Let It Go And Rest

How Torah scholarship rejects Xtian theological constructs as Av tumah avoda zara

Your blog preaches a skewed narrative and censors my comments. תהלים נה:כג — הטל על השם משאתך והוא יכלקלך
  הטל – to cast or throw. “יְכַלְקֶלְךָ” translates to “He will sustain you” or “He will support you” – – typically used in the context of nurturing, supporting, or sustaining someone or something. The Hebrew root verb כ-ל-ק-ל “to stumble” or “to falter.

Learning T’NaCH has a cardinal rule which the Xtian bible – starting with the gospels – rapes because it constructs a theological polemic rather than a halachic narrative. It’s forbidden to do מלאכה\work, but permitted to do עבודה/work on Shabbat. This critical nuance disappears because Greek lacks a term that maps onto melacha.

Healing of the Man with a Withered Hand (Mark 3:1-6). Healing the Woman with a Spirit of Infirmity (Luke 13:10-17). Healing of the Blind Man (John 9:1-12). Healing qualifies as which type of verb: a מלאכה or עבודה? In the context of Jewish law concerning Shabbat, healing qualifies as the category of מלאכה (melacha) rather than עבודה (avodah), due to שחיקת סממנים — grinding herbs (a derivative of melacha). Hence mesechta shabbat introduces Av/toldot mekachaot.

A sharp distinction between two “work” type verbs. The gospel accounts permit doing acts of מלאכה on shabbat. But the Creation story where HaShem rests from the creation acts of מלאכה, the gospel accounts negate. Publicly profaning shabbat the Torah lists as a Capital Crime. Under Roman occupation the Sanhedrin lacked the Constitutional power (Roman occupation abridged the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic.) to impose Capital Crime death sentences: not upon Herod nor upon JeZeus.

Governors appointed by Rome likewise lacked the authority to impose the death penalty. Pontius Pilate, as a governor appointed by Rome, did indeed face similar limitations, regarding the imposition of the death penalty. His authority while significant, existed under Roman law restricted certain judicial powers reserved for higher authorities, such as the Senate or Caesar. Vertical courts where the State pays the salaries of the judges and prosecuting attorneys serves as a proof, that Rome limited both Roman governors and Sanhedrin Capital Crimes courtrooms.

Roman governors permitted to enforce various administrative tasks and enforce law. But significant punishments, especially the death penalty, often required direct approval from Roman authorities. The NT story of Paul sent directly to Rome – another proof of these restrictions. Furthermore, a direct Torah negative commandment forbids mob lynching. Weigh now the Capital Crime of JeZeus publicly doing acts of מלאכה on shabbat; or JeZeus “strung up” on a cross due to mob pressure. Mitzvot do not come by way of sin – a fundamental Torah root concept of justice which the gospel fiction story violates.

These themes highlight the difficulties faced by individuals operating within conflicting legal and moral frameworks which separate T’NaCH/Talmudic common law from Roman Statute Law. Clearly the gospels follow Roman statute law and not T’NaCH-Talmudic common law. Roman governors like Pontius Pilate had to navigate through a complex bureaucratic legal landscape. No different that General Westmorland in Vietnam; LBJ ran the war while sitting in Washington DC. Roman governors authority limited to administrative tasks, specifically taxation. Rome kept its governors on a tight leash, they operated with serious caution, and often needed approval from higher authorities regarding severe matters such as imposing the death penalty.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion – gospel narrative – promotes a blood libel slander – public healing on shabbat. Had JeZeus prioritized such healing in a private setting rather than publicly profane shabbat, then the Pharisees would not have sought the death penalty. Public chillul HaShem מחלל שבת בפרהסיא far more strict than private chillul HaShem. This serves to prove that the imaginary character JeZeus – at best an ערב רב assimilated Jew. A direct negation of the 2nd Sinai commandment.

The Gospels reflect Roman legal assumptions, not Jewish ones. The gospel portrayal of the trials of JeZeus, the cruel punishments endured, has zero halachic basis or categories. Roman statute law clashes with Jewish legal reality across the board. To compare an elephant with a buzzing fly, closer than Jewish common law vs. Roman statute law. The gospel portrayal of JeZeus invalidates the 2nd commandment, the halachic structure of shabbat, the authority of the Sanhedrin lateral common law courts, and the negative commandment which invalidates mitzvot that comes by way of transgression.

