Shomronim and Tzeddukim kapo-like מלשינים. The Hadith simply qualify as a broader category of reports concerning Muhammad’s sayings, actions, approvals, biography, and legal judgments. Respected by the Sunnis as the principal vehicle for knowing the Prophet’s Sunnah making them similar to that of the Tosefta.

The Koran has no concept of ירידות הדורות, directly linked to g’lut. The idea that actions have downstream consequences akin to the ripples resultant from a rock cast into a pond. Post the public burning of all Talmudic hand written manuscripts in Paris, the supporters of the Rambam statute law code which divorced Gemarah halachic precedents as the means of interpreting the language of a specific Mishna based upon a fixed perspective and prioritized an assimilated Greek deductive reasoning logic. Later Islamic communities would likewise struggle with the influence of Greek philosophical schools. Muslim had no fall back logic system, like as did the Jewish kabbalah of פרדס inductive reasoning which separates the P’rushim who passed this masoret down to the rabbis – as recorded through the practice of lighting the Hanukkah lights which rejects Greek deductive logical reasoning as a kosher replacement of פרדס and rabbinic middot traditions of how to understand inductive reasoning in common law courtroom briefs based upon a comparison and contrast of precedents to the case currently heard before the Sanhedrin court.

Post the Rambam “Civil War” all later commentaries written upon the common law codes of Rif, Rosh, and Tosafot commentary fail to treat this unique sh’itta of common law and pigeon hole all post Talmudic literature into the egg-crate block-headed box of static deductive logical reasoning.