Torah justice: The system demands functional, fair, adversarial courtrooms. It rejects the passive, purely theoretical posture of galut theological Judaism. Justice begins with the sanctification of the time-oriented commandment Yovel and the wisdom of brit melah as the eternal “sign of the brit” – a active, land-dependent legal responsibility. This dual Constitutional anchor – of the oath brit alliance – eternally creates, akin to the creation of a מלאך, the chosen Cohen people who inherit the land of Canaan – dini nafshot requires at least two witnesses. The definition of modern Zionism – right to self determination – the vision of Herzl to combat European ANTI-SEMITIC racial insanity commonly framed by these great Apes who share a 98.7% genome genetic match with humans, as Europe’s “Jewish Problem”.

Addressing the subject of דברים פרק כט – the Sh’Cem blessings by 6 Tribes and curses by 6 Tribes brit — under the shadow of the first two Sinai commandments which ALL Israel accepted prior to Moshe receiving the rest of the Written Torah and all the Oral Torah revelations thereafter.

This Sh’Cem brit, which Yehoshua cut over-looks the borders of Canaan, similar to the cities of refuge – small Sanhedrin courts. A brit Israel forced to flee and stand trial before a Small Sanhedrin court, if that court ruled that the death – accidental, the person had to live within the borders of that city of refuge till the Cohen Ha-Gadol passed. Hence, the cities of refuge qualify as g’lut refugee camps for bnai brit Israel, based upon the 3 cities of refuge established by Moshe on the other side of the Jordan river.

Its “under the shadow” of this oath alliance brit which the Order of the Rabbeinu Tam {[Kadesh] [Ve-Haya Ki Yeviacha] [Ve-Haya Im Shamoa] [Shema]} tefillen calls upon the generations of Israel to remember. Hence the Order of parshiot a completely different order from Rashi tefillen {[Kadesh] [Ve-Haya Ki Yeviacha] [Shema] [Ve-Haya Im Shamoa]}.

The latter “under the shadow” of Gilgal, wherein Israel swear the oath brit which Moshe cut: just as HaShem sent Moshe to Egypt as a BRIT מלאך to judge the Gods of Egypt; HaShem sent Yehoshua to Canaan as a BRIT מלאך to judge the Gods of Canaan. As the “Giant” Par’o fell, so too the “Giant” kings of Canaan would fall. This BRIT of Gilgal declares the מלכות of HaShem as the God of Israel.

The Order of Rashi tefillen “remembers”/”t’shuva” the brit cut at Gilgal. The Order of the same four parshiot of the Rabbeinu Tam tefillen “remembers”/”t’shuva” the brit cut at Sh’Cem; specifically the defication of the Oral Torah tohor spirits to rule the lands through just Sanhedrin common law courts. Justice: upon Justice hinges the blessing/curse direction of the Torah birt. Common Law courtroom justice NOT theological interpretations of religious Orthodox g’lut Judaism which has dominated Jewish culture and custom for 2000+ years!

Common law courts stand upon the יסוד of earlier judicial courtroom rulings ie precedents which bear inductive logical similarities to the Case currently heard before the Court – through the arguments and counter arguments made between the Prosecutor vs. Defense; hence all Torts courts must have no less than 3 justices – 2 serve the Prosecutor/Defense requirements of common law courts. The כלל: precedents brought by the Prosecutor – not applicable as Defense precedents – פשיטה. This bi-polar judicial system defines Torah common law: as expressed through all disputes between the classic model – Hillel vs. Shammai; and also the difficulty/answer “style” of Talmudic Gemara learning of each and every specific Mishna. Hence the decision to organize halacha into religious codes while it addresses the needs of g’lut Jewry during the Dark Ages and ghetto gulag slavery period – clearly a לא לשמה coping mechanism need which responds to Jewish isolation among crude barbaric civilizations where justice mirrors the court of Par’o during the days prior to Moshe & Aaron taking Israel out of Egyptian slavery.

Prophetic mussar addresses the consequences of the Torah curse of g’lut. King David as Moshiach the death of Uriah defines David’s fallen booth, just as assuredly as king Shaul’s failure to obey the commandment of Shmuel the prophet (Who serves as the enforcer of the Sanhedrin court – in theory; שפטים ושוטרים.), in slaughtering Amalek together with its king and all its av tumah property such as animals. King Shaul, the first anointed Moshiach by Shmuel, erred in the exact same was as did the 2 sons of Aaron who offered up ‘strange fire’ and died (Aaron and his house Moshe anointed as Moshiach; Pinchas in the war against Midian the Talmud refers to as משיח מלחמה), and Cain. The Capital Crime of perverting korbanot unto only קום ועשה and not קום ועשה זמן גרמא commandments.

Torah defines “FAITH” through צדק צדק תרדוף. Neither King Shaul nor King David obeyed the precedent first set by the prophet Yehoshua – Keep the Pesach to set the Yovel foundation of Liberty and sanctify brit melah as the sign of the brit sworn to Avram at the brit cut between the pieces. Both men failed to bring “shalom to the land” through the establishment of the Institutions of the Great/Small Sanhedrin Federal common law court system where the “Mishkan” (משל) permanently teaches the (נמשל) k’vanna that the spirit of HaShem’s tohor middot live within the hearts of the chosen Cohen nation, according to the mussar of the prophet Yermia’s ברית חדש.

All NaCH Meshiachim have failed to sanctify the Torah commandment of Moshiach – to establish the Yovel and faith: the Federal Sanhedrin court system/בית המקדש – משל. The prophet Natan rebuked David for confusing building a copy-cat Cathedral house of avoda zara with the Torah obligation to establish justice through Sanhedrin courtrooms within the borders of conquered Canaan. From Isaiah’s king Cyrus, to Shmuel’s king Shaul and David; to post Babylonian g’lut of Bar Kochba and JeZeus and Sabbatai Zevi and Yaacov Frank and even last Chabad rebbe – all false messiahs.

The Book of Shmuel specifically addresses the mitzva of Moshiach based upon the Book of Yehoshua and Book of Shofim where Yovel liberty did not prevail in the land and the people worshipped the Gods of Canaan.

All Torah commandments dependent upon the first Sinai commandment. Isaiah’s moshiach reference to king Cyrus the Great clearly only a משל. Torah commandments do not apply to Goyim who worship other Gods.

The closing blessing curse brit of Moshe stands upon the first two Sinai commandments. G’lut Jews live under the Torah 2nd commandment curse. When David fled from Shaul unto g’lut he too validate this Torah first commandment vision: “I have been forced to worship other Gods”. G’lut Jews living in curse g’lut “Egypt” (לאו דוקא) cannot obey Torah faith לשמה. Hence the Talmud instructs better to do mitzvot לא לשמה – to later do mitzvot לשמה. Failure to discern the contrast between blessing/Canaan\Yovel from the curse\g’lut-slavery. The fundamental proof that the NT a false messiah book of avoda zarah.

Torah common law/משנה תורה NOT Roman statute law. The Talmud states just as clearly as does the NaCH that the Yovel never kept as a Torah דאורייתא commandment. The kingdom of Yechuda “tabernacle fell” when the king of Yechuda failed to keep the Yovel. The Book of Yermia teaches this clearly – like the Sun on a cloudless summer day.