Returning back to Tehillem נה:כג, this tefillah resonates with David’s experiences during his flight from Av Shalom, his tefillah expresses feelings of betrayal and fear. To study this “Gemara/Holy Writing” requires a “NaCH/Mishnaic” source. ישעיה מב:י-יג, that T’NaCH sugya compares to תהלים נה. This sugya specifically prioritizes these Oral Torah middot נֹשֵׂא פֶשַׁע; וְחַטָּאה; וְנַקֵּה וְלֹא יְנַקֶּה. T’NaCH a mussar common law legal system. The דרוש for precedents centers in this small sugya upon these specific middot – listed above.

Torah wisdom compares middot with a similar order with similar middot – in other sugyot across the NaCH. Torah wisdom permits Torah scholars Oral Torah knowledge throughout the generations; as the definition of prophesy. This מלאכה-חכמה — how to make a quick precedent reference mussar search seals the T’NaCH as Oral Torah common law. Compare ירמיה ט:ו-יא, this sugya likewise contains this identical set of tohor middot! These Oral Torah middot affix to the last three Middle blessings of the Shemone Esrei. The Order of the Shemone Esrei blessings: 3 + 13 + 3. Blessings 11 through 13 express the k’vanna idea of these three Oral Torah tohor middot.

You cannot know this because your criminally corrupt church denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. The prophetic mussar k’vanna of תהילים נה:כג describes the bitter details of the Torah curse of exile consequent to Civil War, the result of judicial injustice & betrayal. The prophet Natan cursed David with eternal Civil Wars for his profaning the Moshiach oath to rule the land with judicial justice; specifically in the matter of the husband of Bat Sheva! This ‘blood on his hands’ made David incapable of establishing the Federal Sanhedrin court system. His foolish son Shlomo, worshipped avoda zara דוקא/precisely because of his ערב רב assimilation and intermarriage; he like his father – both failed to establish the Federal Sanhedrin common law courts – as the Torah Constitution mandates.

The יכלכלך promise of steadfast support, classical sources like Rashi explain יְכַלְכְּלֶךָ as bearing/sustaining the burden, akin to “holding” or “containing” it (e.g., comparing to מלכים א ח:כז, where heavens cannot “contain” God but the Yatzir Ha-Tov within the hearts of the chosen Cohen people, the נמשל of Shlomo’s Temple משל – can! This psalm – a poignant tefillah expression of David’s distress during Absalom’s rebellion — and the most bitter betrayal by his most trusted and closest of allies (e.g., Ahitophel). The verse David clings his trust in HaShem as the ultimate sustainer amid human treachery which his son AvShalom’s betrayal surpassed the rape by Amnon (the firstborn son of David through Ahinoam of Jezreel) who raped his half-sister Tamar the daughter of Makkah. .

Yeshayahu 42:10-13, a call to sing a new song praising God from the ends of the earth, culminating in the משל of HaShem – marching forth like a גבור/mighty man – aroused with zeal against enemies. Thematically, both passages address themes of divine intervention amid crisis: Tehillim 55 amid personal/national betrayal and exile-like suffering; Yeshayahu 42 prophetic mussar of redemption, Constitutionally mandated Sanhedrin courtroom justice prevailing over ערב רב assimilated and intermarried oppressors שאין להם יראת אלהים. The “new song” motif echoes renewal after upheaval, paralleling David’s plea for deliverance, from this Torah curse known by the mitzva of Amalek. King Shaul lost title to the mitzva of Moshiach through his failure to destroy Amalek. The Torah speaks in the language of Man. The Torah mitzva of Amalek throughout the generations Anti-Semitism the result of av tuma avoda zara – assimilated and intermarried Jews – the 2nd Sinai commandment.

