UK Formally Recognizes State Of Palestine – YouTube

קידושין serves as a משל which teaches the נמשל ‘Never Again’. Post the Final Solution no European State shall ever again dictate any other “solution” to the Jewish people. Never again a ‘Final Solution’ and Never again a ‘Two State Solution’.

Vector bearing azimuths in both T’NaCH and Talmud to make inductive logic case/rule comparison between similar judicial cases. Prophets, they serve as the shotrim of the Shoftim of the Sanhedrin Federal courtrooms. These prophetic shotrim serve as the enforcers of Sanhedrin court judicial rulings. Prophets do not exist separate or divorced from serving as shotrim police enforcers of Sanhedrin common judicial rulings. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.

דתני האיש מקדש. מה שדה מקניא בחליפין אף אשה נמי מקניא
Legal mechanisms of acquisition (kinyan), an abstract idea rather than a physical acquisition. The act of acquisition entails the husband acquiring title to the Name of the future born children which this marital union will ideally produce. Hence the symbolic “exchange” involves not the woman herself but rather the acquisition of the unborn children born into the future or O’lam Ha’bah of this marital union.

The depth of the legal and symbolic meanings behind kinyan-acquistitions in the context of marriage, basically a Man cannot love that which he does not own. The basic standard Torah definition for “Love” as a secondary Torah precedent commandment. It illustrates that marital acquisition – rejects treating the woman as property. But rather about establishing a framework for family, legacy, and spiritual continuity of the oath brit-chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.

Our Gemara now makes a study of T’NaCH kabbalah prophetic mussar sources which shall in their turn require making bearing azimuth precedent comparison similar cases. Its this wisdom of Torah scholarship which ties Talmudic common law with T’NaCH prophetic mussar common law.

Upon this chief cornerstone common law sh’itta of Torah scholarship all generations have “this” obligation from their fathers to learn. A man acquires his wife in the name of producing children and educating those future born children in the faith to righteously pursue judicial justice among our Cohen people.

The first precedent דברים כד:א: “כי יקח איש אשה”, this פרט resides within the sugya כלל of כד:א – ד. This sugya linked to the three earlier sugyot כג:כב-כד וכג:כה. וכג:כו. The subject matter of these three small sugyot vows, respect of a neighbors property and goods as does likewise the next single p’suk sugya. Our p’suk כד:א addresses כי מצא בה ערות דבר וכתב לא ספר כריתת. The דיוק made from this pasuk, just as get defined as a mitzva from the Torah so too קידושין a mitzva from the Torah. The acquisition of קידושין once profaned through a divorce cannot thereafter be acquired again. Just as a korban, once dedicated for a Shoah offering, this korban cannot later be substituted for some other korban dedication, such as an asham dedication. Once a man acquires title to the Nefesh O’lam Ha’bah soul of his wife, even God himself cannot intervene and father a child from this woman! A distinctly unique idea which the Greek God Zeus did when he fathered Hercules from a married woman.

In Greek & New Testament mythology, divine intervention often disrupts human relationships and moral boundaries. Jewish judicial common law emphasizes the sanctity of marriage and the importance of fidelity. The notion that a husband acquires the soul of his wife and that this bond protected by a Torah oath alliance, reflects the seriousness with which Jewish law treats marriage. קידושין emphasizes the importance of fidelity, commitment, and the spiritual dimensions of the marital relationship visa-vis tohor time-oriented commandments which continuously create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

This Torah wisdom reinforces the values of respect and responsibility within the context of family and community. The pasuk בראשית כג:יז located within the larger sugya of בראשית כג:א-כ. Sarah did not survive the horrors of the Akedah, where Yitzak swore an oath brit that if HaShem would save the chosen Cohen seed from shoah, that he dedicates the O’lam Ha’bah life of his future born seed to do Torah mitzvot as the defining cultural trait of the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.

Avraham refers to himself as a גר תושב person of status. Interesting any גר תושב accepts, while living inside the borders of Judea, to keep the 7 mitzvot bnai noach. Why? Observance of commandments, specifically גרי תושב commandments as defined in Masechet Sanhedrin, referred thereafter as the 7 mitzvot bnai Noach, this temporary Torah obligation permits the גר תושב to sue an Israel for damages in a Jewish court of law. By contrast the Nacree/Canaani, as defined in masechet Baba Kama, did not enjoy the judicial legal protections enjoyed by the ger toshav.