Attempts to change the clear Nach texts therefore “highly non-tranditional theological framework which ignores Moshe Rabbeinu building 3 of the 6 Cities of Refuge/Small Sanhedrin courts and Yehoshua doing the same! Torah rejects the av tuma avoda zarah which worships a God in the Heavens! The Book of D’varim explicitly states: תורה לא בשמים היא.

Torah faith – צדק צדק תרדוף – clearly never observed not in king David’s life (He failed to judge Uriah before a Sanhedrin court!) and equally clear no Non Jew can sanctify the mitzva of Moshiach in foreign countries. The oath brit lands sworn to the Avot as specific as the lands promised to both Moav Ammon and Esav. Observance of Torah commandments in Egypt (לאו דוקא) by definition according to all the Reshonim לא לשמה. No king of David or the 10 Tribes of Israel in Samaria ever once established the Written Torah as the constitution of the Republic which mandates Sanhedrin courts based upon the judicial oppression of Paro’s court in Egypt and the rebuke of Yetro Moshe his son-in-law.

Torah neither a theology nor a religion. Moshe validated Tribal land and rights. RambaN ויקרא יח:כה wrote in his Chumash commentary that mitzvot observed in g’lut only a “remembrance” for the time when Jews can observe mitzvot לשמה in ארץ ישראל. G’lut has its consequences. Just as the Oct 7th 2023 surprise attack upon Israel by UNWRA and Hamas resulted in the total destruction of Gaza no different from the 1000 plane fire-bombing of Japanese and German cities consequent to the Nazi invasion of Poland.

The Book of Acts, in Koine Greek. The Greek word “cleansed” not remotely the same as the Hebrew word tohor. Just as מלאכה different from עבודה. But Koine Greek lacks the nuance to distinguish the two different Hebrew verbs. The Greek word ἐκαθάρισεν (ekatharisen, from katharizō) in Acts 11:10 does not have a single, one-to-one equivalent that perfectly captures the full spectrum of the two distinct Hebrew concepts of “tohor” as it relates to “work” as expressed through the Torah. The Hebrew טהור stands upon the foundation of the Oral Torah 13 “tohor” middot which Moshe heard at Horev on Yom Kippur – 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf. The revelation of “Oral Torah” pronouns of the שם השם revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment. This Spirit revelation the Avot did not know. The sanctification of shabbat לא תעשה מלאכה – this wisdom stands on the foundation of tohor spirits holy to HaShem.

Just as the כלל second Sinai commandment defined through the פרט of the Golden Calf; so too טמא רוחות define the ערב רב שאין להם יראת אלהים. Viewed from this Torah perspective, the limitations of the Koine Greek in Acts 11:10 – indeed significant.

Acts 11:10 fails to address the struggle between the Yatrir Ha-Tov\Yatzir Ha-Rah (how Rabbi Yechuda in the Mishna of ברכות interprets בכל לבבך as the prophet Yerami’s ברית חדש). The Greek ἐκαθάρισεν often implies a removal of dirt or a general purification; perhaps similar to how modern Hebrew today refers to refined olive oil as טהור. But modern Hebrew as different from Biblical Hebrew as Koine Greek.

In this framework, the “cleansing” in Acts 11 is not just a removal of dirt but a re-alignment of the assimilated & intermarried Egyptian Erev Rav that came out of Egypt and declared themselves as “grafted” on to the chosen Cohen nation. The Greek koinoō (to make common) fails to distinguish between Chol (Israel) and Tamei (profane), perverting through a false translation the nuanced understanding which distinguishes the middot which struggle for dominance within the prophetic ברית חדש heart.

The Greek koinos blurs these, treating the Erev Rav as merely “common” rather than addressing the fundamental Av Tum’ah middot which define their alien Esav Yetzer HaRa. It fails to grasp the eternal struggle expressed through the struggle between Yaacov and Esav in the womb of Rivka. טיפש פשט literal translations as idiotic as the literalist viewpoint that the Universe created in 6 days.

Acts 11:10 perverts the prophetic ברית חדש into the NT diseased whore prostitute; ערב רב “Jews” defines the Torah curse of Amalek throughout the generations, commonly referred to today as antisemitism – first coined during the period of the Dreyfus Trials. Katharizō implies a physical or general removal of dirt. It treats purity as a static condition. Rather than a dynamic Torah spiritual struggle. By using this word, the text erases the 13 Middot and the specific Oral revelation that defines true Tahor middot — through T’NaCH,Talmudic, Midrashim, and Siddur scholarship. Hence the church abomination has always and forever denied the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

The Greek κοινός (koinos) and κοινοῦ (koinou), on par with how “covenant” (as expressed through both the NT & Koran.) perverts ברית. The latter requires swearing a Torah oath (שם ומלכות) within the borders of Canaan, based upon the prophet Yehoshua’s definition of tefillen through the oaths sworn first at Gilgal and then at Sh’Cem. The Order of Rashi tefillen – remembers/t’shuva\ the oath sworn at Gilgal; the Order of Rabeinu Tam tefillen – remembers\t’shuva/ the oath sworn at Sh’Cem. Both stand upon the יסוד Blessing & Curse oaths affixed to two opposing mounts through שם ומכלות sworn oaths.

The Greek text of Acts 11:10, not merely a translation error, but a theological rupture that severed the connection to the Shem HaShem and the Middot-מלכות, replacing the dynamic struggle of the Brit with a static, “idiotic” literalism that facilitates the Erev Rav – Amalek curse. Greek κοινός (koinos) fails to distinguish between חֹל and טמא. The ערב רב – Amalek eternal Torah curse – the Prime Torah precedent which further defines the פרט of the Golden Calf av tuma avoda zara – 2nd Sinai commandment. The Greek diatheke(covenant) introduces a statute static decree which totally negates the oaths sworn by the Avot and the Oath HaShem in his brit turn swore back separately to each of the Avot.

The Order of Rashi tefillen remembers – As HaShem sent Moshe as his מלאך to judge the Gods of Egypt, so too HaShem sent Yehoshua as his מלאך to judge the Gods of Canaan. The Order of Rabeinu Tam tefillen remembers the oath, ((as again expressed through lighting the Hanukkah lights)), only to interpret the k’vanna of time-oriented wisdom commandments through the Oral Torah tohor spirit middot; which chazal has clarified as פרדס – expressed through the rabbinic middot of 7 Hillel, 10 Akiva, 13 Yishmael, vs 32 HaGalil. In that Jewish Civil War the Tzeddukim together with the Greeks sought to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. The Tzeddukim assimilated ערב רב, like the Wilderness generation – both have no portion in the World to Come.

The 6 Divine Names Ya/Pesach Ha’El/Shevuoth El/ר”ה, Elohim/Yom Kippur, El Shaddai/Sukkot and Eish Ha’Elohim\Shemini Atzeret + Shabbat = the 6 days of Chol where Israel sanctifies time oriented mitzvot wisdom and shabbat – called Shalom – where Israel dedicates not to do wisdom acts of מלאכה – based upon תמיד מעשה בראשית, the eternal creation of the chosen Cohen people through sanctification of Torah wisdom time-oriented commandments on Shabbat – meaning the “week” of Creation.