Yirmiyahu 9:6-11 frames the theme of deceit, betrayal, refusal to keep Torah judicial common law as – “the faith” with its ensuing injustice. Hence Tehillim נה functions as a duplicate role the Gemara serves the Mishna—the treachery in Tehillim 55 interprets and understands the k’vanna of the prophetic rebuke expressed in Yeshayahu. Yirmiyahu 9 laments pervasive falsehood and violence in society, desiring escape to the wilderness, with its plea for divine judgment implied by way of a דיוק-inference. The shared Oral Torah middot framework allows cross-referencing from T’NaCH multiple witnesses to understand prophetic mussar k’vanna. HaShem sustains the righteous (as in Tehillim) while holding accountable those who betray justice (as in prophetic warnings of exile due to judicial corruption and civil war).

This sh’itta\approach/methodology treats T’NaCH as completely interconnected through middot and k’vanna (interpreted prophetic mussar), revealing layers of mussar — rather than isolated texts as the fraud NT Protocols of the Elders of Zion blood libel screams to angry mobs to lynch Christ killer Jews. The prophetic context of Tehillim 55:23 indeed ties to exile’s curses (e.g., from civil discord, betrayal, injustice, taxation without representation and ghetto gulags etc.), where casting burdens on HaShem becomes the path to endurance chaos, anarch, and Civil Wars. The mussar k’vanna here — bitter exile from judicial injustice and betrayal — resonates deeply in Jewish thought as a recurring theme from David’s era through the prophets and equally played out in the Rambam Civil War time of troubles.

Building against the foundational critiques of the Xtian false messiah and Muslim false prophet revisionist theologies whereby Goyim who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai & Horev introduced ‘New God’ theologies aimed to supplant the oath alliance brit Sinai faith which permanently cuts a brit faith that HaShem ruling in this Earth לא בשמים היא – through the spirits of tohor Oral Torah middot, which permanently dwell and occupy the משל משכן of the Sinai revelation contained and interpreted by the נמשל יצר הטוב within the heart as differentiated by the Torah language of kre’a shma’s: בכל לבבך\לבבכם, as interpreted by rabbi Yechuda.

Just as the NT and Koran negate the Oral Torah’s dynamic common law in favor of static, universal doctrines—replacing the particularistic local brit with their theological dogmas of “Universal God for all Goyim” — the Rambam’s sh’itta likewise assimilates Greco-Roman statute law and Aristotelian philosophy as a replacement for פרדס logic; specifically through the 7 middot of Hillel, 10 middot of Akiva, 13 middot of Yishmael, and 32 middot of Yossi Galil’s 32 Aggadic middot – building blocks נמשל, which replace logical Case/Rule comparisons to other Case/Rule disputes heard by different courtrooms; with the Torah משל of straw required to make bricks interpreted by the above נמשל of inductive logical comparison to interpret “k’vanna” of time-oriented mitzvot as the definition of Torah wisdom. (That’s quite a mouthful, please don’t choke.)

The Torah contrasts with how Goyim define idolatry – limited to graven images which the NaCH prophets completely mock in absolute and total derision. Torah negative commandments directly פסול-declare as treif-Jewish assimilation wherein Jews abandon the culture and customs of the chosen Cohen people as established by the sealed מסורת – the T’NaCH, Talmud, Siddur – replaced by Goyim cultures and customs; ultimately resulting in Jewish intermarriage with Goyim who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai – the brit of the chosen Cohen people. Forsaking the oath Sinai brit, abandons the 3 oaths sworn by the Avot whereby they eternally father the chosen עולם הבא Cohen seed; it rejects the yoke of the kingdom of heaven which define the k’vanna of tefillah; wherein Israel accepts through tefillen permission to swear Torah oaths which absolutely define the k’vanna and intent of the Written and Oral Torah revelations.

Assimilated Reshonim scholarship upon the T’NaCH/Talmud\Midrashim failed to arouse Jews to rise up and re-conquer our homelands like as did Herzl’s “Jewish State” political Zionism and Ahad Ha’am’s Cultural Zionism, expressed through his essay titled: “The Jewish State and the Jewish Problem”. A millennium after the Hanukkah Civil War, the Rambam Civil War made a “mishna torah”; but whereas Jews in Israel who can do mitzvot לשמה lit the Menorah lights of victory over the ערב רב Tzeddukim … charisma foreign counter-cultures in g’lut lead by the Rambam in particular and the vast majority of Spanish assimilated Reshonim scholars in general – g’lut Jewry lacks the Yatzir Ha-Tov tohor middot dominance which permits them to likewise observe Torah commandments לשמה – consequent to the Torah curse of g’lut.