Therefore our Av Mishna likewise comes to distinguish and define the rights of women in Torah common law. A ordinary woman does not possess the legal right to acquire a Man, except and unless she qualifies as a significant status, such as being a tribal chief. For example: the prophetess Devorah as a sho’ter. The concept of judicial authority existed during the time of Deborah. Both Moshe and Yehoshua established the 6 cities of refuge with their Small Sanhedrin courtrooms.

Deborah served as a judge and prophetess in Israel, leading her people during a time of oppression. The Aggadic story found in the Book of שופטים (פרק ד וה), which depicts her as a leader who inspired Barak to lead the Israelites against the Canaanite army. Prophets forever and always serve as the shot’rim of the sanhedrin common law courtrooms. This fundamental נפקא מינא both the fraudulent counterfeit books NT and Koran failed to discern.

Abraham’s acquisition of the Cave wherein he buried Sarah compares to the mitzva of קידושין, ideally both sets of acquisitions shall permanently maintain this status. The status of a married woman, higher than the status of a virgin unmarried woman. The NT virgin Mary theology perverts this Torah priority all together into a foreign alien Av tuma avoda zarah religion.

The pasuk ירמיה לב:כה contained inside the larger sugya כלל: לב:טז-כה. The comparison of Avraham as a גר תושב to the people of Canaan compares to Israel invaded by the Armies of Babylon. Avraham demanded to pay the full price for Sarah’s burial plot due to his outright distrust of the faithfulness of the nations of Canaan. Israel too, in the days of Yirmeyahu failed to rule the oath sworn lands with righteous judicial justice – no different that the cursed nations of Canaan; its judges accepted bribes and perverted law.

T’NaCH common law requires Torah scholars to shoot a bearing azimuth and find a comparable Case/Din prophetic mussar. This Torah wisdom in essence defines how to study T’NaCH Primary Sources through the skill of learning by means of comparing similar Case/Din rulings. A similar mussar Case/Din ירמיה ח:יג-יז. The דיוק learned from קידושין, divorce – and the Torah curse of g’lut. Herein this T’NaCH kabbalah frames the k’vanna of the tohor time oriented Torah commandment expressed through the דיוק-inference of the Av tohor time-oriented commandment of קידושין.

T’NaCH common law requires Torah scholars to shoot a bearing azimuth and find a comparable Case/Din prophetic mussar. This Torah wisdom in essence defines how to study T’NaCH Primary Sources through the skill of inductive logical learning, by means of comparing similar Case/Din rulings through ‘compare and contrast’ sharpened reasoning skills. A similar mussar Case/Din ירמיה ח:יג-יז. The דיוק learned from קידושין, from divorce, and the Torah curse of g’lut, these 3 Case/Din prophetic mussar add a layer of internal k’vanna to observance of ritual commandments. Herein this T’NaCH kabbalah frames the k’vanna of all tohor time-oriented Torah commandments, not limited only or specifically merely to the mitzva of קידושין.

תני האשה נקנית וניתני התם האיש קונה. מעיקא תני לישנא דאורייתא ולבסוף תני לישנא דרבנן. ומאי לישנא דרבנן דאמר לה אשה קנויה לעולם מהקדש וניתני הכא דאיש קינה משום דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא וקונה את אצמה

What does the language אשה קנויה לעולם מהקדש? This refers to the oath brit sworn between the pieces wherein HaShem cut a brit with Avram that his future born Cohen seed would number the stars in the heavens for multitude. Torah common law always learns by means of prior precedent rulings. Any attempt to read the Talmud, as if it existed as a common book of pleasurable reading, like fiction – utterly false.

The Talmud stands upon the mandate of the Torah as the working Constitution of the Republic. Upon this יסוד both the T’NaCH and Talmud stand as the Central Primary Sources which function as the basis by which the rabbis weave the culture and customs which the Cohen people wear like unto garments by which HaShem gave to Adam and Chava in the Garden. Just as the mitzva of קידושין represents a permanent status, so too and how much more so – the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic stands as a permanent status. However the perverse transformation of קידושין merely as a rabbinic commandment – set off a chain of consequences, like a rock thrown into a pond makes a ripple effect. Understanding קידושין limited only as a ritual rabbinic mitzva, this perversion changed the status of the Torah away from a Constitutional basic law document unto a religious law of ritual observances as codified in the assimilated statute law Shulkan Aruch. Torah common law bears no resemblance to assimilated statute law, any more than a bastard child born from adultery, resembles the profaned husband’s קידושין with his wife.