The Greek ἐκαθάρισεν (ekatharisen), therefore – a reductive translation that fails to capture the metaphysical depth of טהור…the Yatzir Ha’Tov alignment of 13 middot of mercy – understood as blessing & curse as defined by the first two Sinai commandments; as affixed within the 13 middle blessings of the Shemone Esrei tefillah דרבנן. The Greek text ignores this duality, offering a single “cleansing” that bypasses the blessing curse oaths which mark the borders of the Cohen nation from the Goyim. In short, the Greek text of Acts 11:10 – a theological revisionist history g’lut Av tuma avoda zarah JeZeus false messiah catastrophe.

This sugya of Aggada serves as the basis to learn the mixture of halacha and aggada. By giving you קידושין ה as the established case of middot contained within a Vilna Shas format of a defined sugya, I seek to duplicate this in some other defined sugya of the Vilna Shas. The 32 Middot of Rabbi Eliezer ben Jose ha-Gelili – the definitive horizontal threads (ערב – Weft) that weave through the vertical lines of judicial common law (שתי – Warp). They interweave the stark transactional realm of pure Halakha.

Aggadah/Mussar—the structural matrix that reveals the Kavanna, the ethical, national, and historic blueprint k’vanna of common law. The : ___ : sugya precedent ideally seeks similar Aggadic precedents; but not in this case. By demanding that the twin be strictly Aggadic (Weft) and perfectly bound by internal colons (:), this ideal rejects the popular sh’itta of learning Shas with an exact, spatial sh’itta of Dof Yomi – which flatten Talmudic texts and simply do not & cannot replicate Torah common law legalism.

Precedents (בניני אבות) require something that connects one case with another in Talmudic common law. What other Aggadic sugya of the Shas Bavli employs this exact set of middot? To my knowledge none. Where do the middot sequence in .קידושין ה of rabbi Yossi — what other sugya or combination of sugyot across the entire Shas Bavli have this exact same sequence of middot?

Sugya intergrity defined through the [ : ] which separates one sugya of Gemara from another; like as does the ס או פ in the Written Torah. The precedent for sugya integrity learns from the ס/sugya and פ\chapter of the Order of the Written Torah. Upon this יסוד the T’NaCH repudiates the Xtian bible abominations whose chapters and verses change the Order of the T’NaCH on par with the church belief in a man/God.

There a person must count the שם השם in a repeating 13 middot ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון etc revolving wheel across all 5 Books of the Torah. Hence the prophets referred to this as the chariot wheels within wheels metaphor סוד conceals the kabbalah of Torah common law. Torah a common law legal system. משנה תורה – דברים means 1. Legislative Review. 2. Common Law. The Book of Divarim “constitutionallly” mandates common law Sanhedrin courts; hence Moshe Rabbeinu established the 3 cities of refuge Sanhedrin courts, and Yehoshua did the same after Israel crossed the Jordan and kept Pesach as the model of the mitzva of Yovel, together with brit melah – the sign of the brit to rule the conquered land of Canaan with Sanhedrin courtroom justice.

The entire purpose of the Books of Shmuel, mitzva of Moshiach … prior to that time Israel did not rule the land in “Liberty”! This reality, the generation following the passing of Yehoshua the prophet, that Book described as “worshipped avoda zara”. Avoda zarah does not literally refer to bowing down to a pesel. Rather foreign cultures and customs the bnai brit people assimilated and embraced and abandoned the culture and customs which the Torah and much later Talmud define.

The Torah NaCH Prophets learn from one another by containing the same identical sets of middot, for example רחום חנון ערך הפנים רב חסד. If one sugya in the Torah has this set of middot and a different sugya in the NaCH prophets has this identical set of middot within a specific sugya or sugiot סמוך combination, the latter becomes a precedent from which a person can derive the k’vanna of prophetic mussar down through the generations.

The warp/weft Talmud operates in the same model. Only instead of counting the שם השם in a revolving 13 middot revolving wheel. The Talmud ideally divides halachic sugyot from aggadic sugyot through affixing the 7, 10, 13 middot of Hillel, Akiva, and Yishmael to halachic sugyot and 32 of HaGalilee to addadic sugyot. Its called a sh’itta of learning among many others. But its this sh’itta which Rav Nemuraskii taught me.

The precedent for sugya integrity learns from the ס/sugya and פ\chapter of the Order of the Written Torah. There a person must count the שם השם in a repeating 13 middot ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון etc revolving wheel. Hence the prophets referred to this as the chariot wheels within wheels metaphor kabbalah. The foundation for the Torah common law legal system. משנה תורה – דברים means 1. Legislative Review. 2. Common Law.

The Book of Divarim “constitutionallly” mandates common law Sanhedrin courts and דיעבד permits kings. Hence Moshe Rabbeinu established the 3 cities of refuge Sanhedrin courts, and Yehoshua did the same after Israel crossed the Jordan and kept Pesach as the model of the mitzva of Yovel, together with brit melah – the sign of the brit to rule the conquered land of Canaan with Sanhedrin courtroom justice, the vision of faith first revealed to Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov. The entire purpose of the Books of Shmuel, to define the mitzva of Moshiach. Prior to that time, Israel did not rule the land in Yovel “Liberty”!

This reality the generation following the passing of Yehoshua the prophet described as “worshipped avoda zara”. Avoda zarah does not literally refer to bowing down to a pesel. Rather, embracing foreign cultures and customs the bnai brit people assimilated and embraced and abandoned the culture and customs which the Torah and much later Talmud define. Hence the B’HaG rules that lighting the lights of Hanukkah a mitzva דאורייתא!

The Torah, and NaCH Prophets learn from one another by containing the same identical sets of middot, for example רחום חנון ערך הפנים רב חסד. If one sugya in the Torah has this set of middot and a different sugya in the NaCH prophets has this identical set of middot, within a specific sugya or sugiot סמוכים combination, the latter becomes a precedent from which a person can derive the k’vanna of prophetic mussar down to all generations thereafter. The warp/weft Talmud operates in the same model. Rabbi Yechuda compiled his Mishna after the Bar Kochba disaster where Rome changed the name of Judea unto Palestine. Throughout the entire Beit Sh’ne Jews never experienced Pesach/Yovel freedom. Hence the Mishna functions in the identical role of NaCH prophetic mussar. Rabbi Akiva laughed when he saw a fox leave Herod’s “holy of holies”.

The Talmud, only instead of counting the שם השם in a revolving 13 middot revolving wheel. It weaves together halachic sugyot with aggadic sugyot through ideally affixing the 7, 10, 13 middot of Hillel, Akiva, and Yishmael to halachic portions and 32 of HaGalilee to addadic portions. Its called a sh’itta of learning.