According to the RambaN’s Chumash commentary, g’lut Jewry observe mitzvot primarily as a zikaron (remembrance) of their identity, heritage, and connection to the land of Israel, rather than fulfilling them in their complete and original ideal לשמה. The Ramban acknowledges examples of obvious mitzvot cannot be fully realized when the Jewish people are not in their homeland, particularly those related to the “Temple” משל of the judicial justice נמשל and agricultural laws. Based upon the Talmud’s prioritization of time-oriented k’vanna of tefilla over Cain’s sacrifice as a barbeque to heaven positive Torah commandment which requires no k’vanna. G’lut Jewry directly compare to the ger tzeddik who rejects to do certain Torah commandments; who favors how the Shomronim, Tzeddukim, and Karaim observe Torah as religious ritual law, rather than how the P’rushim, instructors of the Oral Torah masoret, validate the Writtten Torah as the Constitution of the Republic which mandates Oral Torah court room common law to establish the rule of righteous justice in the Cohen eternal inheritance land!

Off the דרך curse g’lut statute law assimilated Judaism culminated its “Berlin is our new Jerusalem” by duplicating the rebellion of the Wilderness generations who refused to conquer Canaan from fear of giants! Chaim Weizmann in 1937, “Jews of the world, where are you?”, shortly followed up with the White Paper and FDR closing the Golden Medina to Jewish refugees in 1939 & thereafter. The story of the curse Wilderness Generation repeated in the virtual destruction of Western European Jewry in the Nazi gas chambers of three years duration.

The Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, a systematic code of halacha, represents a departure from the Oral Torah’s common law tradition, which thrives on dialectical debate, precedents, and inductive reasoning as seen in the Gemara’s sugyot. Instead, it adopts a Roman-style statute law format—concise, authoritative rulings without the underlying disputes—mirroring the codified canons of Christianity (e.g., the Nicene Creed’s dogmatic assertions) and Islam (e.g., the Sharia’s fiqh compilations). This negation of the Oral Torah’s fluidity prompted swift condemnation.

In 1232, the rabbis of northern France, steeped in the Ashkenazi tradition of Rashi (1040–1105) and the Tosafot, issued a ban against studying philosophy, explicitly targeting the Rambam’s works for their rationalist bent. Led by figures like Solomon ben Abraham of Montpellier, this ban was amplified by Rabbeinu Yonah Gerondi (d. 1263), who traveled to gather support, viewing the Rambam’s integration of Aristotelian logic as a threat to traditional Torah study. Rabbeinu Yonah, a relative of Nahmanides (Ramban), initially spearheaded the anti-Maimonidean agitation in Provence and Spain, seeing it as akin to Hellenistic corruption. The French school’s emphasis on Tosafist common law commentaries upon the Talmud denounced the Rambam’s declarative style, which omitted sources and debates, much as the NT & Koran omits Sinai’s context to proclaim a “new covenant,” or “final prophet”.

This controversy escalated into the Maimonidean Controversies (1232–1305), involving bans and counter-bans across Europe. Rabbeinu Yonah later repented after witnessing the Inquisition burn all the Talmud manuscripts in Paris France in 1242. A disaster which duplicated the dynastic Hashmonean Civil War which pitted Hyrcanus II against Aristobulus II. Both brothers appealed to Roman general Pompey to resolve their dynastic dispute over the Crown. Pompey’s Army marched into Jerusalem unopposed and appointed the Goy Herod as king around 37 BCE. Herod the Idumean a non Jew, Pompey appointed as king. This marked a crucial transition towards Roman hegemony and set the stage for future conflicts and the eventual emergence of early Xtianity within this tumultuous context.

This controversy escalated into the Maimonidean Controversies (1232–1305), involving bans and counter-bans across Europe. The Rambam’s philosophy risked eroding the mystical and ethical dimensions of Torah. This mirrors the Torah’s negative commandment against foreign worship (Shemot 20:3–5), extended to intellectual idolatry—assimilating Greek logos over prophetic mussar. Just as Xtianity and Islam universalize and supplant their “monotheistic God” detached from Israel’s election, the Rambam’s code likewise imposes a static halacha alien to the living Oral Torah common law פרדס inductive logic expressed through middot models.