Vector bearing azimuths in both T’NaCH and Talmud to make inductive logic case/rule comparison between similar judicial cases. Prophets, they serve as the shotrim of the Shoftim of the Sanhedrin Federal courtrooms. These prophetic shotrim serve as the enforcers of Sanhedrin court judicial rulings. Prophets do not exist separate or divorced from serving as shotrim police enforcers of Sanhedrin common law judicial rulings. Just that simple. No fancy dance’n.

דתני האיש מקדש. מה שדה מקניא בחליפין אף אשה נמי מקניא
Legal mechanisms of acquisition (kinyan), an abstract idea rather than a physical acquisition. The act of acquisition entails the husband acquiring title to the Name of the future born children which this marital union will ideally produce. Hence the symbolic “exchange” involves not the woman herself but rather the acquisition of the unborn children born into the future or O’lam Ha’bah of this marital union.

The depth of the legal and symbolic meanings behind kinyan-acquistitions in the context of marriage, basically a Man cannot love that which he does not own. The basic standard Torah definition for “Love” as a secondary Torah precedent commandment. It illustrates that marital acquisition – rejects treating the woman as property. But rather about establishing a framework for family, legacy, and spiritual continuity of the oath brit-chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.

Our Gemara now makes a study of T’NaCH kabbalah prophetic mussar sources which shall in their turn require making bearing azimuth precedent comparison similar cases. Its this wisdom of Torah scholarship which ties Talmudic common law with T’NaCH prophetic mussar common law.

Upon this chief cornerstone common law sh’itta of Torah scholarship all generations have “this” obligation from their fathers to learn. A man acquires his wife in the name of producing children and educating those future born children in the faith to righteously pursue judicial justice among our Cohen people.

The first precedent דברים כד:א: “כי יקח איש אשה”, this פרט resides within the sugya כלל of כד:א – ד. This sugya linked to the three earlier sugyot כג:כב-כד וכג:כה. וכג:כו. The subject matter of these three small sugyot vows, respect of a neighbors property and goods as does likewise the next single p’suk sugya. Our p’suk כד:א addresses כי מצא בה ערות דבר וכתב לא ספר כריתת. The דיוק made from this pasuk, just as get defined as a mitzva from the Torah so too קידושין a mitzva from the Torah. The acquisition of קידושין once profaned through a divorce cannot thereafter be acquired again. Just as a korban, once dedicated for a Shoah offering, this korban cannot later be substituted for some other korban dedication, such as an asham dedication. Once a man acquires title to the Nefesh O’lam Ha’bah soul of his wife, even God himself cannot intervene and father a child from this woman! A distinctly unique idea which the Greek God Zeus did when he fathered Hercules from a married woman.

In Greek & New Testament mythology, divine intervention often disrupts human relationships and moral boundaries. Jewish judicial common law emphasizes the sanctity of marriage and the importance of fidelity. The notion that a husband acquires the soul of his wife and that this bond protected by a Torah oath alliance, reflects the seriousness with which Jewish law treats marriage. קידושין emphasizes the importance of fidelity, commitment, and the spiritual dimensions of the marital relationship visa-vis tohor time-oriented commandments which continuously create the chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

This Torah wisdom reinforces the values of respect and responsibility within the context of family and community. The pasuk בראשית כג:יז located within the larger sugya of בראשית כג:א-כ. Sarah did not survive the horrors of the Akedah, where Yitzak swore an oath brit that if HaShem would save the chosen Cohen seed from shoah, that he dedicates the O’lam Ha’bah life of his future born seed to do Torah mitzvot as the defining cultural trait of the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.

Avraham refers to himself as a גר תושב person of status. Interesting any גר תושב accepts, while living inside the borders of Judea, to keep the 7 mitzvot bnai noach. Why? Observance of commandments, specifically גרי תושב commandments as defined in Masechet Sanhedrin, referred thereafter as the 7 mitzvot bnai Noach, this temporary Torah obligation permits the גר תושב to sue an Israel for damages in a Jewish court of law. By contrast the Nacree/Canaani, as defined in masechet Baba Kama, did not enjoy the judicial legal protections enjoyed by the ger toshav.