A comprehensive Shitta (system) of learning that treats the entire Oral Torah as a single, multi-dimensional matrix of legal precedents, completely integrated through the language of rabbinic middot of פרדס inductive logic reasoning. By grounding this עולם הבא vision together with the constitutional architecture of Sefer Devarim as a foundation for common law; which map middot דאורייתא ודרבנן as a dynamic “chariot wheel” – code kabbalah, the true nature of a cross-Shas sh’itta – parallel – ideally becomes clear.

Justice defines true Liberty (דרור) under the Yovel model. Hence kre’a shma remembers the Yovel from Egypt. When the Book of Shoftim records that the generation after Yehoshua “worshipped Avoda Zarah,” it means they abandoned the native common law court culture, & assimilated unto foreign administrative customs, and stopped rendering justice according to the middot Horev revelation. Remembered through the Divine name האל dedicated on Chag Shevuot.

When an internal, closed sugya contains a specific sequence of these middot, it acts as a precise structural fingerprint. If you can find another sugya or combination of sugyot locked between the same structural boundaries (the equivalent of a Parsha Setuma or Petucha – that runs the exact same string of middot, the later sugya reads as a direct precedent of the former. It reveals the underlying Kavanna of the Mishnaic common law case.

The sugya of .קידושין ה begins with Kal VaChomer, flows to דבר הלמד מעניינו, followed by מיעוט, דבר שהוא שנוי. Hence the wisdom – how to locate an exact Talmud precedent in either the Bavli or even the Yerushalmi. By giving you קידושין ה as the established case of middot contained within a Vilna Shas format of defined sugyot, I seek to duplicate this in some other defined sugya of the Vilna Shas. The 32 Middot of Rabbi Eliezer ben Jose ha-Gelili the definitive horizontal threads (ערב – Weft) that weave through the vertical lines of the law (שתי – Warp), they do not ideally belong to the stark transactional realm of pure Halakha. They belong to Aggadah/Mussar—the structural matrix that reveals the Kavanna, the ethical, national, and historic blueprint of Yatzir Ha’Tov k’vaana within the heart.

The : ___ : sugya Order precedent must by definition ideally be Aggadic. By demanding that the twin be strictly Aggadic (Weft) and perfectly bound by internal colons (:), this ideal perspective of Shas acknowledges בדיעבד cases; a spatial precision that Dof Yomi – which flattens and ignores sugya text integrity simply cannot replicate. Torah common law legalism, replaced with frum religious ritual observance. Warp (שתי): the halakhic framework—the legal rulings, obligations, liabilities, and procedural logic. Weft (ערב): the aggadic matrix—the historical memory, prophetic mussar which through the פשט-דרוש axis, links the Oral Torah spirit middot through the Aggadah and Midrashic rabbinic middot; akin to AC & DC electricity.

This provides the mussar k’vanna which defines the Yatzir Ha-Tov middot spirits within the heart. Such that when a person keeps a specific halachah he can through common law precedent based learning potentially elevates ritual halacha transformed unto the wisdom of Torah av time-oriented commandments, as first introduced in the בראשית creation Aggada story. The g’lut לא לשמה טיפש פשט literal worship of words compares to a dog chasing after its own tail – a hurry up and wait frum religious mentality.

The Vilna Shas layout becomes significant because it preserves recognizable sugya units within which these interpretive patterns can be traced. Creating an original catalog of precedents, starting with the Aggada the next revelation of the Torah prior to Israelis keeping the Yovel and establishment of the federal Sanhedrin Court system, according to the expectations placed upon this sh’itta of learning.

Comparing Kiddushin 5a to Kiddushin 23a בדיעבד exposes how the Talmud runs the exact same code string through both the Warp and the Weft, changing the entire nature of the transmission. On Kiddushin 23a, the Gemara runs that precise sequence of middot—the Kal VaChomer, the textual comparisons, and Rava’s rigorous dialetical response—but the current is strictly Halakhic (Warp). This later precedent, a related clause of the סמוך adjacent Case/Din Mishna! דתנן: עבד כנעני נקנה בכסף ובשטר ובחזקה. וקונה את עצמו בכסף על ידי אחרים ובשטר על ידי עצמו ולא ע”י אחרים דברי רבי מאיר.

This contrast hammers out the stark transactional mechanics of Kinyan (specifically regarding an Eved Kena’ani / Canaanite slave, Ketubah parameters, and the structural exclusions of acquisition). קידושין by contrast acquires title to the brit soul of the Avot. Hence divorce requires that a man return back to his ex her “Title soul” by way of a גט.

Because the mitzva of קידושין involves much more than simply dealing with pure procedural liabilities, and obligations. קידושין does not apply to Goyim because they have no portion with the chosen seed of the Avot through the brit. Ritual halacha that has no k’vanna no wisdom time oriented commandment – such תולדות secondary commandments do not generate the prophetic Mussar K’vanna. The av wisdom which separates Torah time-oriented commandments from religious beliefs common among Goyim and g’lut Jews who can only observe Torah mitzvot under the Torah death curse of g’lut. קום ועשה מצוות והלכות operates as the functional AC current of frum religious observances, rather than the internal DC current that transforms the heart תמיד מעשה בראשית from nothing, unto the Cohen inheritors of the Avot within conquered Canaan. Halacha not framed as a self-contained Drusha living prophetic spirit; created to breath the spirit of life into the Yetzer HaTov heart of clay; simply because to sanctify time oriented commandments לשמה, this mountain hanging by a hair, depends upon Jews dedication of Yovel and brit melah לשמה within conquered Canaan – the first Sinai commandment.

This comparison attempts to validate the sh’itta that Rav Nemuraskii taught me in Yeshiva D’var Yerushalim. The identical sequence of middot can appear in both places, but if you treat them flatly—the way Daf Yomi or a literalist (peshat) Rambam halachic surface reading does—this immensely popular g’lut sh’itta completely misses the transformation. Kiddushin 5a holds the higher structural K’vanna, serving as the architectural blueprint for how this wisdom time-oriented commandment elevates the human spirit, while 23a provides the technical, baseline legal boundaries how to acquire an עבד כנעני. A כלל applicable to virtually all literature, the rule of compare and contrast. But in Talmudic scholarship a different כלל – never separate Gemara halachic precedents from their Mishna. Because Talmudic common law serves as the prophetic vision for when Israel conquers Canaan, dedicates the Yovel time-oriented count of judicial liberty in the land sworn to the Avot as their future born Cohen seed eternal inheritance. No word mutilated “covenant” translation in either fraud NT or Koran can change the oath ברית sworn alliance לשמה which to Avot cut upon their future born living souls at the brit cut between the pieces\מגן אברהם.

Our Mishna excludes קטנה from קידושין ע”י רבוי מיעט\קמ”ל. As: גט דאורייתא כל שכן קידושין. Hence “ספק קידושין” does not apply to a קטנה anymore than an immature etrog qualifies as one of the four species during Chag Sukkot or קידושין applies to an עבד כנעני.