In Hilchot Melachim u’Milchamot 8:10–11, he posits these seven laws—prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, eating a limb from a living animal, and the command to establish courts—as binding on all humanity, enforceable by death for non-compliance. This universal framework echoes Christian and Islamic theologies of a singular, accessible God for all peoples, framing monotheism as a global imperative rather than Israel’s particular oath brit which תמיד מעשה בראשית through time-oriented Avot commandments creates the chosen Cohen people יש מאין – comparable to the Ger Tzeddik. Rambam elevates Noahide observance to grant non-Jews status as “chasidei umot ha’olam” (righteous of the nations) if accepted due to divine command, despite the limitation of the jurisdiction of Sanhedrin courts limited only to the boundaries of the Jewish State!

The Aggada of mesechta Sanhedrin limits the 7 mitzvot bnai noach unto the gere toshav Goyim living within the borders of the land. Mesechta Baba Kama limits the exclusion of all legal rights to the Shomronim “new Israel impostors who “converted out of fear” just as did Herod; both mesechtot Sanhedrin and Baba Kama base their instruction on D’varim which instructs Israel to either give treif flesh to the ger toshav or sell that flesh to the Na’cree. Sanhedrin refers to the ger toshav as bnai noach. Whereas Baba Kama describes the despised “Samaritan charlatans” as Canaani.

Rambam’s view assimilates a “universal God,” akin to Christianity’s Trinity or Islam’s Tawhid, violating the Torah’s distinction: HaShem’s Name is revealed solely through Israel’s brit (Shemot 6:3). He even praises Islam as non-idolatrous monotheism (Hilchot Teshuvah 3:7), while deeming Xtianity idolatrous, yet both alien religions equally share the av tuma universalist avoda zara ONE GOD abomination. This “monotheistic universalism” negates the Oral Torah’s focus on Israel’s role as or l’goyim through prophetic mussar.

Xtianity defines prophesy as witchcraft fortune telling. Whereas the Koran declares that Allah sends prophets to all nations and those prophets speak the native tongue of the nations . The Arab nation being the last nation to receive its prophet’s warnings. This negates the prophet Yonah sent to Assyria! His mussar rebuked g’lut 10 tribes not the kingdom of Assyria whom the Babylonian empire almost immediately thereafter conquered. Rambam’s rationalism offers no mussar for suffering, paralleling the absent Jesus or Allah. His fiat halacha does not remotely compare to the Prosecution vs Defense courtroom setting which the Gemara models.

Led by figures like Solomon ben Abraham of Montpellier, this ban was amplified by Rabbeinu Yonah Gerondi (d. 1263), who traveled to gather support, they viewed the Rambam’s integration of Aristotelian logic as a threat to traditional Torah study. Both the rabbeinu Yonah’s court in Spain and the common law school of Rashi/Tosafot in France placed a ban upon the Rambam’s assimilated to Greek/Roman legal customs: statute law halachic fiat codification which negated Oral Torah “commodity based” common law–much as does both the NT and Koran. Rabbeinu Yonah later repented after witnessing the Inquisition burn Rambam’s books in 1233 and after the Goyim torched all the Talmud found in France. He interpreted these “disasters” as divine retribution for his zeal. Nonetheless, the initial ban against the study of Greek philosophy stands in Yeshiva education unto this very day, as a bulwark against assimilation.

For example a defining פרט to the previous paragraph’s כלל – Rambam’s perverted views on Noahide laws. The Rambam assimilated, a direct Torah negative commandment, and embraced the Xtian & Muslim theologies of God – framed as a Monotheistic Universal God; his Roman statute law halacha and Greek Aristotle philosophy clashes with the Talmud which teaches that only the 12 Tribes of Israel accepted the Written Torah at Sinai and the Oral Torah at Horev. The Rambam replaced the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive dynamic logic with Aristotles static deductive logic – absolutely identical as did the Tzeddukim 1000 years previous during the Hanukkah Jewish Civil War.