Therefore our Av Mishna likewise comes to distinguish and define the rights of women in Torah common law. A ordinary woman does not possess the legal right to acquire a Man, except and unless she qualifies as a significant status, such as being a tribal chief. For example: the prophetess Devorah as a sho’ter. The concept of judicial authority existed during the time of Deborah. Both Moshe and Yehoshua established the 6 cities of refuge with their Small Sanhedrin courtrooms.

Deborah served as a judge and prophetess in Israel, leading her people during a time of oppression. The Aggadic story found in the Book of שופטים (פרק ד וה), which depicts her as a leader who inspired Barak to lead the Israelites against the Canaanite army. Prophets forever and always serve as the shot’rim of the sanhedrin common law courtrooms. This fundamental נפקא מינא both the fraudulent counterfeit books NT and Koran failed to discern.

Abraham’s acquisition of the Cave wherein he buried Sarah compares to the mitzva of קידושין, ideally both sets of acquisitions shall permanently maintain this status. The status of a married woman, higher than the status of a virgin unmarried woman. The NT virgin Mary theology perverts this Torah priority all together into a foreign alien Av tuma avoda zarah religion.

The pasuk ירמיה לב:כה contained inside the larger sugya כלל: לב:טז-כה. The comparison of Avraham as a גר תושב to the people of Canaan compares to Israel invaded by the Armies of Babylon. Avraham demanded to pay the full price for Sarah’s burial plot due to his outright distrust of the faithfulness of the nations of Canaan. Israel too, in the days of Yirmeyahu failed to rule the oath sworn lands with righteous judicial justice – no different that the cursed nations of Canaan; its judges accepted bribes and perverted law.

T’NaCH common law requires Torah scholars to shoot a bearing azimuth and find a comparable Case/Din prophetic mussar. This Torah wisdom in essence defines how to study T’NaCH Primary Sources through the skill of learning by means of comparing similar Case/Din rulings. A similar mussar Case/Din ירמיה ח:יג-יז. The דיוק learned from קידושין, divorce – and the Torah curse of g’lut. Herein this T’NaCH kabbalah frames the k’vanna of the tohor time oriented Torah commandment expressed through the דיוק-inference of the Av tohor time-oriented commandment of קידושין.

T’NaCH common law requires Torah scholars to shoot a bearing azimuth and find a comparable Case/Din prophetic mussar. This Torah wisdom in essence defines how to study T’NaCH Primary Sources through the skill of inductive logical learning, by means of comparing similar Case/Din rulings through ‘compare and contrast’ sharpened reasoning skills. A similar mussar Case/Din ירמיה ח:יג-יז. The דיוק learned from קידושין, from divorce, and the Torah curse of g’lut, these 3 Case/Din prophetic mussar add a layer of internal k’vanna to observance of ritual commandments. Herein this T’NaCH kabbalah frames the k’vanna of all tohor time-oriented Torah commandments, not limited only or specifically merely to the mitzva of קידושין.

תני האשה נקנית וניתני התם האיש קונה. מעיקא תני לישנא דאורייתא ולבסוף תני לישנא דרבנן. ומאי לישנא דרבנן דאמר לה אשה קנויה לעולם מהקדש וניתני הכא דאיש קינה משום דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא וקונה את אצמה

What does the language אשה קנויה לעולם מהקדש? This refers to the oath brit sworn between the pieces wherein HaShem cut a brit with Avram that his future born Cohen seed would number the stars in the heavens for multitude. Torah common law always learns by means of prior precedent rulings. Any attempt to read the Talmud, as if it existed as a common book of pleasurable reading, like fiction – utterly false.

The Talmud stands upon the mandate of the Torah as the working Constitution of the Republic. Upon this יסוד both the T’NaCH and Talmud stand as the Central Primary Sources which function as the basis by which the rabbis weave the culture and customs which the Cohen people wear like unto garments by which HaShem gave to Adam and Chava in the Garden. Just as the mitzva of קידושין represents a permanent status, so too and how much more so – the Torah as the Constitution of the Republic stands as a permanent status. However the perverse transformation of קידושין merely as a rabbinic commandment – set off a chain of consequences, like a rock thrown into a pond makes a ripple effect. Understanding קידושין limited only as a ritual rabbinic mitzva, this perversion changed the status of the Torah away from a Constitutional basic law document unto a religious law of ritual observances as codified in the assimilated statute law Shulkan Aruch. Torah common law bears no resemblance to assimilated statute law, any more than a bastard child born from adultery, resembles the profaned husband’s קידושין with his wife.