Shall now contrast Boris Badenov & Natasha Fatale. Both of whom learn halacha divorced from its Mishna. Both prioritize religious ritual and ignore the prophetic mussar of the Talmud that stands upon Yovel Liberty and Sanhedrin common law courts guarded לשמה. Both mourn the destruction of Herod’s temple abomination by the Roman meshiach akin but opposite of the Moshiach king of Persia who from his own treasury permitted the generation of Ezra to build a “house of worship” but like the Romans ruled the land as a banana republic. Hence throughout the entire בית שני Jews never sanctified the Yovel as a דאורייתא מצוה. And how much more so post Bar Kochba Rabbi Yechuda’s Sha’s Mishna published in Roman Palestine. Based upon how Natasha Fatale learns the statute decree of Boris Badenov, clearly both assimilated Jews ignored the Talmudic כלל – never separate Gemara halachic precedents from their Mishna.

הלכות דירושין: פרק ראשון – א וב. == אין האשה מתגרשת אלא בכתב שיגיע לה וכתב, זה הוא הנקרא גט. ועשרה דברים הן עיקר הגירושין מן התורה ואלו הן: א. שלא יגרש האיש אלא ברצונו ב. ושיגרש בכתב וא בדבר אחר וכו’. כסף משנה: === אם לא תמצא חן בעינין שאינו מגרש וכו’. פרק חרש (יבמות דף קי”ב:) האשה יוצאה לרצונה ושלא לרצונה והאיש אינו מוציא אלא לרצונו

Neither statute law assimilated codes understand our Gemara precedents brought to interpret the intent of the Framer of this av Mishna of קידושין. The later codes address the situation of g’lut Jews post the collapse of the Roman roads where people stopped international travel or in Natasha Fatale situation – Jews confronted with the church war crimes of ghetto gulags.

If Boris built the clean, administrative framework, Natasha built the impenetrable defensive perimeter for a traumatized, post-Expulsion nation. Reeling from the chaos of the shifting G’lut, Yosef Karo takes the code concept and turns it into a survival checklist.

In the Shulchan Aruch, the text – completely divorced from its prophetic Mussar. It becomes a hyper-vigilant operational manual: Do this, don’t touch that, say this word at this exact minute. It treats the symptoms of exile with rigorous ritual observance (Kum Ve’Aseh), but because it sits entirely on the surface level, it cuts off the internal DC current that was meant to transform the human heart from clay into a living sanctuary.

A logical פרדס דיוק – inference of inductive reasoning made on Rom 12:2 → “church avodah zarah” → based upon the either/or first two Sinai commandments which Moshe Rabbeinu reinterpreted as blessing/curse– life/death. Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox both embrace dogmatism and Creedal based belief systems. The “genesis” of the condemnation of the entire NT fraud – begins with Romans 12:2; by universalizing a substitute “covenant” for ברית, it untethered the “covenant” substitute Universal Monotheism God from the local god Eretz Canaan, conquered and ruled by the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot. Just as the Torah has its בראשית-introduction of wisdom time-oriented positive commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna so too and how much more so the Pauline theology of Original sin and Romans 12:2 serve as the “Genesis” Latin NT bible substitute.

Paul’s theology laid the exact intellectual groundwork that allowed the later Church to completely detach belief in their man\God from Judea and acquiesce to Rome’s erasure of the land’s Jewish identity – post destruction of the Bar Kochba revolt. Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox both embrace dogmatism and Creedal based belief systems. The genesis of the condemnation of the entire NT fraud begins with Romans 12:2; Rom 12:2 → “church avodah zarah” Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox both embrace dogmatism and Creedal based belief systems. The genesis of the condemnation of the entire NT fraud begins with Romans 12:2.

Rom 12:2 τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ (to thelēma tou theou) totally off the grid. The Torah brit revolves around ארץ Canaan. Not the world. The Greek phrase behind “pattern of this world” commonly understood as the prevailing way of life in the present era. This declaration openly either repudiates the Roman empire or rejects Judea and supports the post Bar Kochba Roman renaming of the conquered province of Palestine. Which one?

Paul by most super-commentaries the author of Romans. He wrote it from Corinth while on his way to Jerusalem (commonly dated around 57–58 CE), only a few years before the outbreak of the Jewish revolt against Rome! The dominant “age/system” in Judea and across the entire Roman empire. So a religious box thinking simply absurd.

Strictly with Rom 12:2: the text doesn’t mention Rome, Judea, or any renaming of Judea to Palestine! Written in Greek the “God’s will” it refers to fails to obey the 1st Sinai commandment. And therefore it justifies the 2nd Sinai commandment and directly refers to some Greek God. Its Greek language says believers should not be conformed to the “pattern of this age/system,” but be transformed by renewing their mind, so they can discern/approve God’s will. Torah judicial common law stands upon previous judicial precedents not what individuals personally believe or not believe. This language supports the suggestion that avoda zara believes in Gods in the heavens.

The whole of the Xtian bible, not just the book of Romans, totally ignores the 1st and 2nd Blessing vs. Curse commandments which the entire Torah judicial system hinges upon. Hence the Xtian bible whose NT supplants the OT worships a Nicene Creed Trinity God in Heaven. This violates the revelation of the Torah at Sinai – תורה לא בשמים היא. The NT prioritizes “love as the greatest of all commandments”. D’varim 6:5 the paragraph of the kre’a shma tefillah דאורייתא, prioritizes love. However, משנה תורה\דברים – means common law/legislative review of the k’vanna of the other 4 Books of the Written Torah. The בנין אב precedent to learn the k’vanna of “love” learns from the brit cut between the pieces wherein childless Avram counted the Olam HaBah future born chosen Cohen seed. The mitzva from the Torah which best achieves the brit cut between the pieces … the opposing mitzvot of קידושין – גט – wherein a bnai brit Israel acquires or returns title to the “soul” of his wife. “Soul” in this context: the future born seed of this marital union. Hence upon divorce the obligation to give his ex her גט – which returns the title of her “soul” back to her possession.

Rom 12:2 promotes a belief system: “how believers are to think and live”. The Torah NEVER commands any such commandment – ever. This av tuma avoda zara presumes that “faith” linked to belief in God. This false assumption/religious rhetoric propaganda fails to weigh the word translation of אלהים which replaced the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment. The 1st Sinai commandment does not command to love God as the NT prioritizes as the greatest of all commandments – false.

τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ (to thelēma tou theou) means the word has been inflected—changed at the ending—to indicate that something belongs to, originates from, or is closely connected to God. Utter and complete rhetoric nonsense. The Mishna Chagigah 2:1: instructs that any person who contemplates upon that which is above, behind or below him – better that that person never born. The Greek Word God in no way shape or form defines the 1st Sinai revelation of the שם השם. Based upon the 2nd Sinai commandment Goyim worship other Gods; Egypt and Canaan worshipped other Gods just as did the ancient Greeks and Romans and before them the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians.

Torah Lo BaShamayim vs. Internal Discernment – Romans 12:2 introduces an entirely different mechanism for determining what is right. Paul shifts the locus of the law from objective, courtroom-tested statutes based on precedents to an internalized, subjective “renewal of the mind” (anakainōsis tou noos) to discern an abstract “will.”