The Rambam, influenced by Aristotle’s Organon, employs deductive logic in his philosophical work: Moreh Nevuchim. There he reduces prophetic mussar perverted to intellectual perfection, much like his posok halacha of the av Mishna Chullin touching the אפיקורוס slaughter of animals as lacking knowledge and understanding of the true essence of Jewish teachings. The Rambam Greek philosophy prioritizes intellect as the highest human faculty. The Talmud by contrast instructs that יראת שמים serves as the foundation of faith. This Torah rebuke applied to the ערב רב – שאין להם יראת אלהים as the root cause of the Torah curse of Amalek throughout the generations.

Just as the Tzeddukim denied resurrection and angels to align with Greek thought, Rambam reinterprets miracles and eschatology allegorically, clashing with Kabbalistic traditions like the Zohar. But the mitzva of Shabbat which forbids doing acts of wisdom known specifically as מלאכה and generally as time-oriented commandments! Doing מלאכה repressed through time-oriented commandment create מלאכים שברא יש מאין; based upon the precedent that Yaacov sent מלאכים unto his brother Esav and wrestled in turn with the מלאך of his brother!

This substitution negates the tohor middot spirits animating the yetzer ha-tov, reducing Torah to intellectual exercise. Christianity’s logos (John 1:1) and Islam’s kalam theology similarly adopt Aristotelian deduction, supplanting Sinai’s inductive mussar. The bans by Rabbeinu Yonah and the French schools affirm: True Torah resists such assimilation, prioritizing Sanhedrin common law over codified fiat statute law. As a commodity based currency day & night different from fiat monopoly play-game board funny money so too and how much more so Torah common law/משנה תורה rejects fiat statute roman laws; which extend to intellectual idolatry—assimilating Greek logos over prophetic mussar.

Hence in summation: The foundational critiques of the Xtian false messiah (JeZeus) and Muslim false prophet (Muhammad) revisionist theologies stand firm: Goyim who rejected the dual revelation of the Written Torah at Sinai and Oral Torah at Horev fabricated “New God” theologies to supplant the eternal oath alliance brit of Sinai. This Sinai oath brit/alliance alone cuts the faith of justice wherein HaShem dwells permanently through the spirits of tohor Oral Torah middot in the משל משכן of the Sinai revelation, interpreted by the נמשל yetzer ha-tov within the heart—as differentiated by the Torah language of kriyat Shema (“בכל לבבך/לבבכם”), per Rabbi Yehuda’s interpretation emphasizing the whole heart’s tohor intent.

Rambam’s sh’iita assimilates Greco-Roman statute law as the basis\priority which defines his statute halacha which makes secondary the language of the Talmud which his code translates into Hebrew. Common law – no translation can duplicate – because common law requires precedents. Rambam’s code relies upon foreign imports of Greek syllogism deductive logic which lacks the means to inductively compare ever changing halacha based upon ever changing life conditions throughout the generations. Just as the bible translations of בראשית fail to account for the רמזים of ב’ ראשית, ברית אש, and ראש בית, so too and how much more so static fiat halachic codes fail to employ Gemara halachot as precedents whereby scholarship through the generations can re-interpret the language of the Mishna based upon different perspectives suitable for the times and generations.

The Rambam’s sh’itta assimilates Greco-Roman statute law and Aristotelian philosophy as a replacement for פרדס logic. The Torah משל of straw required to make bricks finds its נמשל in inductive logical comparison to interpret k’vanna of time-oriented mitzvot, defining Torah מלאכה wisdom, which the Rambam totally failed to grasp much less prioritize and understand. The downfall of the ‘Golden Age of Spain’ resulted from Jewish assimilation/intermarriage.

Torah “idolatry” (a gross erroneous translation) far exceeds Goyim’s graven images (mocked derisively by Nevi’im). It encompasses any Jewish assimilation where Jews abandon the sealed mesorah culture and customs of the chosen Cohen people—T’NaCH, Talmud, Siddur—and favor/approve of Goyim cultures, customs, and intermarriage with those rejecting Sinai’s brit, like have themselves. This forsakes the 3 oaths sworn by the Avot to father the chosen Cohen seed and rejects the yoke of Heaven’s kingdom in tefillah, where tefillin oaths affirm Written and Oral Torah revelations.

Assimilated Rishonim scholarship on T’NaCH/Talmud/Midrashim failed to arouse Jews to reconquer the homeland, unlike Herzl’s political Zionism (“Der Judenstaat”) and Ahad Ha’am’s cultural Zionism in his essay “The Jewish State and the Jewish Problem” (1897/98), which critiqued purely political approaches for neglecting spiritual/cultural revival. A millennium after the Hanukkah Civil War against Tzeddukim assimilation, the Rambam Civil War produced the “Mishneh Torah”—a statute law fiat codex. By logical דיוק contrasts with Israel performs mitzvot l’shmah raised the Menorah lights of victory over the Erev Rav Tzeddukim and foreign counter-cultures. Galut Jewry, cursed by the Torah’s galut decree (Vayikra 26, Devarim 28), lacks yetzer ha-tov tohor middot dominance to observe commandments l’shmah. The off the דרך Orthodox Judaism confuses the 3 vows: 1. Not to Attempt to Conquer the Land 2. Not to Rebel Against the Nations 3. God Will Bring Them Back prioritized over the 3 oaths sworn by the Avot which eternally create the chosen Cohen people through time oriented מלאכה חכמה. This mesechta of Ketubot simply does not supersede the Torah obligation to conquer the land. Moshe qualifies as the av model of Moshiach, and he did not general the war by which Israel fought multiple wars to conquer Canaan!

This off-the-derech galut statute-law assimilated Judaism culminated in “Berlin is our new Jerusalem,” duplicating the Wilderness generation’s rebellion—refusing to conquer Canaan from fear of giants, absolutely no different from the prophetic mussar where the Shomronim converted for fear of lions or Herod’s “inquisition like” convertion – for fear of his life. Rambam’s fiat halachic משל currency counterfeit fails to “weave” halachic ritualism which requires no k’vanna together as with “gold” aggadic prophetic mussar as the time-oriented commandment k’vanna which makes aliya of secondary commandment to Av time-oriented commandments and results in the garments worn by the chosen Cohen people נמשל to the Cohen garments worn by Aaron and his sons משל.

Roman “fiat currency” statute law—concise authoritative rulings without disputes—forms the basis of Middle Ages Roman Catholic Church Canon Law. The Rambam code duplicates Catholic dogmatism and Islamic Sharia fiqh compilations. Rabbeinu Yonah (d. 1263, relative of Ramban) amplified the agitation in Provence/Spain, viewing Aristotelian integration as Hellenistic corruption akin to Tzeddukim. The French school’s Tosafist precedent pilpul denounced Rambam’s declarative style omitting sources/debates, much as NT/Koran omit Sinai context for “new covenant” or “final prophet” substitute theology/revisionist history. All Torah prophets command mussar. Torah prophets not required to speak in Goyim languages because Goyim never accept to this very day the revelation of the Torah at Sinai & Horev.

The Rambam’s gross error in the Av Mishna of Chullin matched by his equally stupid error in Kiddushin wherein his halacha declares, ignorant of the Gemarah רבוי מיעט-קמ”ל which excludes young girls as fit for the mitzva of kiddushin, just as the Av Mishna excludes Chuppa; or his halachot of Shabbat which fails to distinguish between the two verbs מלאכה כנגד עבודה. As commodity-based currency (day/night value) differs from fiat monopoly funny money, so too—and infinitely more so—Torah common law/Mishneh Torah rejects fiat Roman statute law Caesar decrees which forcibly expelled Jews from Judea and resulted in an 2000+ year Jewish g’lut which the Rambam code grossly emulates.

Assimilated Rambam and his rabbinic ilk directly compare to the disaster of Herod! This disgraceful Civil War serves as proof that g’lut Jewry in those dreadful days – totally failed to due t’shuva. The shame of this disgrace compares to the betrayal of the British White Paper and FDR closing the borders of the Golden Medina to Jewish refugees attempting to flee from Nazi sub-human barbarians. Match only by the cold-blooded Allied calculation which sacrificed the Jewish people upon the Goyim altar of war – their refusal to bomb the Nazi rail lines which lead to the Death Camps.