The Greek word (Theos) carries centuries of baggage from Greek philosophical and mythological thought. In the Greco-Roman world, Theos or theoi belonged to a cosmic hierarchy—deities inhabiting the heavens, or the abstract “Unmoved Mover” of Hellenistic philosophy. When the Greek NT text uses “of God”, it uses a term that, to a Greek or Roman audience, fits cleanly into their existing cosmic/theological “box.” It abstracts the Divine into a universal, heavenly entity.

The historical context of 57–58 CE from Corinth, Paul’s use of the phrase tō aiōni toutō — “this age” or “this system” – is intentionally subversive, but it operates on an apocalyptic axis rather than a localized geopolitical one. By telling his readers not to be “conformed to this age,” he is asserting that the entire current political and physical world order is obsolete, waiting to be supplanted by a celestial kingdom. To a jurisprudence built on the permanent, physical inheritance of a specific geographic territory (Eretz Canaan), treating the physical world order as a transient “age” to be transcended completely undermines the territorial and physical nature of the brit.

The Gospel: By their fruits you shall know them judges Romans 12:2 rhetoric as utterly false. The NT rejects both circumcision and declares Goyim not under the law – which post NT church openly rejected Torah Oral Torah common law. The Church embraced Roman statute law; hence by their fruits you shall know them.

Rom 12:2 τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ (to thelēma tou theou) totally off the grid. The Torah brit revolves around ארץ Canaan. Not the world. The Greek phrase behind “pattern of this world” commonly understood as the prevailing way of life in the present era. This declaration openly either repudiates the Roman empire or rejects Judea and supports the post Bar Kochba Roman renaming of the conquered province of Palestine. Which one?

Paul by most super-commentaries the author of Romans. He wrote it from Corinth while on his way to Jerusalem (commonly dated around 57–58 CE), only a few years before the outbreak of the Jewish revolt against Rome! The dominant “age/system” in Judea and across the entire Roman empire. So a religious box thinking simply absurd.

Strictly with Rom 12:2: the text doesn’t mention Rome, Judea, or any renaming of Judea to Palestine! Written in Greek the “God’s will” it refers to fails to obey the 1st Sinai commandment. And therefore it justifies the 2nd Sinai commandment and directly refers to some Greek God. Its Greek language says believers should not be conformed to the “pattern of this age/system,” but be transformed by renewing their mind, so they can discern/approve God’s will. Torah judicial common law stands upon previous judicial precedents not what individuals personally believe or not believe. This language supports the suggestion that avoda zara believes in Gods in the heavens.

The whole of the Xtian bible, not just the book of Romans, totally ignores the 1st and 2nd Blessing vs. Curse commandments which the entire Torah judicial system hinges upon. Hence the Xtian bible whose NT supplants the OT worships a Nicene Creed Trinity God in Heaven. This violates the revelation of the Torah at Sinai – תורה לא בשמים היא.

Rom 12:2 promotes a belief system: “how believers are to think and live”. The Torah NEVER commands any such commandment – ever. This av tuma avoda zara presumes that “faith” linked to belief in God. This false assumption/religious rhetoric propaganda fails to weigh the word translation of אלהים which replaced the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment. The 1st Sinai commandment does not command to love God as the NT prioritizes as the greatest of all commandments – false.

τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ (to thelēma tou theou) means the word has been inflected—changed at the ending—to indicate that something belongs to, originates from, or is closely connected to God. Utter and complete rhetoric nonsense. The Mishna Chagigah 2:1: instructs that any person who contemplates upon that which is above, behind or below him – better that that person never born. The Greek Word God in no way shape or form defines the 1st Sinai revelation of the שם השם. Based upon the 2nd Sinai commandment Goyim worship other Gods; Egypt and Canaan worshipped other Gods just as did the ancient Greeks and Romans and before them the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians.

Torah Lo BaShamayim vs. Internal Discernment – Romans 12:2 introduces an entirely different mechanism for determining what is right. Paul shifts the locus of the law from objective, courtroom-tested statutes based on precedents to an internalized, subjective “renewal of the mind” (anakainōsis tou noos) to discern an abstract “will.”

The Greek word (Theos) carries centuries of baggage from Greek philosophical and mythological thought. In the Greco-Roman world, Theos or theoi belonged to a cosmic hierarchy—deities inhabiting the heavens, or the abstract “Unmoved Mover” of Hellenistic philosophy. When the Greek NT text uses “of God”, it uses a term that, to a Greek or Roman audience, fits cleanly into their existing cosmic/theological “box.” It abstracts the Divine into a universal, heavenly entity.

The historical context of 57–58 CE from Corinth, Paul’s use of the phrase tō aiōni toutō — “this age” or “this system” – is intentionally subversive, but it operates on an apocalyptic axis rather than a localized geopolitical one. By telling his readers not to be “conformed to this age,” he is asserting that the entire current political and physical world order is obsolete, waiting to be supplanted by a celestial kingdom. To a jurisprudence built on the permanent, physical inheritance of a specific geographic territory (Eretz Canaan), treating the physical world order as a transient “age” to be transcended completely undermines the territorial and physical nature of the brit.

The Gospel: By their fruits you shall know them judges Romans 12:2 rhetoric as utterly false. The NT rejects both circumcision and declares Goyim not under the law – which post NT church openly rejected Torah Oral Torah common law. The Church embraced Roman statute law; hence by their fruits you shall know them.

Obviously Romans 12:2 by itself alone does not support the later Roman renaming of Judea to Palestine. But Rome embraced Xtianity and after the name change to Palestine never did the church of Rome ever once challenge the Empire. Just as Pope Pius XII did not openly challenge the Nazi Shoah.

The NT bible substitute treats the Greek phrasing as harmless. It totally ignores the first two Sinai commandments and the linguistic shift to the linguistic shift to Theos; totally ignoring the אלהים Sin of the Golden Calf. You do not need the text of Romans 12:2 to say the words “Nicene Creed” to prove it is the genesis of Creedalism. Rav Nemuraskii repeatedly emphasized directly to me: if the foundation cracked, then the entire structure must come down. By definition, once you shift the definition of the Torah which remembers/t’shuva the oaths sworn to the Avot unto covenantal alignment which prioritizes salvation from sin and by-passes the brit inheritance of the land of Canaan unto a internal mental state, you must eventually invent Creeds\inquisition to police beliefs – happening inside people’s hearts & minds. A common-law system polices actions via courts; a psychological system polices beliefs via dogmatic Creeds — the two not even remotely connected.

First commandment “who brought you out of the land of Egypt”, changed to belief in JeZeus brings salvation to Original Sin! Paul’s theology laid the intellectual groundwork, it never foresaw the disaster of the Bar Kochba revolt and the Roman name change to Palestine. The Pauline rhetoric stripped the oath sworn to the Avot and made the Church the “new Israel”. Inductive reasoning relies on observing a pattern of outcomes to determine the nature of the premise. The history of church barbarism and war crimes against humanity the reality “bridge” that forever separates the NT theology as fundamentally and absolutely false. Once the Church became the state religion of Rome, it systematically institutionalized exactly what Romans 12:2 set in motion: a top-down, creedal, imperial system that replaced the terrestrial Halakha of the Avot with an abstract celestial theology. When Moshe sent spies to Canaan, those spies did not come with a sign declaring their intent!

The mussar of the prophet Yerimia touch ברית חדש centers upon the פרדס Oral Torah interpretation of tohor middot within the Yatzir Ha’Tov heart. The perversion that JeZeus saves from Paul’s Original Sin narishkeit theology totally uproots the בראשית ברא אלהים wisdom time-oriented commandments theme which the Book of בראשית introduces and the משנה תורה Book of D’varim seals; the Torah Constitution mandates Sanhedrin common law courts to rule the conquered land of Canaan with justice/fair compensation for damages inflicted by our people to our people. Herein the tiqqun O’lam for hatred without cause.

To grasp this subtle distinction shall open with a quote from Isaac Asimov’s novel: The Second Foundation: The Mule p. 62. As an atheist-praise God, Yid, working on a kibbutz that specialized in Organic farming. I sat in the library on Yom Kippur and ate this small book with great satisfaction.

“”So he created his Foundations according to the laws of psychohistory, but who knew better than he that even those laws were relative. He never created a finished product. Finished products are for decadent minds. His was an evolving mechanism and the Second Foundation was the instrument of that evolution. We, First Citizen of your Temporary Union of Worlds, we are the guardians of Seldon’s Plan. Only we!””
This quote, it seemed to me, best describes the k’vanna of the Torah Mishna and Gemara; Siddur and Midrashim. The BaHaG, the Rif & Baali Maor, the Rashi common law commentary to the Chumash, the Rabbeinu Tam & Baali Tosafot, and Rosh common law commentaries to the Talmud.

What does “NOT STANDARD RABBINIC FORMULATION” mean? 3 Types of Torah commandments 1. Av time oriented. 2 Toldah positive. 3. Toldah negative. The latter toldot mitzvot serve as precedents used to elevate a learned Torah commandment or even rabbinic halacha interpretation as a mitzva from the Torah. This chiddush defines how the B’HaG understanding of Torah commandments radically – day vs night – differs from the Rambam טיפש פשט literalism of Torah commandments…בראשית creation story introduces wisdom. The main Torah theme: time-oriented Av commandments; it does not teach the history of the creation of the Universe.

In short: “Not standard” here means not aligned with the Rambam’s statutory, codified model, which became the de facto “standard” after the 13th–15th centuries, especially in Sephardic and later Ashkenazic communities. The B’HaG code: the first rabbinic work to include a formal Hakdama, which includes the 13 principles of rabbi Yishmael. Thereafter this code often introduces a Mishna followed by Gemara precedents which interpret the language of the Mishna as recorded by the Talmudic language. It often summarizes the Talmudic discussion to arrive at the law, rather than quoting a Mishna first to interpret it. Its defining structural feature is the Introduction and the enumeration of the 613 commandments, not a Mishna-based opening for every section. The book frequently utilizes the 13 Hermeneutical Principles (Middot) of Rabbi Ishmael used to derive laws from the Torah text. While these are not unique to the Halakhot Gedolot, they represent the structural tools used throughout the book to organize the laws. The warp-weft Talmudic loom employs rabbinic 7,10, 13 middot to interpret halacha and 32 middot to interpret Aggadah/Midrash.

This directly explains why the B’HaG code — with its Hakdama, 613 enumeration, Talmudic Gemara summaries, and heavy use of the 13 Yishmael midot — feels so “evolving and non-finished” compared to the Rambam’s static list: it keeps the entire Talmudic loom alive, using the earlier middot for the core legal precedents and the later (Galilean) 32 for the aggadic depth that gives every mitzva its time-oriented k’vanna and tohor spirit.

The B’HaG introduction to his common law halachic code radically differs from the טיפש פשט of the Rambam statute law assimilation abomination. Roman law-statute law! Rome changed the name of the 2nd Jewish commonwealth to “Palestine”. The Gemara commentary to the Mishna a common law sh’itta methodology which centers common law upon how Mishnaic courts ruled opinions based upon בנין אב precedents. A halacha does not create its own religion. The Gemara brings an off the dof halacha as a precedent to interpret the intent of a clause of Mishnaic language – based upon a fixed witness like perspective. The Rambam טיפש טשט halachic rulings pervert the Talmud from precedent common law courtroom judicial rulings derived through comparing similar precedent cases unto fixed religious law. The latter has nothing, zero common ground with the former.

“Av / Toldah positive / Toldah negative” framework as seen in the B’HaG: 100 blessing a day דאורייתא, reading the Megillah of Esther דאורייתא, lighting the shabbat candles דאורייתא, tefillah kre’a shma דאורייתא; lighting the lights of Hanukkah דאורייתא, separating Challah as holy דאורייתא etc etc etc.

Tefillah usually read as Shemone Esrei! The common denominator of the B’HaG chiddush – all the mitzvot דרבנן which he rules “potentially” דאורייתא – all זמן גרמא מצוות שצריך כוונה. Toldoth secondary commandment do not require k’vanna. Herein the traditional rabbinic understanding of all three types of Torah mitzvot. Kre’a Shma, requires k’vanna. K’vanna not a word that any fool can simply translate as meaning “intent”. The Shas Bavli/Yerushalmi interpret k’vanna as prophetic NaCH mussar learned to define the Oral Torah middot spirit “pronouns” of the שם השם לשמה which Moshe Rabbeinu heard orally on Yom Kippur after the Golden Calf “revelation” which forever serves as the Av precedent to learn avoda zara – the 2nd Sinai commandment. Specifically, through the commandment precedent which commands do not compare anything in the Heavens, Earth or Seas to HaShem. The k’vanna of this “time-oriented” commandment (as opposed to a simple negative commandment), based upon the sin of the Golden Calf, do not worship words. The ערב רב שאין להם יראת אלהים worshipped the word אלהים rather than the first commandment שם השם לשמה. Words convey ideas they do NOT communicate tohor spirits. The revelation at Horev of the 13 tohor spirit middot “pronounds” of the שם השם לשמה רוח הקודש – spirtis NOT words – despite the Torah speaking in the language of Man.

The Gemara of ברכות debates weather the blessings surrounding the kre’a shma דאורייתא? Why? The language of ברכת כהנים, קריא שמע, ותפילה all lack שם ומלכות. The Siddur opens with ברוך שאמר which contains within this praise שם ומלכות. Understanding how שם ומלכות means swearing a Torah oath elevates a תהילים שבח unto a blessing/oath. This kabbalah חכמה defines the Order of the Siddur blessings. The language מלכות dedicates a particular Oral Torah middah spirit. Hence the Middle Blessings of the Shemone Esrei – 13 – to affix a blessing to a מלכות Oral Torah spirit!

Post the Rambam Civil War (Jews did not fight with armies like as did the North vs South in the American Civil War. בראשית opens with the creation of Order out of Chaos and anarchy. Civil War defines chaos and anarchy among a people.), g’lut Jewry during the horrors of the Dark Ages (G’lut defined as Jews cursed to do mitzvot לא לשמה.), embraced as their “Standard/Flag” – that Shema, Birkat Kohanim, or tefillah are missing “name and kingdom” in a technical sense. The question is more about whether a text functions as a full berakhah and whether it has the required form.

Israelis living in Israel today respond with an emphatic NO. The lack of שם ומלכות not a technical sense what so ever. Rather a k’vanna. Time-oriented commandments specified above, absolutely require swearing a Torah oath – which requires the dedication of Oral Torah spirits לשמה. Rabbi Yechuda understood Yatzir HaTov through בכל לבבך. A Yatzir – a tohor spirit k’vanna – not a ritual technicality. Hence the Cohen blessing Kre’a shma and tefillah all “technically” lack שם ומלכות.

Contrast standard לא לשמה g’lut rabbinic learning. שם ומלכות still usually means the structural form of a berakhah, while kavanah is the inward aim. לשמה Israelis say NO. Kavanna never directed heart/mind toward Heaven. Post Sinai תורה לא בשמים היא. Malchut Shamayim never acceptance of divine sovereignty, but dedication of tohor Oral Torah spirit middot to rule the heart over tumah Yatzir ha-rah spirits also within the heart. The precedent learns through Yaacov and Esav wrestling in the womb of Rivka. Torah common law interprets k’vanna of mitzvot through precedents.

Herein separates how the B’HaG and also the Baali Tosafot rejected the way of Rambam. The Baali Tosafot include Rabbeinu Tam who passed prior to the Rambam publication of his av tuma avoda zara statute law perversion of the Torah vision — to in the future rule the land of Canaan through Sanhedrin court justice. The Rambam perversion changed the Talmud into a religious ritual creed belief system no different from the Xtian and Muslim separate but different “belief systems”. A Torah judge who tries a case based upon a pre-established belief – no different than a judge who accepts a bribe.

The Rambam statute law perversion fundamentally addressed the dire straights of g’lut Jewry during the Dark Ages. The collapse of the dead Roman empire road system made tiny Jewish communities isolated. The Baali Maor criticized the Rif common law code because its structure – while common law – invited a religious statute law reading. B’HaG, Rif, Rosh common law codes as a rule open with Mishna followed by Gemara halachic precedent rulings. But especially after the Rambam statute law abomination prevailed following the public burning of all the Talmud in France in 1242 (((A majority of the Baali Tosafot agreed and supported the Spanish court of Rabeinu Yona and placed the ban of נידוי upon the Rambam in 1232. But The Semag – one of the Baali Tosafot hardily agreed with the Rambam codification.))), the expulsion of all Jews from France in 1306 permanently destroyed the Rashi Tosafot common law school of Talmudic scholarship. The main criticism of the Baali Tosafot commentary to Rashi, that the latter’s Talmudic commentary learned the Talmud more like a dictionary of difficult terms. Totally different from how Rashi’s common law p’shat theory learned the Chumash!

The Semag followed the mitzvot established by the Rambam sefer Ha-Mitzvot egg-crate code which divided Torah commandments into positive and negative 613 commandments! The Semag – one of the Baali Tosafot! He organized Halacha rulings, based upon the model Written Torah commandments. This error, shattered the Gemara employment of Halachic rulings as precedents to learn the language of the Mishna and elevate the Mishna unto time-oriented commandments which require k’vanna. K’vanna simply does not mean the טיפש פשט of “intent”.

The Gaonic school, one of their greatest chiddushim, initiated the Midrashic scholarship which limits itself to making a commentary upon Talmudic Aggadic sources. Its chiddush of affixing aggadic stories to the Order of T’NaCH p’sukim emphasizes the sh’itta of how to study Talmudic Aggada through the פרדס – axis of דרוש\פשט affixed to the warp of Aggadah and the רמז\סוד affixed to the weft of halachic Talmudic scholarship. The Semag codification of halachot supports the false learning of halacha/mitzvot as religious ritual law rather than lateral Sanhedrin courtroom comon law vision for the day when Jews conquer Canaan; the oath brit time oriented commandment of ruling the land of Canaan with wise Sanhedrin lateral courtroom justice which makes righteous compensation of damages inflicted upon others among our people. This latter vision of faith follows the brit established by the Avot who dwelt as ruled strangers in Canaan rather than rulers of Canaan. The Mishna Gemara – Talmud: learns the culture and customs of the chosen Cohen nation like a loom has warp/weft opposing threads to weave garments. 

Rabbeinu Yanah’s court first placed the ban of נידוי upon the Rambam in Spain. He petitioned the Pope and king of France to burn his books. In 1232 a majority of the Baali Tosafot likewise imposed the ban upon the Rambam. Rabbeinu Yonah never visited Rambam’s grave. Repent a Xtian term does not mean t’shuva. Yom Kippur defines t’shuva as remembering the oaths sworn to the Avot that they alone would father the Cohen people. Goyim repentance has no connection to remembering through the generations the oath each and every Av swore to cut a brit with HaShem. Historians do not know these 3 separate oaths which the Avot Swore which Moshe reminded HaShem to remember and annul the vow to make Moshe the father of the Cohen people.

Hence I open with a quote from the 2nd Foundation to distinguish between the Torah vision of the avot from the religious ritualism (1st foundation) of g’lut reshonim. The quote affixes the 1st foundation to Rambam literalism and religious ritualism which has no k’vanna. The Rambam never defined time oriented commandments. His 5th positive commandment proves this conclusively — תפילה דאורייתא – קריא שמע, תפילה דרבנן שמוני עשרי.

The Rambam confused Shemoneh Esrei with kre’a shma according to the RambaN’s rebuke of the Rambam. The Order of krea shma adjacent to the Shemone Esrei סמוכים defines the k’vanna Order of the Siddur. The ברוך שאמר contains שם ומלכות in the Ashkenazi siddur. The kre’a shma does not contain שם ומלכות but the 1st blessing does. The repetition of the krea shma the reader adjoins the word אמת into the kre’a shma linking the 3rd blessing סמוך to the 2nd blessing and on to the Shemone Esrei itself through סמוכים.

This interpretive framework explains how Rabbi Yehoshua taught מערב תפילה as both רשות וגם חיוב. And the dispute between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam 3 stars vs p’lag ha’mincha. P’lag ha’mincha a person can place Rabbeinu Tam tefillen and has the רשות to affix the kre’a shma ערבית back to the Mincha Shemone Esrei and the Shemone Esrei ערבית to the kre’a shma ha’mita through k’vanna. Tefillah ערבית unlike Tefillah שחרית the חצי קדש separates the kre’a shma from the Shemone Esrei. G’lut super-commentaries fail to explain the contraction of rabbi Yehoshua which resulted in Rabban Gamliel’s replacement.

Rambam’s code aims to provide practical rulings without requiring study of T’NaCH, Talmudic or Siddur primary sources. The forced expulsions of Jews 1290, 1306, 1492 etc combined with the blood libel pogroms crusade slaughters and 1648 Kossack rebellion resulted in the absolute destruction of Jewish physical historical evidence. The Nazis sought to make a museum of the extinct Jewish people! But its really not relevant because Torah commands mussar – the definition of prophesy NOT history.